) Time for a few meaningless warm-up games to injure key players, and to decide whether to bother entering a transfer-shovelling fantasy game to help maintain interest in Uzbekistan v DR Congo. 
Too cruel. Too funny....forestfan wrote:Arsenal penalty-takers take on the Cha-Cha Slide.
https://x.com/thefootballfeed/status/20 ... DBa6I0OybQ
On reading further details, maybe not quite as bad an outlook as the headlines initially suggested.forestfan wrote: 01 Jun 2026, 11:58 Sounds like Keegan doesn’t have long left, according to quotes from him at a recent Newcastle event
the Dutch, Kempes and Argentinian hair and that Cryiff refused to go. "Zaire", the Dutch, Poles, Muller, and some good and funny Pundits (Clough, Allison etc al). Haiti were there too, and yes I am expecting a win for them vs Scotland.
Internationalcrap football in a single word.
Aside from actually winning the World Cup itself, which still means more than literally anything involving a round ball.
It is going to take 72 games just to weed out the weakest 16 teams and take us to where we should have started from, i.e. 32 teams.forestfan wrote:Aside from actually winning the World Cup itself, which still means more than literally anything involving a round ball.
78 was the world cup for me. there were two brothers playing for holland that i used to call the van der kickoff brothersMaldini wrote: 05 Jun 2026, 21:24 Read this earlier today. I was eleven in 1982 too so it really resonated.
I expect it will apply exactly the same to those with first World Cups before and after it though. Well worth a few minutes of your time, especially if you’re a similar vintage to me.
https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer ... ent-there/
that's what got me playing football over the park all the time even though i was crap. think i watched the final on a portable black and white tv in a caravan on holiday. i was 8 then Croatia and Ghana are both banana-skins, especially given how we normally start tournaments (and have done for the past 40 years…) If we can’t beat the Canals we’re definitely sunk, thoughmurf wrote: 06 Jun 2026, 14:32It is going to take 72 games just to weed out the weakest 16 teams and take us to where we should have started from, i.e. 32 teams.forestfan wrote:Aside from actually winning the World Cup itself, which still means more than literally anything involving a round ball.
Then 31 interesting games in the knockout so about 70% complete rubbish.
A bit different if you are a fan of a lesser team but for someone like England the group games SHOULD just be warm up games. Might even get through with 2 losses!
A boat on the Norfolk Broads for Cubillas, but back home for the KO stage.itslikebrandnew wrote: 06 Jun 2026, 14:56 i watched the final on a portable black and white tv in a caravan on holiday. i was 8 then
) The dazzling Danes, ugly Uruguay, some stunning goals (Josimar, Negrete, Rats against Bats…) and the Germans almost outlasting everyone as they have a tendency to do. Yeah, probably the poorest for quality of football too, with that awful balloon-like ball that meant every free kick went into row Z. Capello boot-camp England were awful too, and it got the final it deserved with the Dutch of all teams resorting to kicking the crap out of the opposition!itslikebrandnew wrote: 06 Jun 2026, 16:01 While we are talking of memories what about that dreaded vuvuzela world cup. I ended up putting quite a few matches on mute.
And that one was in Russia, who can’t even show their flag at global sports events now.
