World Cup 2018

[Crazyskier]

Just looked it up and both BBC and ITV are showing it

The ITV team are unaware still - they just said the only place to watch was with them!

For those of you with a 4K TV, don't forget to use the I-Player APP for the 4k UHD feed, rather than sky or free to air. That way you get a 4K feed for the football as well as the tennis (subject to at least 20MB download speed fibre optic broadband).

CS

[dt888]

Just looked it up and both BBC and ITV are showing it

Where did you see this? All I can see is ITV have first pick so will therefore be on ITV.

Would be great if it was on both channels though

[Halliday]

Just looked it up and both BBC and ITV are showing it

Where did you see this? All I can see is ITV have first pick so will therefore be on ITV.

Would be great if it was on both channels though

Same here ... BBC showed qtr final .. saying ITV have first option ... watch this space I guess

[BetScalper]

BBC are showing France v Belgium on Tuesday. ITV are showing England v Croatia on Wednesday.

Both are showing the final.

[SeaHorseRacing]

Anyone think it’s possible for England to be priced fav if they make the final. If so what would need to happen?

England to win 4-0 against Croatia and the other team through to lose a key player?

[Naffman]

Just looked it up and both BBC and ITV are showing it

Where did you see this? All I can see is ITV have first pick so will therefore be on ITV.

Would be great if it was on both channels though

Same here ... BBC showed qtr final .. saying ITV have first option ... watch this space I guess

I obviously read an uninformed article as you guys are correct

[SeaHorseRacing]

Exactly one week today we could be World Cup winners!! Imagine that!

[ShaunWhite]

Exactly one week today we could be World Cup winners!! Imagine that!

It was always going to take the luck of the draw. A World League would be the interesting one.

It's great etc etc but it feels a bit hollow only playing one decent team between day 1 and the final. And thankfully we lost to them.

If we'd played the likes of Brazil, Germany, Argentina, France, Portugal and Spain I'd be buzzing but after I've waited 52 years for this (probably a few more than you) and I have to admit it doesn't feel as big a big deal it should.

World cup winners, maybe. Best team in the world, mmmm if you say so.

[ShaunWhite]

I've just had a bollocking from the missus for being so gloomy.

We are doing well and winning any comp takes a certain amount of luck, so 'Yay' I'm happy with it all really.

[BetScalper]

We didn't decide the groups or who got knocked out.

Brazil are not there
Spain are not there
Italy are not there
Holland are not there
Germany are not there
Argentina are not there

They weren't good enough to qualify or get to the semifinal's.

By hook or by crook ENGLAND are there. All they can do is play the team in front of them, whoever that may be.

The engraving (if they still do) will just say England 2018 World Cup Winners (if they do it).

It matter's not how you get there Grasshopper. It just matters that you do. Same with trading.

PS. And don't forget, back in 1966 there were fewer teams in the WC, so very likely you had to beat at least 4 of the worlds top teams to get to the final. I dread to think who will win when they introduce 48 teams, Australia ? (no offence intended)

[ShaunWhite]

I get it Betscalper, I've seen the error of my ways.
I think maybe after all these years I'm strugggling so much to actually believe it that I'm finding reasons that aren't really there.

My take on the bigger number of teams is that it will produce a truer winner not a freak one. It's like the FA cup, there's so many rounds that the cream tends to rise to the top. Poor teams get the odd lucky win but stringing a series of them together is much tougher.

[SeaHorseRacing]

I get it Betscalper, I've seen the error of my ways.
I think maybe after all these years I'm strugggling so much to actually believe it that I'm finding reasons that aren't really there.

My take on the bigger number of teams is that it will produce a truer winner not a freak one. It's like the FA cup, there's so many rounds that the cream tends to rise to the top. Poor teams get the odd lucky win but stringing a series of them together is much tougher.

It’s like the European Championship every 4 years..

Up until the late 80s there was only 4 teams in the finals. And in 1996 was the first year they moved it from 8 teams to 16 teams. So we could really turn round and say those previous winners didn’t really do much to win it.

But everyone just knows the facts like Spain have won it 3 times... without actually knowing the first time they were at home and only 4 teams played in 1960.

I’m 20 years time all that will be remembered is the achievement of winning it. Plus it’s going to 48 teams in 2026 which probably will make it even harder to win it.

[dt888]

If its an England v Belguim final, there could be as many as 20 of the 22 starters being from the premier league.

That would be pretty amazing and could be one hell of a game!

[ShaunWhite]

If its an England v Belguim final, there could be as many as 20 of the 22 starters being from the premier league.

That would be pretty amazing and could be one hell of a game!

What I like about the WC is the clash of styles from each continent, artsitry vs brute force or gradual build ups vs the long ball game.
But an all premiership line-up would make for a good game. Certainly much better than somethng like Brazil vs Colombia with about 10mins of open play and 80mins of acting.

[dragontrades]

Does anyone on here actually make any money trading football? I can't crack it.
Post your results from the world cup so far to prove me wrong.