Bass Akwards

No "dignitaries" were cropped in this picture of Spain's
celebration (Photo: Carl Recine/Getty Images)

Somehow FIFA accidentally switched the 3rd place and championship matches.  At least in terms of entertainment value, the England - France 6-4 thriller far outdid the Spain - Argentina 1-0 hackfest.  I am not alone in that opinion.  In this NYT article that ranks all of the 104 matches, the final comes in at 102nd (ie 3rd worst) while the 3rd place contest is rated first. Fortunately, this YouTubeableMoment from Ferran Torres saved us from a World Cup winner that failed to take a shot for 117 minutes.  I'm also trying not to let the crappy final overshadow what was largely a great five plus weeks of football.  

The More the Merrier?

Opinion is divided on the wisdom of the expanded 48-team tournament.  Summarizing the arguments I think the pro side says it was good for global growth of the sport, produced some entertaining competitive surprises and certainly generated $.  The negatives suggested are diluted quality, some concerns for player welfare and some logistical strain for the host cities.  There were some blowouts but I thought overall the quality was fine (more on that below).  I'm not buying the player welfare argument as the expanded format meant only one extra match for the players, and only for those teams that advanced out of the group stage.  As for the logistics, that might have been more a function of a multi-country hosting format as opposed to an expanded format.

That said, I am skeptical of moving to a 64-team tournament.  The pros are still there but seems like the negative points will be even stronger.  Also, this World Cup was just at about the right level of saturation; not sure even the most ardent fans will be able to stay on top of a bigger tournament.

A Note On Quality

So how did the additional 16 teams do in the tournament?  Hmm, identifying the 16 teams that would not have been at this World Cup under the old 32-team format was harder than expected.  Not always obvious who wouldn't have made it because the confederation qualifying formats weren't always the same.  So here's how I did it.  CONCACAF used to get three or four but got six this year so I put Panama, Haiti and Curacao on the list.  South America used to get four or five but got six so I put Paraguay (6th in qualifying) in there.  Oceania previously didn't get an auto qualifier so New Zealand goes on the list.  UEFA got 16 instead of 13. After taking out the 12 group stage winners, Turkiye looked the best of the four who got added in the playoffs so that put Bosnia & Herzegovina, Sweden and Czechia in the mix.  Asia got nine instead of four or five so I took out Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Iraq, who "qualified" in competition after their group stage qualifiers.  I also took out Jordan, the worst performing side of the group stage runner ups who got a spot.  Africa was the toughest because they did nine groups of four and didn't take any runner ups.  I took teams out based on world ranking; sorry Cape Verde, Ghana and Tunisia.  DR Congo got in via playoff so I took them out as well.  So here's the list:

Bosnia & Herzegovina    DR Congo     Jordan                 Qatar

Cape Verde                      Ghana            New Zealand      Saudi Arabia

Curacao                            Haiti              Panama              Sweden

Czechia                            Iraq                Paraguay            Tunisia

And here are the final standings:

That 10 of the bottom 11 spots were claimed by teams that in previous years would have been watching on TV goes on the con side of the expanded tournament debate.  On the other hand, six advanced out of group stage, with Cape Verde doing it as runner up in Group H.  Also, a poor finish in the tournament doesn't mean there wasn't value to their participation, as the experience may raise the level of the game in those countries.  

Looking at individual matches, I counted nine blowouts (goal differential greater than 3) in the group stage.  All but one involved one of the 16 "added" sides.  In comparison, there were just two in 2022.  In percentage terms this year, 12.5% of the group stage games were routs compared to 4.2% in 2022.

Despite some of these stats, I'm still thinking it was a net positive to expand the tournament.  They do however increase my wariness of moving to a 64-team tournament.

New Laws

IAFB and FIFA rolled out some new laws for the tournament.  How'd that go?

Mistaken identity VAR expanded to include either team 👍 - Any rule change that gives referees a second chance to catch divers is okay with us

Manual countdown on throw-ins and goal kicks 👍 -  Another tool for referees in the continuing battle to cut down on shithousery

Mouth covering ban 👍- Mostly good with this given the number of times a covered mouth is likely giving abuse

One minute sit out for "injuries" "treated" on the pitch 👍- A net positive though we're concerned about consistency in its application

Corner kick VAR 👎- Needs symmetry - if a corner kick is such a threat to the defending team that VAR needs to verify it, then denying a corner kick on a mistaken call is just as bad for the attacking team

Substitutes have to be off in 10 second 👍- We're good with things that cut down on delaying tactics

And Another Thing...

Aside from the disappointing final there were other less than savory aspects to the tournament.  Wikipedia provides a PhD dissertation here on things that went wrong.  The articles hits some of the big points for me (prices, political interference in the game itself, political interference with the logistics and some racist behavior).  I'm disappointed and annoyed that I couldn't find reference to the homophobic chants of Mexican fans in the Ecuador and England contests.  As I've discussed in posts along the way, for me the alleged refereeing controversies were usually due to people 1) not knowing the rules, 2) not understanding the rules, 3) not liking the rules 4) all of the above.  

And yet, for all the things that went wrong, it was not the disaster I feared going in.  

Follow Up on Injury of the Tournament

Recall that Jordan Henderson broke his arm jumping over the advertising signs celebrating an English victory.  Here we see that claim being adjudicated.

Service Restored

He's back!

Kai Wagner is back for another tour of duty for the Philadelphia Union.  He's the club's all-time assist
leader and was the 2025 club leader in minutes, successful crosses, corners, and key passes.  In 2026, we have sorely missed him putting the ball in the box for good scoring chances.

We didn't have to wait long for his return to pay dividends.  His cross set up this goal for Iloski a mere nine minutes into Wednesday's match versus the Red Bulls.  He also assisted via a corner kick that newcomer Neil Pierre neatly headed in to give the U a 3-1 lead at 66 minutes.  That was the final, the U's first win at Subaru Park this year.

Neil Pierre - You can't teach height

Wagner was not the only positive development.  Quinn Sullivan returned from his 10 month absence due to a torn ACL and was quite lively down the right wing.  And we saw a center defender who might help us forget Jack Elliott and Jacob Glesnes.  Neil Pierre, just 18, was the 2025 MLS Next Pro Defender of the Year.  The club roster lists him at 6'5" but other sources say he's 6'7" - whichever, he towered over everybody.  This was also the first match under interim manager Ryan Richter.  

Aside from the win and the three points, they looked like a confident team.  The playoffs are a long shot but if they play like this, at least they'll be fun to watch the rest of the way.

I'll be taking a break for a few weeks, probably returning 8/7, in plenty of time to complain about Newcastle's transfer window and the upcoming season.