One should consider making their own list, it's sort of based on how the games went beyond the group stage at the World Cup and I was looking at Speedee's prior post above. Spain was knocked out of the round of 16. Besides that, then, that would start to effect where one puts Russia since Russia defeated Spain. I think England would compete quite well versus Argentina and Portugal.

Per the news, fans in Montreal Canada poured out into the streets. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/thousands-of-france-fans-pour-onto-montreal-streets-after-4-2-world-cup-nvictory/ar-AAA73fx Canada produces some of the best hockey players in the world, it sure seems to me that per football, they could be competitive. They have a whole slew of Italians, those from the former Yugoslavia as well besides, obviously, many of British ancestry.

Yes, France was the best team there, yes, the officiating tended to put Croatia on their back heel and have to chase the game. I believe 3 European teams could have defeated Brazil, those being France, Croatia and Belgium though, Switzerland did draw in the group stage, one South American team likely could have too, Uruguay. I'd rank the teams something like this. 1. France 2. Croatia 3. Belgium 4. Uruguay 5. Brazil 6. Russia* (as the host nation) 7. England 8. Sweden 9. Spain 10. Switzerland 11. Portugal 12. Japan 13. Denmark 14. Argentina 15. Mexico 16. Colombia Russia probably would not have done as well in a neutral venue, I basically have 6th place as a tie between England and Russia. England need to up their game to where they would be one of those teams that could defeat Brazil as well. This was a roadblock in the past. Not as much of one currently. All IMHO. The above are the round of 16 teams.

Arguably, many think Croatia was shortchanged, it's even included in the BBC coverage: https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/44754965 France is always solid except in cases like 2010, something happened, it may have mainly been inner-turmoil, challenged at the 2006 World Cup and end up virtually the last place team in 2010. Win the 1998 World Cup, win the 2000 Euro, don't advance in the 2002 World Cup, where have I seen this before??? Germany anyone?? I'd not count one's chickens before they hatch.

They have every right to it but France's success has to be seen as largely being with players from former colonies, France had great teams in the '80s and otherwise with Platini and many other fine players. The Croats were truly Europeans, make whatever one wants to out of that. France "could" have a conveyor belt of great players coming up but I don't think they will. They will do well but they'll continue to have a lot of opposition.

One of those World Cups, '90 or '86 had a lot of draws because of the way the rules were, I think '86 but once the knockout rounds came, then, the quality picked up. FIFA had to finetune it to get fewer draws I think. '90 had some. '86 had that kickaround I think that bored viewers.

You'd better believe, at the least, Germany and Spain will have something to say about the next Euro...and really, England and Portugal should and if Italy can ever get another Pirlo or Baggio, they can be in it too. And of course, Croatia.

Modric sure was quiet today, nonetheless, valiant effort imo, by the Croats....

Croatia never gives up and with some brutal breaks, France, finalist at World Cup 2006 and Euro 2016, losing both.... so, I'm pretty sure, they wanted to stay away from that today....

'94 was considered a good World Cup with a mediocre final, maybe some of the best football is during the early stages, stating the obvious really.....

France have been sound but nothing spectacular... I hope Croatia can come back after 2 questionable decisions.... that's football.

All that I heard Modric say is England didn't respect Croatia enough. One has to admit, some folks already had England winning the World Cup.... so, people have a right to be optimistic.

For the record, I have it that the referee is Pitana, an Argentine. I would have thought he was from Scandinavia or something.

Our announcer said Griezman dived, I wish they had a 2nd look at it ... Free Kick, France scored, 10 minutes later, Croatia draws it up. There is something to learn from Croatia, they are setting up attacks all the bloody time in this match. Something that England and others can take note of....

The Conspiracy theorists are out (this is all joking around of course): From the Russian press, well, the Moscow Times: https://themoscowtimes.com/articles/conspiracy-theories-make-the-world-cup-go-round-62210 National drink of the Former Yugoslavia and similar areas, this stuff, the Croatian make, was way to harsh for me, Slivovitz:

The wikipedia article posted seemed to say the women's World Cup has the 3rd place game in the same stadium and on the same day as the final. That would certainly make for a very, very long day. I think they said the game is viewed with more importance. Read the article to double-check.

I usually skip the final and just watch the 3rd place game.

Germany has been a good sporting team since 2006; but over all, those teams, Brazil, Argentina, Italy obviously and Germany won a lot of their World Cups by hook and by crook. I'd almost be ashamed of the style some of these teams won by and I don't mean to be harsh. I'm not positive Brazil, Italy and Argentina will be back that strong in the future. It's changing. France lost the 2006 final, the last Euro, so they won't want to be seen as the "challenger".... It's hard to say about Croatia, bend don't break. They've been a great story and perhaps one can say, they haven't had the most difficult path. Again, a lot of the traditional powers, save France, didn't do that great in the tournament, who's to say what an easy path is?

Boy, I can't believe the naysayers, after 2010, 2014, 2016 Euro, hell yeah, this will be seen as a very good tournament by England. Well done England.

Belgium get another, Belgium might even be more disappointed than England in this World Cup; this was a World Cup, they had a very good shot at. They could do nothing against France.

Dier, that was very nice, unfortunate to not score... Belgian player stopped the goal.

It's been around since at least, 1934. TV was not common then. It's modeled I'm sure, after the Olympic system, to give out a bronze (3rd place) medal. https://www.sportskeeda.com/football/belgium-vs-england-6-fifa-world-cup-3rd-place-games-that-were-hugely-entertaining-including-a-9-goal-thriller-ss "Six entertaining 3rd place games", the article says Germany has won it 4 times... hey, it must be okay then. I'd think this is true too: " The FIFA World Cup features a third place playoff, usually on the day before the final. It is often there to provide a spectacle as there is often a gap of a few days between the semi-finals and the final. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place_playoff#FIFA_World_Cup_and_other_association_football_tournaments This is probably what you might have meant. Early on, I'll bet even radio coverage was limited. Probably really didn't come into its own until the 1950s as far as media coverage goes.

Croatia defeated Germany at the Euro 2008 or 2012 I believe, then played Turkey in the knockout rounds, Croatia was given a bad deal back in 2014 vs. Brazil. Maybe they wouldn't win but the refs would not leet the host nation down. Croatia has earned it and I think we will see more upstarts out there. I hope they win Sunday. I think in '98, they were 3rd and they had Davor Sukor then.....

The Pacman vs. Lucas Thyssen. https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianmazique/2018/07/13/manny-pacquiao-vs-lucas-matthysse-odds-and-prediction/ Open for comments.

Chesterfield Kings - Elevator Ride