World Cup 2026 - USA/Canada/Mexico

Leuth said:

letthegoodtimesroll said:

McCartney said:

Addick Addict said:

It's amazing how many greats of the game were/are diminutive but have that control and low centre of gravity that makes them so elusive - the likes of Puskas (5' 8''), Pele (5' 8''), Maradona (5' 5''), Messi (5' 7''), Modric (5' 7''), Xavi (5' 7''), Iniesta (5' 7'') and Romario (5' 6'').

If only we didn't have our "height test", we might have had Xavi, Iniesta and Messi playing for us in the same side instead of Lepoint, Buyens and Churchinho!!!  

We did have Allan Simonson back in the day who can join that list. He didn't quite reach 5' 5' and was very Messi like in his play.

Messi couldn’t hold a candle to him. It’s all set up for Messi. Simonson had to do it all and he was up against players at a time when the tackles were still full blooded.

And it was acceptable for defenders to smoke, have no pace and fall out of position if they felt like it 

I wouldn't normally get involved in a daft Simonsen v Messi debate, but there’s absolutely no way defending is better is today’s game. The marking today is atrocious for starters - they ’fall out of position’ far more.
Also, the rules and refereeing have changed to benefit attackers. There’s no way Kane, Haaland and others would have the goal records they have if they were playing in the 80s.
Besides, what evidence do you have for them smoking?

I loved the duck marching with the Scotland supporters, even though I am not a fan of dressing animals up this was a great moment.

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Algarveaddick said:

Apologies if this has been posted already.

Would be interesting if we did have Haaland as you couldn't leave him or Kane out. But how would you play both together in modern football when they both play every week as a lone central striker.

Kane is intelligent enough to play a bit deeper but not sure it would work as they'd generally want to occupy the same areas when we were attacking. Feels like the Gerrard/Scholes/Lampard conundrum.

Only just seen this. The commentator on the France game the other day said there's 55 players at the tournament who were born in Paris alone, let alone the rest of France.

Blew my tiny mind that did.

Off_it said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Algarveaddick said:

Apologies if this has been posted already.

Would be interesting if we did have Haaland as you couldn't leave him or Kane out. But how would you play both together in modern football when they both play every week as a lone central striker.

Kane is intelligent enough to play a bit deeper but not sure it would work as they'd generally want to occupy the same areas when we were attacking. Feels like the Gerrard/Scholes/Lampard conundrum.

Only just seen this. The commentator on the France game the other day said there's 55 players at the tournament who were born in Paris alone, let alone the rest of France.

Blew my tiny mind that did.

Yeah is it further up this thread or on the football facts one that there are 99 footballers in the tournament born in france and would have been more than 100 if not for the fact that some of the France squad were born overseas

Algarveaddick said:

Apologies if this has been posted already.

Other side of the coin is that Kane, Rice and others could play for Republic of Ireland

Really disappointed with Korea. Just sat off Mexico.

killerandflash said:

KingKinsella said:

Algarveaddick said:

Apologies if this has been posted already.

Other side of the coin is that Kane, Rice and others could play for Republic of Ireland

Not really,  as they were both born in England. 

Very few England footballers have been born abroad, and most of them grew up here anyway, like Sterling.  Owen Hargreaves and Eric Dier are rare recent exceptions. 

I heard they qualify as they have the grandparent qualification. So not a case of" not really". Its their choice just as it is for that long list above.