Just now, Audax said:

'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.....

I'd put this tied for 3rd as the best World Cup that I have seen, with my first being in 1962. 1970 is the best for me the standard was incredible there were probably 6 teams in that tournament that would have won this World Cup. 1974 would be my second favourite just for that Dutch team, they were a joy to watch just a shame they didn't win it. And I'd put 1986 on a par with this there wasn't an outstanding team but very exciting games and Argentina won it thanks to an outstanding player in Maradona & in this World Cup there hasn't been an outstanding team but some very exciting games with a very well organised French team winning it.

Ref get's in the way and the awards France a goal kick despite a clear deflection. Probably the worst refereeing performance of the tournament.

The most frightening thing about this France side is that they aren't likely to be close to reaching their peak until the next World Cup. 

Just now, Tom said:

MBAPPE 

Harsh On Croatia but that’s stunning; new superstar on the scene 

Best team of the tournament winning it, think the two best perhaps were in the other semi final 

Not sure why people keep going on about Mbappe emerging as a new superstar in this tournament he has already moved for £166 Million as well as scoring in the Champions League round of 16, quarter finals and semi finals.

France score their first legitimate goal of the final.

3 times in one half Croatia have been on the wrong end of poor decisions. Firstly a dive by Griezmann for the Free Kick, Pogba was offside for the first goal (why did VAR not do anything about that?) and then of course the penalty that never was. Anybody get the feeling the powers that be want France to win?

Just now, Audax said:

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

I was surprised he was appointed as he's been one of the very few poor refs in the tournament. I thought Mr.Kuipers or Mr.Faghani would have been given the final as for me they have been the two stand out refs.

Just now, Tom said:

If it’s on the goal line and the same thing happens then a penalty is given 99% of the time. Ball has come all the way from the corner so it’s not like it’s been hit at him from a couple of feet.

Doesn’t stop it being harsh mind you.

Croatias goal was an absolute belter, hope there’s more in this.

It doesn't come all the way from the corner Matuidi flicks it on.

Just now, Tom said:

The ref gave the penalty ultimately not VAR, I think it is one of those that goes either way, probably not obvious enough to overrule if he saw it first time mind. 

The difficulty with the tech is you can watch something multiple times and still disagree.

But VAR must have thought it was a penalty as he told the ref to go and look at it. And the fact that you can watch something multiple times and still disagree and the fact the ref spent 3 minutes looking at it suggest that it was clearly not a 'clear and obvious error.'

3 added minutes there must have been a 5 minute delay just for the penalty.

I was a VAR sceptic before the tournament but I was very much warming to it however that decision in a World Cup final has made me more against it than I have ever been. Not sure why this ref was given the final he has been one of the worst refs in a tournament that has had a very good standard of referring.  

Just now, Audax said:

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.

Belgium's biggest regret in this tournament will be beating England in the group stage, if they had not won that game I've got do doubt that they would be in tomorrows final. 

As for England they have looked toothless again from open play, only chances coming from set pieces again.

A bit of a reality check for England in the last 2 games as we've played good sides and looked second best.

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

Mowbray has played 3 at the back in some games since becoming manager here. so he clearly wants to play that system in some games depending on the opposition and I agree we should. 

All down to budget pal who we can sign. Like I have said previously I would be spending the most on it on a striker. so it doesn't leave much for centre back does it. 

please explained last line?

The trouble is every time we play 3 at the back we look clueless.

Just now, Tom said:

Looking at that squad I’m convinced we are more than just 4 players short 

At least 5 probably more.

Sterling officially undroppable.

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

Do you know the reasons why he wasnt in Bristol City squad? Was it an injured or personal reasons or just form

He wasn't selected

11 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Kent has skills and tricky plus has championship experience in the past. He impress me when he played against Rovers twice in the season 16/17 for Barnsley

Maddison hasn't got the championship experience and can I say for the record I have never post that I don't like him. so that's is incorrect information. 

If we did sign Maddison I wouldn't be unhappy at all but could he step up and the for the money we would be paying we would need him to

Kent's skills and Championship experience didn't do much to help him at Bristol City last season, where he couldn't even get into the squad some weeks.

30 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Bennett and Travis can both play there as well 

Right back is not a priority 

Mowbray clearly sees Travis as a midfielder & of all the positions Bennett played last year right back was were he was weakest. Nyambe probably deserves to start the season at right back but for me the jury is still out on him & if he is found wanting in the Championship we will need someone who does play at right back not someone who can play there, especially as Bennett is 1 of only two wingers currently on the books otherwise our side will have too many square pegs in round holes.

7 hours ago, Fraserkirky said:

Liked the comment, then had to unlike when I got to the right back part. Strongly disagree.

So you think that Caddis is adequate back up if Nyambe gets a long term injury?

6 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Antonsson barley played since January and Chapman barely played more than a third of the season. and Armstrong replace Antonsson in January in the team. So its barely more 1 player tbh. 

I agree we need a winger or 2 but these have to be the right players. 

Mowbray has said he wants 4 more. 2 permanent and 2 loans signings. 

How many championship clubs have signed more than 2 players then?

Just had a quick scan through and I found 15 Championship clubs that have brought in more than 2 players so far this window. Also we are a newly promoted team so we are going to need to add a few more as we will be playing a much higher standard of opposition this season. I still think that we need 2 wingers, centre forward, a centre half and a right back & we only have 26 days now to achieve this in.

Just now, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

Anyone else worried we are blowing our money on new contracts for existing players?  Didn't see Smallwood or Williams as a priorty.  Still no news on Dack. 

Totally agree Williams had 2 years left and Smallwood had a year left with the option for another. Lenihan & Mulgrew were the only two we absolutely had to tie down to new contracts and unusually nothing has even been mentioned about Mulgrew yet.

I'm all for taking your time when recruiting players but we need to get a move on only 27 days until the window shuts and we still need 5-6 players. At the moment we have a weaker squad than last season.

4 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

ok - very bang average. We got to the semi because of the route we got in, let's be honest. 

I wanted us to win and thought we would, we were not as good as Croatia an oldish team from a small country. 

The amount of hoofball we played was a disgrace.

We never really looked like scoring from open play in any game other than Panama. Our tactics seemed to be win a corner or free kick close to goal, push the centre backs up and lump the ball into the area. Dire to watch.

Just now, DE. said:

A massive issue that we can't score from open play. The Kane/Alli/Lingard/Sterling front four doesn't really work. I'd be looking to tweak that quite significantly. Defensively we're not quite there either. A lot to work on before Euro 2020. 

Still, we've got a base to build from. We're far from the finished article and benefited from the luck of the draw. In most world cup years we wouldn't have been anywhere near a semi final. Getting there was more than we'd get most years, so that's something. And we won a penalty shootout. 

We need to see evolution for Euro 2020. There's something here but we aren't quite there at the moment. 

Playing those 4 gives you no balance in midfield. When you play against high quality opposition like Modric and Rakitic they will expose it.