World Cup 2026 Review

Join us as we discuss our take on the tournament. The 2D's talk players, expansion and of course FIFA.

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:00

Hello, and welcome to the latest episode of Two D's in a pod. This week we will be continuing to look at the recently completed World Cup in the US. So join us as we discuss how the tournament took shape and what future World Cups might have in store. So John, good to see you. Thanks. Thanks, good to see you too. So it's the end of the World Cup. Lots of excitement. Yeah, we've survived. Lots of drama. Survived just about. What were your overall impressions?

SPEAKER_00 0:23

What has it been? I can't even remember the world before the World Cup. Was it uh four weeks? I don't know, a hundred odd games or something ridiculous. I enjoyed the tournament. I've got to say, I enjoyed the tournament. Uh a small bit of my day will be uh vacant now. I don't know what I'm gonna do with um the mornings and when I think, oh my god, was that the result last night? And check in various websites to see what was going on. So uh yeah, I enjoyed it. I think there were some pluses and minuses, but overall I enjoyed the tournament. What about you?

SPEAKER_01 0:50

Uh yeah, I thought it was a good tournament. I mean, I think I've said before that I I felt it was a very large tournament, having that number of teams, Mel. There were a lot of games early on, particularly that were low block games where big teams playing little team that has big teams obviously got a lot to lose, and little teams just out for a draw or a a narrow wing. But there were some very good positives that came out of it. Some of the football was very good. Some of the top players, interestingly, all the top players, particularly goal scorers, came to the fore in the tournament. People like them Mbappe and Nessie and in Cain and Bellingham scored goals. So, and the top four teams ranked in the world got to the semi-finals. So uh a lot to be said for FIFA's ranking and the performance of the players.

SPEAKER_00 1:32

Yeah, I'd agree. I think the size of the World Cup is obviously as the tournament gets bigger, it's gonna be harder and harder to host. I think the next one is in three countries Spain, Morocco, and Portugal, but they're also playing single off one-off games in Uruguay and Argentina for some bizarre reason. So as it gets bigger, it's definitely gonna be harder to control. But I think I wouldn't want FIF FIFA's answer is to go to 64 to avoid this kind of dead games um with the with the way they they ran it this time. And I think 64 is a too-beat, personally. This was about as far as I don't think they're gonna go back to there were issues with some games towards the end. I just think 64 is just I mean who could who could what country alone could hold that? Probably maybe the UK, maybe Germany, but I just I don't see there's enough stadiums, I don't see the infrastructure that's required now. I mean it was a well view, but the spectators, the stadium seemed to be pretty full. It's a big, big uh so the number of stadiums required is a lot.

SPEAKER_01 2:36

Yeah, and I wonder just do does a tournament lose its identity a bit? Because when you think back of the great tournaments of the past, like you had Italian 90, you had in curr uh South Korea, those were very iconic tournaments because they were in one or or maybe two countries. If you go too wide with your hosting, does it lose a certain amount of that identity? I remember Mexico in 1970, the sunshine and those open stadiums, th those kind of things, it's do we lose a little bit of that if we're spreading it all around the world, it just becomes a more general tournament?

SPEAKER_00 3:05

Yeah, I I think there's that's a really good point because if you I don't know, obviously Mexico were due to play all their games in Mexico, so that meant that was a lot of buzz for that. But if Mexico for whatever reason didn't get through and you ended up with Qatar and Malawi or something playing in the Azteca, how many people would go? And how important would that be? That would that would be one factor. But I I mean I'm amazed. I think Qatar, I don't know how they did it, they obviously had the money to build stadiums. Probably China could obviously put a World Cup on, they could probably decide that they want to build 15-20 stadiums. I mean, it's gonna lose its identity, you know. The fans, where do they go to? I I'd no idea how easy it was for Argentinian and Spanish, you know, to to negotiate getting to the final if you're a fan, because you're travelling to Miami and then Dallas and then New York. So yeah.

SPEAKER_01 3:58

And and as a viewer, how do you keep track of having 48 teams waking up in the morning and seeing what games have been played, who's playing who? If it's 64 teams, can you really keep a grasp of all that's going on in the tournament, whether that's a good thing or a bad thing? And to your point, there'll be a lot of games that people just aren't interested in because because the tournament is so large. And if you've got games where people aren't interested, does that take away from the World Cup? Which, you know, generally speaking, in this World's Cup, as you say, it's got a lot of people. At the end of the day, it comes down to money. This tournament has $13 billion and incredible sum of money, yeah. Double what they made in Qatar last time. Does that if that goes back into the game and we see the benefit of that, then maybe, then maybe it's the ends justify the means if next time around we get twenty billion dollars into the game.

SPEAKER_00 4:47

But where does it go? I think the uh I mean FIFA will say and I would too, that you know, things like Cape Verde, it was great to see them what they did. Um they were uh one of those kind of old FA Cup style kind of couple of you know great results, managed to stay in the game and get through how much how much better can they do? I don't know, they're only half a million people, whatever it was, some ridiculous sum, the number of you know, population. I don't know how much better they can get. You know, you've got I think you made a point last time that people like Japan and Morocco have made big investments in your infrastructure to develop great teams, but they've got big populations. You know, Iceland, I can't see winning the World Cup, Haiti can't see winning the World Cup, Cape Verde. I can't see winning the World Cup. So you've got these are they are they just in it for the sake of it? I don't know. And that's a question for FIFA.

SPEAKER_01 5:35

I think it's it was interesting that teams did feel any success for some teams was greeted, they were greeted as heroes when they returned to their country. Norway obviously lost to England, treated as heroes when they went back home. Some of the smaller nations when they went home were treated as heroes. Some nations who just qualified were treated as heroes. So I think it is it does give a feel-good factor to to countries. And if you're looking to bring the world up generally, get more people interested in football, provide more money to invest in more, then maybe that's that's a good thing. But it does take away that uniqueness that what's made the World Cup great for someone like myself who's been wanting to see for you know 50 50 odd years.

SPEAKER_00 6:11

Yeah, I mean, I think the European teams didn't get it their own all their own way this year this tournament, which was good to see. Uh, a lot of African teams got to generally a pretty good level, but there were not yet a breakthrough team, and the Asia, Asian teams, really other than Japan, didn't really show anything or too much. There is FIFA can argue could argue that well, there's still India, there's still China, you know, and there's still potentially countries in Africa and and um Asia that could come through. But I can't see where, you know, for example, New Zealand, you've got rugby, you've got cricket, you've got other extreme sports that are, you know, really their small population. Qualifying is kind of fantastic for them. Can they go further? Probably not. South America, I don't know how many it must have been, it's probably only about someone's going to correct me on this, but I don't know, 50, 16 countries, 18 countries in South America, and 10 or 11 of them are already in there. And then you've got host nations, no, if they're there, so you're almost guaranteed a place. And any of the top European 20, I mean, Italy would have probably got through if there'd been 64 teams, as would have uh, I don't know. Well, Holland had missed a couple, England have missed a couple over the years, but that also I think added added to the interest.

SPEAKER_01 7:21

For sure, for sure. I remember 74 and 78 when England failed to qualify. It was like a shock to the system that we we failed to qualify. But it does create that uniqueness that when we came around in Spain '82, they qualified, it becomes a bigger thing. So there's no jeopardy. If you go to 64 teams, then pretty much, as you say, Europe will will have a dominant number of teams in the tournament. And is that maybe that's a good thing? Maybe you know, maybe it's good to make you make sure that everybody's there and teams like Italy don't miss out. Because it is a shame when the big teams don't get there, particularly if you've won the World Cup and another team hasn't been there and they've said, Well, you won the world, we've been there potentially.

SPEAKER_00 7:59

Yeah, but if if I look at, I mean, for that thing, if I look at you know, Brazil are the only team I believe that have qualified for every World Cup, and they were pretty awful, to be honest. And they are so on past glories, do they deserve to qualify just by right? Not sure. I would I was, you know, of all the teams I look forward to seeing Brazil are one I look forward to seeing play. And when I saw them this year, I thought, you know what, I might as well have been watching, I don't know, any of the other teams, any other team. There was nothing special about them. And I and if that if all teams are equal and all teams are kind of much of a muchness, it's kind of just so the marches are so fine in professional sport that it takes it, takes it away. I mean, I mean, you know, Mexico stunning because they were in the Azteca, you know, they they really worked. Even Argentina to their point, you know, that they were a resilient team, you know, the guys were you could tell were proud to play for their country, want to do the best for the country. But when it gets to kind of well, we're in it anyway, and we're always going to be in it, and it's that I think that does take away something from uh special, you know, that special X factor that the World Cup has.

SPEAKER_01 9:01

Um and again, yeah, maybe maybe it it helps focus the mind. I mean, Brazil didn't look like the there was no mystique about Brazil anymore. Everybody knows all of the players, they would play as a lot of the players play in European leagues, uh, and they weren't the exciting team that we used to like look forward to seeing play, because we rarely saw them play other than in World Cups in previous years, but now we see their team regularly. So so you can go either way. You can either say, look, make it a big tournament, and then everybody will get in. Every team will get there as the Brazil's, even if they're doing badly, will always play there, or keep it at a smaller tournament. But I agree with you, they won't they won't go back, they've made such a huge amount of money this time around, and the power, influence, and control it gives FIFA is something that's very difficult to.

SPEAKER_00 9:47

I d I didn't like obviously the US being the major host of this tournament, Canada and Mexico were sort of secondary to them by the nature of the US and and the size of the population, everything else, and the money involved. I didn't like that Americanization of the game where you know it became quarter, the advertising was prevalent everywhere it could be. I think for a game that's obviously European, South American, and kind of historically, there are elements I didn't like, which I but I understand for the American public that they paid the fees, they paid fee for the big bucks. So I didn't like that. I'd I'd like it to get to a simpler these bigger, bigger, bigger events with half-time shows and that. I'm I'm not a big fan of. I think it loses the football loses and that.

SPEAKER_01 10:29

Yeah, I I think I saw an interesting uh interview the other day, and they were interviewing an American sports podcaster, and he was saying the whole talking about the Balogun situation, he said that's what America's all about. He said there are multiple, multiple legal cases going on in America where one sports team is suing another sports team for this, that, and the other. They're a country that's based on they've got this legalistic framework which is the basis of their country, and everything falls around that. So we shouldn't be surprised to see that. So it's a shame that, and it comes down to Infantino at the end of the day, as the as the guardian of the beautiful game, that he's allowed, you know, bring in the good things from other cultures and other countries, but don't let the corrupting things and the negative things that the that is typical of America.

SPEAKER_00 11:16

I think obviously their sport is designed around, I don't know how many teams are in the NFL or NBA or whatever, or NHL, but they are a set number of teams, they have a franchise for a city, and that's it. And they never there's no promotional relegation. Now, we are used to in the non-soccer world, the football world, of promotion and relegation being a a regular occurrence. And I think that's the other worry about when you get to that bigger, bigger tournament. At the end of the day, you're gonna go, well, these guys are guaranteed to get in, they're guaranteed to do that. And I like that little bit of jeopardy that wow, you know, there could be a giant giant killing effect. Yeah, yeah. The the uh another couple of things which I didn't even realise till it became obvious that England were out, and they talked about no country having won the World Cup without a manager from that country.

SPEAKER_01 12:07

Right, okay.

SPEAKER_00 12:08

And I'd never heard that. And they said the only was I think I think it was the I can't remember where he was from, I think it was German, the manager of Greece, when they won the Euros, which we see is the only tournament in history that a non-native has led the team. And when when they talk of you know, people talk about DNA of teams and and how they feel, that's got to be in there. I mean, I think that's gotta be in there because when you're working with your players, you've got an idea how they would have played, how they would have started the game, whether it be on the streets or you know, in a park or whatever it was. And maybe that's where that final clash of Tuchel and also Ancelotti at Brazil, that that final piece was missing of the jigsaw.

SPEAKER_01 12:48

Yeah, no, I think you could be right. I mean, I think I think I've said before on an earlier podcast that Tuchel took a gamble by leaving out some very good technical players that I don't think anybody else would have left out. He went for this kind of mechanism. He wanted a high press, underbreak kind of kind of team that what that lacked those technical players, the Palmers and the Fodens and maybe Northans, you might you might argue. And that was an experiment almost with can I create a great group of players who've got a good atmosphere rather than select the best players? Yeah because I'm worried that it might damage the atmosphere. Quite a gamble to take. And would an England an English manager have done that? I'm not so sure. I think was prepared to be more avant-garde, and then that maybe doesn't get the full buy-in of the team, and that might have had a knock-on effect.

SPEAKER_00 13:34

I mean, I think England certainly going back to Fabio Capello and Svane Groen Erickson had decided they want a star manager, except and Gareth Southgate somehow ended up with a job in between all of that, but they've wanted stars, not stars, but proven elite managers. Whereas, you know, Spain and Argentina went through a kind of system of doing that, managers who'd been with the players for a long time and obviously had a steep history in those guys you know from a very early day. And I think I saw something that you know, there's no way though the Argentinian or Spanish manager would have got the job from the FA. They would have said, No way, who who are you guys? And that's interesting. And I don't know what I mean. I was I think that as the game gets bigger and more and more players are equalised, the managers are equalised, it does take a little bit out of it, I think, this feeling of the French team being French and the Moroccan team being more English team being English and whatever, and it seems to be a bit of a it could go either way at the moment, it could be the person the team with the most money buys has the best players, and and that isn't great.

SPEAKER_01 14:40

There was some talk with some minister some years ago who said, Well, why can't we play the players who are playing in our domestic league? And you mentioned the Premier League. And I I would you'd never want it to get to that level, although if you see in the World Cup something like 94 players who were born in France played in the World Cup, 49 players were born in the UK played in the World Cup. So teams are picking and choosing whether you like it or not. These they're strengthening their squads and their teams by harvesting the best who aren't being picked up by the first choice nation.

SPEAKER_00 15:11

Yeah. I think I mean I think the one thing, I mean, I had um I had some physio today, and I was talking to the lady. She's got a couple of young boys, one who's 10, I think, and she was saying that you know he loved the World Cup because of the goal scores. And that was the real standout. I mean, I normally there might be one or two, but this year everybody scored goals. And I don't know if there's been a is a higher average, and I'll have to check that out if the games have there's been more goals per game, rather than you know, obviously the total number of games has been more. But um, you know, as you said before, it's been great. I do feel a little bit that the third place game, the bronze final, with Mbappe scoring two, I think, and becoming the golden boot was a little bit kind of like that's a little bit off for me, because that the competition's ended, you know, you're you're qualified and then you're the final is where it is. That other game is is nothing wrong with it. It was a good game, it was one of the most enjoyable games, it was a praiser game and lots of goals.

SPEAKER_01 16:06

But I don't know if that those performances should count towards the Yeah, a few people have said that England were definitely not uh fully concentrated on defence during that game. I think you know, 6-4. If it had been the if it had been the final, it would never have been choice to Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 16:25

I think the last thing I I'd ask you is that um so if I was now I'm you know I'm I'm uh the chief scout of I don't know Real Madrid and I've seen that tournament and I'm thinking, right, who can I go and buy? Who would you go and buy? You're you're uh Real Madrid's technical director, and you're like, right, okay, who is the who are the players that I mean you've already got some of them anyway, but who are you gonna go out and buy?

SPEAKER_01 16:45

I was one player I thought who's got a lot of potential, who and I think he could be playing a number of positions, is uh O'Reilly, the left back. Because he's naturally a central midfield player, he's six foot four, he's quick, he's very good on the ball, he's at Men's City where he's obviously developed. Well, he's got an England team at 19, 20 years of age. If I was Real Madrid and I was looking for a player who could be a multi-purpose player who might eventually evolve into a central midfield player, I think I might look at O'Reilly from an English bullet perspective. Other than that, Elise, I think he didn't get the golden boot, but he got the most assists in the tournament. He looked very, very good, very accomplished, come a long way since his days at Sellhurst Park. What about yourself?

SPEAKER_00 17:29

I didn't actually think there was anybody. There were no surprises for me in terms of wow, you know, this guy's brilliant. I mean, I think the French when they were going forward was stunning. I loved the team ethic of the Spanish. I thought they were superb, they covered each other. No, even though Lemille Lamar didn't really have a fantastic World Cup, but he's obviously, and he's 19, did really like the the uh guy who got player of a young player of the tournament, the Spanish centre back, Carl Cabassi. Yeah, Cabassi. I thought he was superb for because there's not many centre backs who are 19 who would play well in a World Cup final, and he did really well, and they've got you know uh Gavi, another kind of 19-year-old or whatever he is, he uh came on fantastic. Uh Kedri's definitely come on two or three, so they're the players, they're at Barcelona, no surprises. There were a couple of fullbacks, I think, particularly for Congo. There was a left fullback that I really liked, and then number 23, whose name escapes me for Germany, who reminded me of Kadira and those kind of players. There weren't many surprises, which is also disappointing, I think. You know, there wasn't any star that I thought, wow, this guy's come from nowhere, and boom, it was all the regulars, if you like, all the well-known players who who were there and thereabouts. That was a disappointment for me. I don't know. Lots of players excited me, but I'm not sure I'd go out and say, you know. One thing I'd definitely say is that I'm I'm not sure I'm amazed at this transfer business that's been going on during the World Cup. Yes. And I'm not sure. First of all, Elliot Anderson, is he a £100 million player? Not sure. Is Morgan Robbs a £100 million player? I I'm not sure what I would say.

SPEAKER_01 19:10

A lot of money, isn't it?

SPEAKER_00 19:12

A lot of money, a lot of money. So I don't know if there were any other £100 million players there that I thought, well, I'd pay that money for them. I don't know if those guys delivered enough to want that, but hey hell, not my budget.

SPEAKER_01 19:24

Okay. Good to speak to you.

SPEAKER_00 19:26

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Four years' time. Can we wait that long? And let's look forward to four years' time. Okay. Good to talk to you, Peter. See ya.

SPEAKER_01 19:34

Well, that's it for this week. Join us next time for another episode of Two D's in the Pod.