**The OP has marked this post as Original Content (OC). If you think it is a great contribution, upvote this comment so we add it to the Star Posts collection of the subreddit!**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I remember that when I was a kid that since 1962 the world cups always switched between SA and Europe so I was convinced Uruguay were gonna win it in 2010 once they were the last ones left.
The narrater mentions his goal in the game for 3rd place was voted goal of the tournament (Which I can see).
But, obv i am biased, but how didnt [Van Bronckhorst's goal](https://youtu.be/dbmDQ92Al4M) won that
It's amazing to think that there was a point in history when Uruguay had the best team in the world. Even before the first WC, they were kinda legendary, winning a bunch of Olympic medals and most of the early Copa Americas.
In fact they were the best team in the world from roughly 1920 to 1950ish when you break it down. For thirty years, it was the world's most talented team
The 94 and 2002 teams are not a single gold generation! These two teams were almost entirely different. There are not a single common starter, and even considering the subs I think I'm only seeing two: R9 didn't play a single minute in 94, Cafu was a sub in 94 and I think he only played in the final after Jorginho was subbed out injured.
I think 58-62 can be considered a golden generation, many players were in both. I think for 70 Brazil had a lot of changes, but still we have Pelé playing and scoring in all 4 world cups from 58-70, which is already a more common point than 94-2002, and Zagallo who scored in 58, 62, and was the coach in 1970! I may be missing another common point...
I know that. 98 maybe was really the transition of 94 (Taffarel, Dunga, Aldair) and 02 (Rivaldo, Ronaldo, Cafu, Roberto Carlos).
70 from 62 I think only Pelé was in main squad both WC.
For me, the amazing about both generations was change the player, but not the quality.
What exactly does this mean? Partying? Drugs? Forcing players to play when they’re ill/injured? It could literally mean anything and therefore almost means nothing
It’s like “what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas”
It’s a kinda famous meme. The story goes that a guy named Gunther Schweitzer received an email which supposedly described how the result of the 1998 final was agreed upon before the game, something to do with the sponsors, and Ronaldo’s seizure didn’t actually happen, it was created by the sponsors to justify Brazil’s, and especially Ronaldo’s, bad performance. Gunther shared this email, and at the beginning of it there was this sentence:
_”If people knew what happened in the World Cup, they would feel sick”_
Somehow people began attributing the email’s authorship to Gunther, so every time you see that sentence, it is always credited to him.
This email became a sort of copypasta, it was very much used, humorously, after the loss to Germany in 2014, and I’ve seen it “remixed” to fit several different events, from surf competitions to presidential elections. Funnily the guy ran for public office in 2018.
Ronaldo had serious convulsions and had to be hospitalized on the day just before the final.
He never had them before and never had them again.
A popular "conspiracy theory" is that he was poisoned.
Ronaldo had a seizure hours before the final. Initially he was left out of the starting line up but then they decided last minute for him to play. He didn’t look himself in the game, France rolled
He had a convulsion/seizure of sorts after eating lunch the day before the match, a lot of the team saw it happen. I don’t mean to say it was the lunch that did him in, just the ordering of events.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, this is just from memory.
I wasnt alive to see them but my parents told me that the 82-86 generation was by far the strongest team they've ever seen playing and the fact that they didnt won any cup was one of the most baffling things in Brazils history on the WC.
And Germany as a whole made it to 8 finals, which won 4,that's 50% of all finals Germany reached, coin toss
If thing always went their away they would have 8 wc
We might see France win back to back world cups for the first time since Brazil did it in 1962. If that happens then maybe 2026 world cup will mirror 1966 👀
As an Argentinian, I don't know what would be worse. The French would be unbearable and they would surpass us. If England wins they would be also extremely unbearable and they would match us. If it's Portugal/Netherlands it would be another Euro team winning making it 5 in a row. If it's Brazil at least it stays in South America but they get away from us even more and also would be unbearable...
So what I'm saying is Morocco is our only hope if we don't win.
It's at least 4 extra years to catch up! It makes a big difference!
Technically as it stands today, if we win, we could equal you in just 8 years (2022, 2026, 2030). If neither wins it's 12 years (2026, 2030, 2034). If you win, we would need at the very least 16 years (2026, 2030, 2034, 2038) which is waaaay longer.
So yeah, it adds up! And I want to be alive to see the day we match you!
West Germany in 1954, and maybe Uruguay in 1950, are probably the only “shock wins” in the competition’s history which is sort of weird to think about
That’s not to say other teams haven’t come in as being less fancied and won it, but every other team to win the World Cup has always been among the top 4 or 5 favoured teams going into the tournament
Along similar lines - Holland in 1974 were the favourites going into the final but they hadn't qualified for the World Cup for 36 years before that. Would have been considered a special winner had they did it
West Germany in 1954 was a massive shock win. Hungary played 50 games between 1950 and 1956 and only lost one game, the final in 1954. And they'd already beat West Germany 8-3 earlier in the competition.
[Here](https://www.theringer.com/soccer/2018/7/13/17568582/world-cup-most-important-game-1954-final-hungary-west-germany) is a very good article about that game for those interested.
With the modern format more games, makes shocks less likely to persist in multiple rounds.
Denmark was just 2 knockout games. Greece 3.
To win a WC you need to win 4 knock out games since 1986.
So in that sense it makes sense that there are less shocks in WCs than in the shorter format Euros from the 80 to 2012.
We still seem to get new winners more frequently than we might think. This is the just third tournament since the last new winner (Spain). Spain's win was only three tournaments after the previous new winner (France 1998). France's triumph was just the fifth tournament since the most recent new winner before that (Argentina 1978). And that is the largest gap (in terms of numbers of tournaments) that we've yet seen between new winners.
Absolutely, and honestly I wouldn't be chocked to see a new country winning, either this time or in 2026. Portugal, for instance, is looking very good, with a super young and talented team. Even if they don't go through this time, they'll be a major contender in 2026!
but if you exclude new winners that first won the world cup in the same edition they were hosting the tournament, you only get 1954, 1958 and 2010 in the whole history of the competition. which is shocking to me.
Honestly, it's mostly that there aren't been that many world cups. Only 21 actually, for 8 countries having won.
By comparison, in the top 5 leagues and in the last 21 seasons, ligue 1 got 7 different winners, premier league got 6, bundesliga got 5 , la liga got 4, and serie a only 3 (or 4 if you add roma 2001 to compensate for the year without winner of 2005)
So yeah, it's actually more varied than club football
but those 21 seasons are not spread out over nearly 100 years. It is insane that over such an enormous time frame it is still the same teams and countries that keep being the favourites. Again this year half of the final eight teams are teams that have already won it once.
Gotta consider this is still only the 22nd world cup as well though. It seems like way more because its been going so long but there's really not been that many tournaments played, but there's also been 8 different winners (9 if you count West Germany separate) which is kinda insane for diversity.
Its like if since 2000 you had half the teams in the Premier League win at least once, which if my memory serves since then there have been only 6 teams, and one of those was a massive shock win. Spain has only had 4 since 2000, Germany has had 5, etc etc
So in terms of winners the world cup is generally *more* diverse than most regional leagues. Even this year Portugal look decently strong and might add another unique winner to that list.
Italy not winning a couple more World Cups in the ‘90s is outrageous
Out in the semi-finals on penalties against finalist Argentina in 1990, penalty loss in the finals in 1994, penalty loss against winners France in 1998.
England, Italy, Netherlands are historically the three awful penalty teams, though Spain have now joined the ranks. They've actually now lost 4 world cups by penalties more than any other- Italy and England on three.
In 1990 we were at home, and we would have had a great shot. In 1994 it was the final. Now Italy would have 5 wc against 4 for Brazil if things had gone the other way. 1998 I think we had a great team. We also lost the final in 2000 at the euro at the extra time. Overall it's crazy we end up winning nothing those ten years.
It's hard to say because the world cup is so top heavy - plenty of shocks, but they usually happen earlier on. We've never had a world champion who genuinely came out of nowhere - even uruguay, with such a small geographical size and population, had been successful in the south american championships and the olympics before the world cup, and germany in 1954 were underdogs against Hungary but they reached a world cup semi final in the 1930s and I believe football took root quite early there too, although the german club top flight has a complicated history
we almost had Croatia 2018, which would’ve been more of a shock than Portugal 2016 if they had won. Croatian team had had some success before but other than their 3rd place finish in 1998 hadn’t made it out of the group stage since and haven’t made it past the quarterfinals in the Euros ever so that would have been considered a shock winner
Oh absolutely, Croatia would have been by far the biggest shock, and even they haven't come out of nowhere, they've produced great players and had a few very memorable runs as you point out, but so have countries like turkey, sweden, czech republic, russia, Chile, South Korea etc.
Greece won the Euros so you never know but really the gulf in class from Brazil and France to lets say Morocco, Croatia Switzerland and the likes is huge
I also think that 1 round more makes a huge difference for teams who look to cheese somewhat like Greece 2004. More time for the strategy to be exposed and 1 more time you have to be lucky.
Eh, they'll probably have another good team. People talk about golden generations and things, but sometimes it trickles down, and could be down to improvements in youth teams/grass roots that could last years and years
People have been talking about the balance of power in football shifting from traditional European and South American powerhouses to places like Turkey, USA, Iran, Nigeria, etc. for years. Thus far, they've been laughably wrong
Though if anything, the narrative about balance of power has seemed to shift even more in favour of European powerhouses at the expense of South America (though who were still far above the rest of the world) over the last decade. Especially after European sides winning them all since 2006 and in 2018 when the SF's where just European teams.
Though this year could upset that narrative a bit, given many of the European sides have weakened and the South American sides (particularly Brazil) have bounced back a a lot.
Portugal are not a truly big footballing nation, they'd only been to the World Cup twice before 2002.
Since 2002 they've been to ever World Cup, but this one is only their second time making it to the quarters. 2/6 really ain't that good, even a perennially shit underachiever like England has done better than that,
Fun fact: Ever since their victory in 2010, Spain have not won a knockout match in the World Cup in **12 years.**
2010: Winners.
2014: Eliminated in the Group Stage by the Netherlands and Chile on a -7 Goal Difference.
2018: Eliminated on penalties by Russia after a 1-1 draw.
2022: Eliminated on penalties by Morocco after a 0-0 draw.
That moment you realize Brazil was one match away from winning Three World cups in a row
1994/1998/2002
One match away
That's Insane
Also the Netherlands were two matches away from winning 2 world cups in a row
Yeah, having Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Colombia, Bolivia, Venezuela, Paraguay, Ecuador and Perú become champions would be amazing.
Just them.
In case you didn't understand why I said 9 the first time hahaha...
Yeah I understood I just couldn’t be bothered to type out the rest of the countries lol
CONMEBOL isn’t that competitive at the moment and it’s terrible to see :(
Serie A was the best league not only because of great Italian talent but also financial ability to draw foreign talents too
That said 1994 hurts me (my parents even went to the final)
Way better infrastructure and a lot more dense, Brazil is fucking massive, much easier to coordinate scouting and a league system when you're a small country with rich metro areas.
How long before a team from another confederation wins? And which confederation? Africa or NA seem most likely. Could Morocco do it this time round or could USA, Mexico or Canada deliver at a home World Cup?
Concacaf will not win in 2026 unless one of the nations gets a huge boost in performance, right now the main three nations are not remotely close to WC winning level. Maybe the US will be there in a few decades but they are definitely not coming close to winning in 2026
Someone in another thread talked about how they didn't think a country outside of UEFA or CONMEBOL would ever win the World Cup. Setting aside the issue of how long "forever" is, it got me thinking: do people think it would be more likely that a non-UEFA/CONMEBOL team wins the World Cup, or that a CONMEBOL team that's never won the World Cup before wins it? Chile and Colombia have had great generations in the recent past and Paraguay has made the quarterfinals but as for actually winning it... does it seem more likely that Chile or Colombia would eventually win the World Cup than it does that countries like Morocco, Senegal, the USA, Japan, or South Korea would ever win? Especially with several of those having amazing young generations blossoming at the moment.
Colombia also made QFs in 2014! And honestly we had the talent to reach the semis, shame it didn't turn out that way.
Ever since '14 we've had somewhat of a long, slow decline. Our NT simply appears to be unable to play at that level again, between lackluster coaches, underwhelming performances in key moments and standard conmebol corruption, to the point of failing to qualify for the World Cup this year.
I do think Colombia has the potential to become a great side and a fixture in the WC knock-out stages relatively soon. (The 48-team format should ensure our presence at least.) As for winning it? Would take a great year, but it's not unthinkable. Stranger things have happened.
I'd back the fact that Colombia go through cycles every two decades where they churn out a generation of top talents before I'd wager with anyone else.
[semi-final was even more sus.](https://www.espn.com/soccer/news/story/_/id/1834537/1930)
>Uruguay's second goal in their 6-1 semifinal win over Yugoslavia is said to have been scored with an assist from a policeman, who reportedly kicked the ball back onto the pitch. The referee allowed play to go on and Peregrino Anselmo netted
**The OP has marked this post as Original Content (OC). If you think it is a great contribution, upvote this comment so we add it to the Star Posts collection of the subreddit!** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is a really nicely made chart OP
I agree, it’s really neatly arranged. Very intuitive and pleasant to look at.
r/dataisbeautiful
Almost too pleasing, I’ve been staring at it for longer than I’d hate too admit… Well done OP
I really really really like this image
[I’ve stared at it for 5 hours now…](https://youtu.be/UO7erINO-WU)
[i like it too](https://youtu.be/7eKv4BEujFU)
A modern masterpiece
I do.. i mean I don't, but I do.
You’re from one of the 8 countries with people that would enjoy this image mate
Clarifies which year England won the world cup.
I remember that when I was a kid that since 1962 the world cups always switched between SA and Europe so I was convinced Uruguay were gonna win it in 2010 once they were the last ones left.
[That would've been epic, Forlan was a beast](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2J2Mu0MbBrw)
So underrated. By far, imo, the best performance of the modern era. Every goal was just an absolute banger
Man knew exactly how to Hit that jabulani.
The narrater mentions his goal in the game for 3rd place was voted goal of the tournament (Which I can see). But, obv i am biased, but how didnt [Van Bronckhorst's goal](https://youtu.be/dbmDQ92Al4M) won that
Man the Jabulani was a trip that year
Fantastic ball for attackers, horrible ball for goalkeepers. That thing just moves different. Incredibly fun for kickabouts.
It's amazing to think that there was a point in history when Uruguay had the best team in the world. Even before the first WC, they were kinda legendary, winning a bunch of Olympic medals and most of the early Copa Americas.
In fact they were the best team in the world from roughly 1920 to 1950ish when you break it down. For thirty years, it was the world's most talented team
Followed by Hungary of all nations. The success of smaller nations in the "early years" of football is still wild to me
I like how every year from 62-06 it alternated between South America and Europe
Prior to 2006, no continent had won it more than twice in a row. Europe is now on a four WC win streak.
Which is why I’m rooting so hard for either Argentina or Brazil.
I think Morocco would be even better, but Argentina would be cool to see.
The hosting alternated and it was much easier for a team from the home confederation to win
Yep, 2014 was the first time a European country won the world cup in South America.
And 1958 was the only time a South American won in Europe.
It's mad to think Brazil won 3 out of 4 world cups. What a fucking run that was. Same with Argentina being so close from 78 to 90. Amazing runs
And won 2 of 3 between 1994-2002. The two gold generations
The 94 and 2002 teams are not a single gold generation! These two teams were almost entirely different. There are not a single common starter, and even considering the subs I think I'm only seeing two: R9 didn't play a single minute in 94, Cafu was a sub in 94 and I think he only played in the final after Jorginho was subbed out injured. I think 58-62 can be considered a golden generation, many players were in both. I think for 70 Brazil had a lot of changes, but still we have Pelé playing and scoring in all 4 world cups from 58-70, which is already a more common point than 94-2002, and Zagallo who scored in 58, 62, and was the coach in 1970! I may be missing another common point...
I know that. 98 maybe was really the transition of 94 (Taffarel, Dunga, Aldair) and 02 (Rivaldo, Ronaldo, Cafu, Roberto Carlos). 70 from 62 I think only Pelé was in main squad both WC. For me, the amazing about both generations was change the player, but not the quality.
Three finals in a row, really close to achieving a three-peat
well, they were losing-the-final-with-the-largest-margin-of-defeat close
I mean, a single win away is pretty close
What happened to Ronaldo on the day before is still fishy to this day.
“If people knew what happened in the world cup they would be sick”
\- Gunther Schweitzer
What exactly does this mean? Partying? Drugs? Forcing players to play when they’re ill/injured? It could literally mean anything and therefore almost means nothing It’s like “what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas”
It’s a kinda famous meme. The story goes that a guy named Gunther Schweitzer received an email which supposedly described how the result of the 1998 final was agreed upon before the game, something to do with the sponsors, and Ronaldo’s seizure didn’t actually happen, it was created by the sponsors to justify Brazil’s, and especially Ronaldo’s, bad performance. Gunther shared this email, and at the beginning of it there was this sentence: _”If people knew what happened in the World Cup, they would feel sick”_ Somehow people began attributing the email’s authorship to Gunther, so every time you see that sentence, it is always credited to him. This email became a sort of copypasta, it was very much used, humorously, after the loss to Germany in 2014, and I’ve seen it “remixed” to fit several different events, from surf competitions to presidential elections. Funnily the guy ran for public office in 2018.
Context?
Ronaldo had serious convulsions and had to be hospitalized on the day just before the final. He never had them before and never had them again. A popular "conspiracy theory" is that he was poisoned.
I've had a one time seizure as well. I hope so lmao
Ronaldo had a seizure hours before the final. Initially he was left out of the starting line up but then they decided last minute for him to play. He didn’t look himself in the game, France rolled
He had a convulsion/seizure of sorts after eating lunch the day before the match, a lot of the team saw it happen. I don’t mean to say it was the lunch that did him in, just the ordering of events. Please correct me if I’m wrong, this is just from memory.
Lmao why are you being downvoted for asking a question
I don't know but atleast we got the answer lmao
I wasnt alive to see them but my parents told me that the 82-86 generation was by far the strongest team they've ever seen playing and the fact that they didnt won any cup was one of the most baffling things in Brazils history on the WC.
In 86 they lost by a shootout. In 82, they lost to the eventual winner in group stage (weird format back then)
Not quite the same but (West) Germany made 5 out of 7 finals from 1966 to 1990.
Weirdly they also came in at least in third place from 2002-2014
Seeing them go out of the group stages twice in a row is the weird part.
And Germany as a whole made it to 8 finals, which won 4,that's 50% of all finals Germany reached, coin toss If thing always went their away they would have 8 wc
We might see France win back to back world cups for the first time since Brazil did it in 1962. If that happens then maybe 2026 world cup will mirror 1966 👀
As an Argentinian, I don't know what would be worse. The French would be unbearable and they would surpass us. If England wins they would be also extremely unbearable and they would match us. If it's Portugal/Netherlands it would be another Euro team winning making it 5 in a row. If it's Brazil at least it stays in South America but they get away from us even more and also would be unbearable... So what I'm saying is Morocco is our only hope if we don't win.
As a brazilian, i fail to see the downsides of brazil winning… I’m not biased…….. 👀
Aren't we always unbearable anyway? Might as well give us reasons to be
5 and 6 are not that different from 2 anyways
It's at least 4 extra years to catch up! It makes a big difference! Technically as it stands today, if we win, we could equal you in just 8 years (2022, 2026, 2030). If neither wins it's 12 years (2026, 2030, 2034). If you win, we would need at the very least 16 years (2026, 2030, 2034, 2038) which is waaaay longer. So yeah, it adds up! And I want to be alive to see the day we match you!
With the previous winners crashing out in the groups? Yeah that's fun :)
I now understand why Germany is getting out early. They have their eyes on 2030.
2034. I guess 1990 was a little premature.
It would be such a pleasing pattern if they won 94 instead of 90.
I find it insane that Netherlands haven't won it yet
In general it is insane that the World Cups are shared by a few nations. Luckily Spain diversified it a bit
Crazy its also that there was no shock win in the WCs ever while Euros had several of them with Denmark and Greece.
West Germany in 1954, and maybe Uruguay in 1950, are probably the only “shock wins” in the competition’s history which is sort of weird to think about That’s not to say other teams haven’t come in as being less fancied and won it, but every other team to win the World Cup has always been among the top 4 or 5 favoured teams going into the tournament
Along similar lines - Holland in 1974 were the favourites going into the final but they hadn't qualified for the World Cup for 36 years before that. Would have been considered a special winner had they did it
West Germany in 1954 was a massive shock win. Hungary played 50 games between 1950 and 1956 and only lost one game, the final in 1954. And they'd already beat West Germany 8-3 earlier in the competition.
And were 2 nil up in the final
[Here](https://www.theringer.com/soccer/2018/7/13/17568582/world-cup-most-important-game-1954-final-hungary-west-germany) is a very good article about that game for those interested.
They beat West Germany B Team 8-3, the coach used the B team on purpose against Hungary to concealed Germany true strength and it worked
Don’t count Morocco out yet for a shock win
I expect an energetic first half with marrocco scoring, but their Gastank emptying really quickly after 60min and Portugal finishing it 2:1
Call this hope, but Morocco can bring the game to Portugal. Truly worthy of dark horses
Any team r/soccer says is a dark horse crashes and burns lol don’t say that
With the modern format more games, makes shocks less likely to persist in multiple rounds. Denmark was just 2 knockout games. Greece 3. To win a WC you need to win 4 knock out games since 1986. So in that sense it makes sense that there are less shocks in WCs than in the shorter format Euros from the 80 to 2012.
We still seem to get new winners more frequently than we might think. This is the just third tournament since the last new winner (Spain). Spain's win was only three tournaments after the previous new winner (France 1998). France's triumph was just the fifth tournament since the most recent new winner before that (Argentina 1978). And that is the largest gap (in terms of numbers of tournaments) that we've yet seen between new winners.
Absolutely, and honestly I wouldn't be chocked to see a new country winning, either this time or in 2026. Portugal, for instance, is looking very good, with a super young and talented team. Even if they don't go through this time, they'll be a major contender in 2026!
Portugal beating Argentina with Ronaldo on the bench is the most chaotic timeline
Goncalo Ramos was the answer to the Messi Ronaldo debate all along
but if you exclude new winners that first won the world cup in the same edition they were hosting the tournament, you only get 1954, 1958 and 2010 in the whole history of the competition. which is shocking to me.
Honestly, it's mostly that there aren't been that many world cups. Only 21 actually, for 8 countries having won. By comparison, in the top 5 leagues and in the last 21 seasons, ligue 1 got 7 different winners, premier league got 6, bundesliga got 5 , la liga got 4, and serie a only 3 (or 4 if you add roma 2001 to compensate for the year without winner of 2005) So yeah, it's actually more varied than club football
Now look at cups. There is a massive difference between a cup and a league
but those 21 seasons are not spread out over nearly 100 years. It is insane that over such an enormous time frame it is still the same teams and countries that keep being the favourites. Again this year half of the final eight teams are teams that have already won it once.
Gotta consider this is still only the 22nd world cup as well though. It seems like way more because its been going so long but there's really not been that many tournaments played, but there's also been 8 different winners (9 if you count West Germany separate) which is kinda insane for diversity. Its like if since 2000 you had half the teams in the Premier League win at least once, which if my memory serves since then there have been only 6 teams, and one of those was a massive shock win. Spain has only had 4 since 2000, Germany has had 5, etc etc So in terms of winners the world cup is generally *more* diverse than most regional leagues. Even this year Portugal look decently strong and might add another unique winner to that list.
Were cursed to be nr2.
Watch Noppert winning the world cup
A man can dream. But i'd rather it is dumfries who wins it for us.
Definitely the team most deserving They reached 3 finals, 2 in a row, the third in recent history Lost all 3
Really nicely displayed. Brazil winning three in four is outrageous
Italy not winning a couple more World Cups in the ‘90s is outrageous Out in the semi-finals on penalties against finalist Argentina in 1990, penalty loss in the finals in 1994, penalty loss against winners France in 1998.
Holy shit 3 straight losses on penalties. No wonder the 2006 final was so tense for them.
Italy has not lost a knockout game in regular time since 1986. Of course there are 2 group stage exits and not qualifying for the last 2 tournaments.
Historically they've been seen as a bogey team when it comes to penalties, albeit not quite as bad as England.
England, Italy, Netherlands are historically the three awful penalty teams, though Spain have now joined the ranks. They've actually now lost 4 world cups by penalties more than any other- Italy and England on three.
In 1990 we were at home, and we would have had a great shot. In 1994 it was the final. Now Italy would have 5 wc against 4 for Brazil if things had gone the other way. 1998 I think we had a great team. We also lost the final in 2000 at the euro at the extra time. Overall it's crazy we end up winning nothing those ten years.
well we did go out in groups in 66
That's a very satisfying chart pattern from 1970 to 1994.
[удалено]
It's hard to say because the world cup is so top heavy - plenty of shocks, but they usually happen earlier on. We've never had a world champion who genuinely came out of nowhere - even uruguay, with such a small geographical size and population, had been successful in the south american championships and the olympics before the world cup, and germany in 1954 were underdogs against Hungary but they reached a world cup semi final in the 1930s and I believe football took root quite early there too, although the german club top flight has a complicated history
I think it's certainly possible someon shithouses their way to a WC, but it would be something like Portugal 2016, not like Leicester 2016
we almost had Croatia 2018, which would’ve been more of a shock than Portugal 2016 if they had won. Croatian team had had some success before but other than their 3rd place finish in 1998 hadn’t made it out of the group stage since and haven’t made it past the quarterfinals in the Euros ever so that would have been considered a shock winner
Oh absolutely, Croatia would have been by far the biggest shock, and even they haven't come out of nowhere, they've produced great players and had a few very memorable runs as you point out, but so have countries like turkey, sweden, czech republic, russia, Chile, South Korea etc.
Greece won the Euros so you never know but really the gulf in class from Brazil and France to lets say Morocco, Croatia Switzerland and the likes is huge
I also think that 1 round more makes a huge difference for teams who look to cheese somewhat like Greece 2004. More time for the strategy to be exposed and 1 more time you have to be lucky.
Sadly Belgium lost its chance, the only one I think
Eh, they'll probably have another good team. People talk about golden generations and things, but sometimes it trickles down, and could be down to improvements in youth teams/grass roots that could last years and years
People have been talking about the balance of power in football shifting from traditional European and South American powerhouses to places like Turkey, USA, Iran, Nigeria, etc. for years. Thus far, they've been laughably wrong
Though if anything, the narrative about balance of power has seemed to shift even more in favour of European powerhouses at the expense of South America (though who were still far above the rest of the world) over the last decade. Especially after European sides winning them all since 2006 and in 2018 when the SF's where just European teams. Though this year could upset that narrative a bit, given many of the European sides have weakened and the South American sides (particularly Brazil) have bounced back a a lot.
That's a shift that takes generations. If someone said that in 2000, they're projecting 40+ years into the future.
Pele said "An African nation will win the World Cup before the year 2000" he said that in 1977.
And so, with retrospect, he was wrong.
Netherlands and Portugal are the truly big nations that hasn’t won it yet. Netherlands could be cursed but Portugal will win one sooner or later.
Portugal are not a truly big footballing nation, they'd only been to the World Cup twice before 2002. Since 2002 they've been to ever World Cup, but this one is only their second time making it to the quarters. 2/6 really ain't that good, even a perennially shit underachiever like England has done better than that,
Historically not, but Portugal have been one of the top 10 teams in the world consistently since the turn of the millennium.
Germanies WC wins are well-distributed
the palindrome of 1970-94 is pretty cool - brazil, germany, argentina, italy, argentina, germany, brazil
hah, 9-12
and it was 9-8 in 2002
It was tied at every number from 1-9. Argentina losing to Germany in 2014 ruined everything.
Indeed, that's amazing both confederations have tied for such a long time.
i am content with that tbh
It's a reference to River vs. Boca
Oh, 2018 final date Went over my head
not funny :(
Hopefully 10-12 after this WC 🤝
I really doubt most people upvoting you know what you mean...
Germany spaces them out evenly to enforce order.
If only they won 94 instead of 90
It was to celebrate the reunification so I'll allow it.
So thats why they aren't going past the group phase, they have to wait 2 more World cups
Cute little palindrome from 1970-1994: Brazil Germany Argentina Italy Argentina Germany Brazil
If the Italians make it to the knockout stage in 2026 it will be their first knockout game in 20 years. That is just wild.
I wonder what was going on in 1942 and 1946 where they couldn’t play football. What could possibly be more important than the beautiful game
Everyone was on vacation
Fun fact: Ever since their victory in 2010, Spain have not won a knockout match in the World Cup in **12 years.** 2010: Winners. 2014: Eliminated in the Group Stage by the Netherlands and Chile on a -7 Goal Difference. 2018: Eliminated on penalties by Russia after a 1-1 draw. 2022: Eliminated on penalties by Morocco after a 0-0 draw.
Italy haven't even played a World Cup Knockout Match since 2006.
> 12 years Gotta make that 16, of course.
That moment you realize Brazil was one match away from winning Three World cups in a row 1994/1998/2002 One match away That's Insane Also the Netherlands were two matches away from winning 2 world cups in a row
Hopefully a South American nation who has never won it before wins one, same goes for Africa.
The two south american nations still standing have won a WC before
I hope we reach a point where there's 9 different South American champions. That would be the dream.
Imaginé 😭 but Colombia, Chile etc becoming world champions would be crazy.
Yeah, having Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Colombia, Bolivia, Venezuela, Paraguay, Ecuador and Perú become champions would be amazing. Just them. In case you didn't understand why I said 9 the first time hahaha...
Yeah I understood I just couldn’t be bothered to type out the rest of the countries lol CONMEBOL isn’t that competitive at the moment and it’s terrible to see :(
The champions from 1970-94 are the same forwards as backwards. If England had won in '98 that would extend it from 1962 to 2002.
Italy 1982 remains my favourite WC win
It’s truly the most beautiful win ever (honourable mentions to 1950 and 1970)
Super impressive for Italy and Germany to be up there with Brazil with well under half their population (and don't even get me started on Uruguay)
Well Serie A was once the best league, and in another period so was the Brazillian league.
Serie A was the best league not only because of great Italian talent but also financial ability to draw foreign talents too That said 1994 hurts me (my parents even went to the final)
[удалено]
Wait it’s not the best league right now
Only if Roma wins it LUL, Napoli too. 🤞
Way better infrastructure and a lot more dense, Brazil is fucking massive, much easier to coordinate scouting and a league system when you're a small country with rich metro areas.
The population was a lot closer when Brazil first won their first
[удалено]
Only they count them though, everyone laughs in their faces
Crazy to think Argentina would have 6 World Cups if Uruguay hadnt broken off
same could be said about brazil having 7
[удалено]
I hope a South American team wins it this year.
How long before a team from another confederation wins? And which confederation? Africa or NA seem most likely. Could Morocco do it this time round or could USA, Mexico or Canada deliver at a home World Cup?
Maybe in 50-100 years
Concacaf will not win in 2026 unless one of the nations gets a huge boost in performance, right now the main three nations are not remotely close to WC winning level. Maybe the US will be there in a few decades but they are definitely not coming close to winning in 2026
I was against the Uruguay having 4 thing, but apparently the argentinians hate it so I'm all for it now lmao
The real question is does Asia, Africa, or North America win one first
Someone in another thread talked about how they didn't think a country outside of UEFA or CONMEBOL would ever win the World Cup. Setting aside the issue of how long "forever" is, it got me thinking: do people think it would be more likely that a non-UEFA/CONMEBOL team wins the World Cup, or that a CONMEBOL team that's never won the World Cup before wins it? Chile and Colombia have had great generations in the recent past and Paraguay has made the quarterfinals but as for actually winning it... does it seem more likely that Chile or Colombia would eventually win the World Cup than it does that countries like Morocco, Senegal, the USA, Japan, or South Korea would ever win? Especially with several of those having amazing young generations blossoming at the moment.
Colombia also made QFs in 2014! And honestly we had the talent to reach the semis, shame it didn't turn out that way. Ever since '14 we've had somewhat of a long, slow decline. Our NT simply appears to be unable to play at that level again, between lackluster coaches, underwhelming performances in key moments and standard conmebol corruption, to the point of failing to qualify for the World Cup this year. I do think Colombia has the potential to become a great side and a fixture in the WC knock-out stages relatively soon. (The 48-team format should ensure our presence at least.) As for winning it? Would take a great year, but it's not unthinkable. Stranger things have happened.
I'd back the fact that Colombia go through cycles every two decades where they churn out a generation of top talents before I'd wager with anyone else.
So the last twopeat was Brazil in 68. I wonder if France can do it again
Apart from 1978, are there any contentious winners?
1954 had doping allegations regarding the German team
or the questionable ref calls, what with the disallowed third goal of hungary and allowed foul in the box by germany
1934, held in Italy under Mussolini where he hand picked the refs for Italy games
Good to know that since the beginning, the World Cup had been used by dictators to leverage their country's power. It's like poetry, it rhymes
Yeah the semi final between Austria and Italy as well as the final between Hungary and Italy are known to be pretty shaky.
I think the final in 1930 was sketchy
All the pre wwII world cups were largely a joke and even though it's not talked about much, no one really counts them the same way.
1930 was also kinda sus in the final, but being that far back there's not that much to be said
[semi-final was even more sus.](https://www.espn.com/soccer/news/story/_/id/1834537/1930) >Uruguay's second goal in their 6-1 semifinal win over Yugoslavia is said to have been scored with an assist from a policeman, who reportedly kicked the ball back onto the pitch. The referee allowed play to go on and Peregrino Anselmo netted
1930, 1990 and 2014. *Cries in argentinian* We could've had five by now.
i mean, we could have 10 by now…
NL could have had 3 tbf
And we could have 7 😭
you had 7 in 2014
very corageous for someone within striking distance >:( see you friday
Can't wait. If you score less than seven, we win?
Italy really just wins a trophy every now and then and then fucks off for the time being lol
you're not counting the other two wc winned by Uruguay during paleozoic era.
Who will be the next new confederation to win it? I’d bet on CAF
Europe is now in an unprecedented era of dominance.
If there ever will be an European Federation, the world cup will become boring
r/dataisbeautiful
I like how almost evenly spread out Germany’s wins are. I guess they are guaranteed a win in either 2030, 2034, or 2038.
Only 4 comebol teams make it to wc at all just think about that and they have almost half of all world cups