England are in The World Cup New Order: Germany and Brazil left behind | OneFootball

This is the first time a World Cup quarter‑final has featured none of Germany, the Netherlands, Italy or Brazil. It’s a new club.

Oh and England are likeable. How did that happen? E-mail theeditor@football365.com

The World Cup more open than ever

Now that we have the fixtures for the World Cup quarter‑finals, I think we can conclude that there is a new world order.

Over the last 20 years, the European Cup/Champions League and the World Cup have essentially swapped roles.

The European Cup used to be a balanced competition where many different teams from different countries could reach the latter stages on the basis of having a generationally good group of players. Because clubs had a small pool of players to pick from based on their geographic location, it was often the case that different teams from different countries enjoyed short periods of success. Although some clubs dominated between 1954 and 1990, you still had teams like Celtic, Feyenoord, Red Star Belgrade and Steaua București winning the competition, while Reims, Partizan, Panathinaikos, Club Brugge and Malmö reached the final.

The World Cup, by contrast, was dominated by a small group of major footballing nations with massive player pools. As a result, the same teams consistently reached the latter stages. Between England winning in 1966 and France winning in 1998, every single World Cup final was contested by just five countries: Germany, the Netherlands, Argentina, Italy or Brazil.

Then something changed. The Champions League grew, player migration became commonplace, and mega‑money flooded into European football. Suddenly you had a handful of clubs with enormous pools of elite players, and the same teams began appearing in the latter stages year after year. Since the surprise Porto–Monaco final in 2004, every single final has featured either one of the three biggest Italian clubs, the three biggest Spanish clubs, the two biggest German clubs, PSG, or one of the Premier League’s big six. Essentially, unless you are a mega‑club from one of the big five leagues, you are not reaching the final.

The World Cup, by contrast, began to slowly shift. From 1998 to 2022, we saw France, Spain and Croatia reach finals. While France and Spain not reaching finals before those dates was unusual, Croatia’s run was driven by a golden generation. Now, in World Cup 2026, of the five countries that used to dominate, only Argentina have even managed to reach the quarter‑finals, and that has largely been due to having one of the greatest players of all time. They’ve struggled past World Cup minnows Cape Verde and Egypt.

This is the first time a World Cup quarter‑final has featured none of Germany, the Netherlands, Italy or Brazil.

In their place we have Morocco, Belgium, Norway and Switzerland. I believe this is because, unlike mega‑clubs, national teams now have smaller pools of Champions League‑level players to pick from based on geography, which levels out the playing field. Morocco have the world’s best full‑back in Hakimi, Norway have the world’s best finisher in Haaland, while the likes of Brazil and the Netherlands are selecting attacking players from Bournemouth, West Ham, Sunderland and Brentford. Donnarumma aside, Italy have no genuinely top‑level Champions League players, and Germany’s breakthrough player in this tournament is Undav, a 29‑year‑old Brighton reject.

Am I saying the final will be Morocco vs Switzerland? No, it could be, but it will probably be France vs Argentina. However, I firmly believe there is now a much higher chance of a team from Africa, Asia, the Americas (excluding Argentina or Brazil), or a smaller European nation reaching the final than there is of a non‑mega‑club reaching the Champions League final.

The tables have turned. Paul K, London

UEFA to take over World Cup?

I’ve been wondering lately what would happen if UEFA quietly had a word with Brazil and Argentina (and perhaps Uruguay as well, so that all previous World Cup finalists from South America were involved) and invited them to take part in an alternative World Cup in four years’ time.

With a few South American teams and all the European teams, then no one would take the FIFA world cup seriously and FIFA would lose all their power – and their advertising money. UEFA aren’t perfect, but then the world cup would surely have less corruption and be less about how much money the people in charge can make.

I would also propose that the laws should be changed to allow a minor foul to be an indirect free kick – there is no way that Egypt should have a goal cancelled because they fouled outside the box, whereas Argentina foul inside their penalty area and therefore it’s fine. Make both indirect freekicks and VAR can pull both back. It has the added benefit that referees can be more consistent as the punishment can fit the crime better, rather than deciding between penalty or nothing. Can someone please pass this idea on to Arsene Wenger for me? Tim Boswald

England have somehow become likeable

I haven’t really been watching the World Cup, but what you get with the news snippets and the team singing along with the fans is just such a huge world away from the England team I grew up with, it needs commenting on.

I remember the Welsh fans and how they celebrated Euro 2016, with Bale, Ramsey et al. It was different to usual stories of the Irish and Scots fans having great times at tournaments (though that remains); the specific thing with the perception I had of the Wales 2016 period was that the fans were having fun… but also genuinely seemed to like their team. It was a direct relationship. The players and fans made time to celebrate together, sing together. It all just seemed so unified.

England beat them at that tournament, but under the nadir of Roy Hodgeson, the set up seemed an entire world away from Wales. Roy seemed to genuinely loathe the supporters, media, half the players and basically every single element of the national job, only gleaning some positivity from the clear mindset that all of this was rightfully his; It was the least he deserved, and as such he need not accommodate the needs of anyone else, nor even engage in conversation with them about it.

And that period under Roy, had followed the absolute pit of the golden generation; the United players hating the whole exercise and Ferguson’s long shadow, and the Liverpool lads only being there to sell autobiographies or learn from managers like Capello to take it back to Anfield. The Chelsea lot, in both Coles, Lampard and Terry, did seemingly want to win as a team, but found a squad rife-full of petty squabbles or just an attitude of ‘this is boring, can we go home’.

Rooney commenting to camera that’s it’s apparently not nice to have the fans booing you, oblivious to any introspection as to why that might be, and that the fans were going significantly further than that, with some at that point being so livid with their selfish squabbling they were climbing fences to try and get to McLaren, or just turning away in droves.

In the ten years since that, the whole thing has changed. I don’t personally think that this is just based on the England team moving from national embarrassment to something of genuine quality, and bandwagon jumping.

There was the much cited work Southgate did with Owen Eastwood (Belonging is such a fantastic book) and trying to reframe the pressure and history of the shirt; there’s been the slow media drip feed of images from the squad, such as the unicorn from Russia, Saka and Slabhead, and onwards from there, that has at least presented the impression the squad are united, and that they actually want to be together. Such a low bar, but one so difficult that England haven’t cleared it in 20-30 years.

The other interesting thing to me is also that, in previous years, I’ve always carried my club perceptions into the tournament. eg ‘x’ may be a great player but he dived against us for that rubbish penalty last season. Or ‘y’ might be a fantastic midfielder, but the knob still put one of our lads out for 6 weeks with that bad tackle. But I’m looking at players Gordon (absolute diver), or Rice (completely unable to defend set pieces without grappling, and one of the worst time-wasters in the sport), or Pickford and on and on, and I find their smiles infectious and want them to do well.

There’s no real point to this note other than to encourage everyone to pause and remember just how utterly loathsome so many England squads have been in the past. Still not really going to watch the ‘cup in the US, so may well miss the best moment in English football in three generations. But I am getting something by proxy, in the broader feeling of connection… and that 90’s music far outstrips the noise of today. Tom G

Egypt weren’t robbed

It tells you how much people know about football seeing some of these responses about the Argentina game today. People are acting like it’s some sort of massive robbery.

“That disallowed Egypt 2nd goal after Martinez was LEGALLY dispossessed” – He stepped on his foot. You can say it’s soft but it’s pretty clear. Don’t know why you’ve capitalized legally here.

“That offside header by Romero, his arm hair was offside” – you can’t score with your arm mate.

Egypt bottled it plain and simple. They conceded THREE goals in like 15 mins. They should be concerned about themselves, not the ref. Do people actually like genuinely believe that the refs are trying to make Argentina win? I heard this shit in the last World Cup and they gave France 2 penalties in the final! That doesn’t make any sense.

It was quite funny though when Messi started to play out on the right and realised he could just keep going past people from there when it wasn’t working in the middle. Dion Byrne

World Cup thoughts

Well, if only Egypt could have hung on there to knock the Argies out. Should any team, whatever level, throw away a two goal lead that late on? I really don’t like Argentina and their smug players and to see a Chav score the winner was too much! Let’s send Port Stanley AFC in there to demolish them.

As for the USA V Belgium result, I must agree that although I’m a Trump fan he was out of order. However, bearing in mind the USA had looked pretty decent up until that game I feel it worked against them and they didn’t look too comfortable and also it pumped Belgium up somewhat. Belgium could be dark horses for this tournament.

Going back to the England v Mexico game, I noticed that ‘Bad Wolf’ commented that Bellingham carried the England team. Yes, he had a superb game but the England team carried themselves. He scored two goals through good running and positioning but the goals were thanks to a delightful cross by Saka and good play and a pass by Kane. As yourselves noted his defensive contribution was one of his most admirable parts of his performance.

Also, in your player ratings you emphasised that Tuchel refused to substitute Rice even though he had been booked (a little bit harshly I must say) which sums up why Arteta is over reliant on him. I also humbly apologised about my criticism of Pickford. Other than the sending off which was down to a mistimed tackle every member of the team contributed to one of England’s best performances I can remember.

I’m looking forward to the France v Morocco game which should be entertaining and of course the England game against Norway. How do we stop Haaland? We neutralise Ødegaard first perhaps?! I’ve looked at our individual player’s defensive stats against Haaland and they vary both in respect of goals and assists. I personally think the game will be won or lost in midfield.

Anyway, that’s my contribution for now. Chris, Croydon

Why the US will never dominate football…

Just before the World Cup in 1994, there was a great article written in the New Yorker magazine titled something like “why America doesn’t need Football, and why Football doesn’t need America”. I wish I could track down the article (F365 Editors – any help?) because it postulated that IF the USA decided to throw its full weight behind it, it could dominate Football, possibly forever. Imagine the best young talent being channeled through a well-structured infrastructure with no expense spared. It’s actually a frightening thought really. Fortunately for the rest of the world, this will never happen for two key reasons.

Firstly, the best young talent usually favors one of the indigenous American sports. They want to become the next Tom Brady or LeBron James. They probably have never heard of Real Madrid or Manchester United, let alone want to play for them.

Even if they have an interest, it is still very much a rich person’s sport, primarily following a “pay to play” model (too long to explain here). A kid doesn’t get professional club coaching until they graduate from University in their twenties, which is way too late. The exceptions to the rule are those fortunate few who were born and raised outside of America, like children of military personnel, but that is a small gene pool indeed, possibly to become even smaller given the current political climate in America.

The second, and perhaps bigger issue however is not logistics but mindset. Simply put – Football is un-American, and to the more extreme (e.g. MAGA folk), it’s downright Communist! All the things that make Football great (e.g. egalitarian, diverse, multi-cultural, working class, etc.) are counter to the American ethos of the individual.

While they couch their objections in more basic terms, saying it is low-scoring or even effeminate (!), the reality is Football is a threat to the barbecuing, light-beer swilling, gun-toting racists and bigots who represent a significant proportion of the population. These are the same people who have a similar intolerance for a Woman/Black President, LGBT or Abortion rights, or any other social issue that does not favor the white American male.

So the rest of the world should be grateful that we “dodged a bullet” and Football will gradually disappear from American consciousness, hopefully forever. Adidasmufc (Unfortunately, the term “dodging a bullet” is more than just an euphemism here in America)

…Really enjoyed Keith Reilly’s and Daniel’s thoughts on the current and future prospects for USA football.

I lived in the US from age 4-12 and have lived very near to the US since 2010. Whilst football will always be my true love, I’m a big fan (often attending in person and daily soaking up the 24/7 US news feeds) of US sports, NFL and MLB in particular (was even a little league coach (not a very good one mind) for several years in the country I live in). A few comments:

1. ‘Soccer’ participation at US youth level is almost as prominent as baseball and American football. Participation at U12 grass roots level is huge.

2. Attempts to grow professional ‘soccer’ in the US are not new. I recall seeing the NY Cosmos back in the 80s when old European stars first headed there. The MLS has been around for ages and is relatively well supported. Much like this WC, USA 94 was very well supported, and the same loud noises were made back then about it providing the critical momentum to fuel a US surge in the sport. But the national team hasn’t advanced significantly in the subsequent 32 years. Why is it different now?

3. Youth US ‘soccer’ fades around 14/15 years old. A large reason for that is that there isn’t an attractive path for exceptional youth players (if any) to go pro. This might be for 2 reasons. In all major US sports kids are not eligible to go pro (being drafted) until they have spent at least a year in college (ie 18/19). It is a bit less for MLS but not by much. In Europe/South America, if a youngster is going to have any chance at all of eventually going pro and earning proper cash they will effectively be full time footballers in an academy by age 14 latest and will not attend any school at all after 16. That’s a massive mismatch in developmental timing. There will be a few young (15 or less) US starlets that might come to the attention of European/South American scouts/academies, but it’s hard to see that becoming a significant pathway under the current US set up. (PS – 14 year old Freddy Adu in ChampMan (no, it will never be Football Manager) ‘03, what a player!!).

4. Average MLS salary is currently US$600k (wait, a year…). That’s less than £10k a week. But, that’s hugely skewed by your Messi’s and your Suarez’s. The median MLS salary is US$125k, which is £2k a week. By comparison, the average salary of an English League One player is double that, £4k a week. The US soccer pathway to fame and riches is tiny and talented US sportsmen and women know it very well.

5. Speaking from vast personal experience over the past 20+ years (I am not leaning on lazy stereotypes at all, I promise), there are cultural reasons why it might never take off in the US of A. Americans are admirably bonkers about their Big 4 sports. But there is undeniably a collective “meh” about sports which they are not the best at. The “World Series”, the “Super Bowl”, hell yeah. Champions of the Big 4 US sports are universally and without any irony or embarrassment whatsoever all called “World Champions”.

I’m not claiming that we English, or any other footballing country, are geographically, much less geopolitically, all intimately familiar with all of the outside world, but in the US it is not uncommon for even college students to have a shocking lack of international knowledge (less than half of Americans would be able to point out the US on a world map). Again from experience, that’s because schools almost exclusively teach US history and in general studies courses. Perhaps that’s why the US have such an overtly huge sense of national pride and identity. Soccer does not currently fit in with that identity.

7. As Daniel rightly says, the US reactions to the Balogun incident are instructive and disappointing. I’ve read/listened/watched all of the major US sporting outlets throughout. Even the most respected and least partisan sources (for me, Bill Simmons, The Ringer pods (esp The Gambling Show), to a lesser extent ESPN) have two takes on the incident. Overwhelmingly the first take is that he should never have been sent off in the first place, so what’s the big deal? This was just correcting a wrong, move on. And second, he was already punished by being sent off, so why should he be punished by missing another game, it doesn’t make any sense? What’s completely lacking is any self-awareness that, hang on, this is a world game which already has clear (shut it VAR….) and established “rules” and it is the height of arrogance to just assume that soccer should bend to work like all other US sports do.

8. As a genuine question, imagine if the exact same thing happened with Quansah or Bellingham, and we knew for a fact that it was outrageous corruption and that every other world participant was rightly outraged with it all and us, what do you think we/Tuchel would do? At the risk of being extremely naive, I really do assume that us fans would all be horrified and insist (either officially, or through managerial selection) that the player not play regardless. At the very least it would be a serious discussion. I’ve read/listened very widely to the mainstream US positions, and absolutely no one has even suggested that the honorable thing to do would be to ignore the orange tw@t and take a higher moral stance. This is surely a massive own goal. Imagine the respect that everyone globally would have had for US soccer, and even as a nation of sports fans, if they had done the right thing. Alas.

9. I’d love to hear what US based soccer fans think, and I stress that nothing above is a criticism of America and certainly not of it’s significant number of genuine football fans.

10. Regardless of ‘dynamic’ ticket prices, Budweiser, price gouging, and the Balogun nonsense, this WC has been an awesome spectacle so far. Every stadium has looked rammed, the atmosphere universally has been brilliant, so many great games, so many goals. Football eh, bravo. Mike, WHU

Why do people complain about the punditry?

I haven’t tuned into what the pundits have to say at all during this World Cup and didn’t during the Euros two years ago either.

Here’s a tip – if you’re watching the football on ITVX, you can also watch old reruns of Byker Grove during the many intervals. I’ve just watched the one with Jemma Dobson’s funeral after she was electrocuted.

This also made me think about the sheer number of Byker Grove characters who died – Gil, Geoff and Jemma to name but a few.

Maybe Ant and Dec’s Byker remake should be called Byker Ghost and be about these late characters haunting the abandoned youth club? They could appear in the credits jumping up and down on trampolines shouting Whoooohhhh Byker?