Is this going to earn the crown as the worst World Cup in history or can the football itself save it?

It’s been an exercise in how badly can FIFA and the US treat people and even participants of the tournament so far. Canada and Mexico have barely had a look in. It’s massively bloated with some teams who might be lucky to escape some double digit hammerings. On the other hand, extending the tournament entrants has given some nations a chance to participate that they’d never otherwise have and perhaps they can make good accounts of themselves. Can the football save this World Cup or are the shenanigans already too much for it to be salvageable?

I think all world cups are boring, honestly. Never watched much of one, and have never watched a final. Too easy to lose interest in. In saying that, I'm a night owl, and the timing of these fixtures here in Europe means I'll probably watch a lot of games this time.

You can measure a World Cup on a few factors: format - the positive are the new countries who'll add variety and energy on and off the pitch. The negatives are the lack of jeopardy for the big countries in the group stages which will make matters weirdly flat around the middle of the tournament. atmosphere - expect this to be good tomorrow night in Mexico, otherwise it looks like FIFA and the hosts have gorged and ate the product they are trying to sell to the world. It is going to fall short of the masses of colourful fans we see and hear at European tournaments. quality of football - optimistic that the quality will be high based on some of the individual talent possessed by some of the main contenders, along with the collective fluency of the likes of Spain and Japan. drama - the 1994 World Cup had a number of compelling storylines, but we can only judge after the event.   Last edited: Today at 14:42

I think all world cups are boring, honestly. Never watched much of one, and have never watched a final. Too easy to lose interest in. In saying that, I'm a night owl, and the timing of these fixtures here in Europe means I'll probably watch a lot of games this time. No offence, but having never watched much of one and never watched a final, how can you make that judgement?

No offence, but having never watched much of one and never watched a final, how can you make that judgement? Because they bore me too much to continue keeping up with them?

As much as everyone would love for the event to flop, it's not going to happen. Same death sentences were pronounced when Russia hosted the world cup and then Qatar who actually forced everyone to watch it and got all the leagues in the world to change their league fixtures for the year. It all went off without a hitch. This world cup will also be the same once it starts. This will be a big win for the cronies as Russia and Qatar were. Have fun!

I grew up in India and have watched every World Cup obsessively from 1982 onwards. Most of the time the matches were way into the wee hours, but that was part of the charm. This year, though, it all seems very forced. Way too many matches between unbalanced teams, and real worries about the heat. I don't see how matches can be exciting in conditions that are so hot, and am worried that players will get injured along the way.

Because they bore me too much to continue keeping up with them? Yeah, I find cricket boring, but I won’t comment on the Ashes thread about how I never watch it and it doesn’t interest me? Just a bit odd.

Yeah, I find cricket boring, but I won’t comment on the Ashes thread about how I never watch it and it doesn’t interest me? Just a bit odd. Well, feel free to ignore my comment then.

"Feels the most low key WC" to other people it feels the most high profile. This World Cup lasts 38 days. The 2018 World Cup lasted 31 days. So despite the expansion, the tournament is only a week longer. The increase in teams isn't dragging the competition out, it just means a busier group stage with 4-5 matches per day instead of 3–4, plus one additional knockout round. I don't see why that would cause people to lose interest. More games don't automatically mean less excitement when they're being played by more teams. The scenario that would actually dilute it would be keeping the same number of teams and simply adding extra matches, forcing fans to watch the same sides play repeatedly over a longer period. That's not what's happening here - the additional fixtures come from additional teams, bringing more variety, more storylines, and more countries with a stake in the tournament, over a similar period of time to previous WC tournaments. I am playing devil's advocate here as I do think there was nothing wrong with the previous format and it's all for the money, but I still think there are major holes in the "diluted" argument and the fact the games are on at a bad time for Europeans has no bearing on whether it's going to be a good tournament or not. Of course, it might mean you don't enjoy it as much, but the people who keep making these points seem to want to argue its going to objectively be a bad tournament for everyone, which is t impossible. As with these things, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I wouldn’t have anticipated that the last PL season would be so utterly dull. I would hope the knock out stages are interesting.