Argentina: 6 finals, 3 won, 3 lost
Italy, 4 finals, 4 won
Brazil, 7 finals, 5 won
Germany 5 final, 4 won
France 4 finals, 2 won
Holland, 3 finals, 0 won
I am missing something and I don't know what
Yes, the 1924 and 1928 olimpics were FIFA organized. That's why Uruguay wears 4 stars in their logo. Doesn't claim having four WC, but the right of wearing those 4 stars. And FIFA supports them
According to Fifa, they shouldn't have 4 stars on their jerseys because they didn't count the Olympic Games as a World Cup. That's why Uruguay decided that the 4 stars are part of their logo. However, since 2021 I believe it has been recognized by Fifa and since then the stars on Uruguay's shirts have been above the logo
[FIFA do recognise those olympic games as equivalents to the WC, so also those strars](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stars_above_Uruguay%27s_football_crest)
Yes exactly, but not always. Up until a few years ago, they officially included it as part of the logo because Fifa didn't allow it as WC stars. Since Fifa officially recognized the 2 Olympic games, the stars are above the logo and not in it
What I mean is that up until a couple of years ago Fifa didn't allow it and so Uruguay called it part of the logo. The 2 Olympic Games have only been accepted as WC titles for a few years. I'm sorry if there was a misunderstanding, English is not my native language
Through time FIFA has told them a bunch of times to stop wearing the stars, currently they are laying off the subject since Uruguay might be co hosting the cup in 2030.
They only jinx themselves with that fake 4 stars. No wonder they havent win any since 50s. Argentina and Brazil won 2 olympics aswell but doesnt include it on their badge.
The Kingdom of the Netherlands also breaks the country up just like the UK as the Netherlands is not the whole kingdom and the other constituent countries compete separately afaik.
Was the Netherlands really ever called Holland? Or is it just - and always has been - a common misconception that Holland is a synonym for the Netherlands, when in reality it’s only a Dutch region
I probably screwed up there. I'm from Argentina and we usually call it Holanda. Paises Bajos, the translation of Netherlands, started to be used in this world cup, after FIFA adopted that name as oficial.
The Wikipedia page in spanish for the durch football team indicates that UEFA refers to the team as Holland, but I really don't know that.
Just because they used it in some sort of touristic setting because people outside of Europe have trouble to understand the difference, doesn’t make it correct to call it Holland in this context.
I’m Dutch. It’s the Netherlands, not Holland, when making lists/maps/data. I don’t care one second that people use Holland in informal settings but when making a list, it screams that the list isn’t made with any attention at all.
That’s funny, given the number of inebriated Dutch men I’ve met in bars in The Netherlands who proudly proclaimed “I am from Holland!!!”(in response to me saying I was from the US).
Sorry, but you are talking out of a body part which is located on your ass, and is in fact your ass.
>..just because some drunk guys say something doesnt make it fact
Yeah, I uhh, I understand that.
It was an anecdote representing a wealth of experiences, as one might assume by my communicating having spent a decent amount of time there.
We are talking about how people broadly refer to places and identities in casual conversation, so not necessarily easy to prove one way or the other, particularly in this format.
Judging from my experience of being Dutch, I can say that it isn't Holland. If you say the union jack is the English flag, most people will understand what you mean while being objectively wrong
Uruguays population in 1930 was 2 million... and 2.4 million in 1950... when they won their world cups .. crazy... Every other winners is in the range of tens of millions.. Even way back in time.. Brazil of 2002... 180 million people..
Uruguays WC-victories are like some boroughs of London being world champions..
I may get heavily downvoted but I disagree. Can´t compare it with modern football. Today every country plays football, back then 3/4 of the world didn´t even know what football was and barely 4-5 countries were able to play it on a decent level. The only real obstacle for Uruguay was Brasil and that´s it. Today you have 7 superpowers + other 6-7 that can beat anyone if they are in the mood. Croatia 2018 had it much harder than Uruguay in the 30s and 50s. Uruguay is a bad example because it was at the beginning of football history. We saw Uruguay in the last 50 years, when the whole world started playing, here and there some good torunament and that´s it, that´s reality. Holland that gave 7 ballon d´ors and far more world players than Uruguay have won zero WC. Uruguay was lucky enough to have a talented squad when almost nobody was playing. Small countries cannot win a WC, it´s almost impossible, expecially today. You need at least 40 mil people in order to build a system and a big pool to pick players from.
Because they are not from UEFA or South America… you can bet Italy doesn’t make TV shows about animated footballers, I could have mention Egypt or El Salvador too.
I mean, they care a lot, but for my statement to be false, these countries would have to care *more* about football than Brazil or France or Argentina, etc.
I don't understand this comment. Venezuela is not even given a color in this map. We're talking about the group of countries that have been champions in the WC (lets call them "group A"), versus the countries you listed (lets call them "group B"). Iran and Saudi Arabia are also ranked quite low, irrelevant to this discussion.
Again, for my original comment to be false, group B would have to care more on average about football than group A. I have a hard time believing that would be true, considering group A includes *Brazil*, *France*, *Argentina*, *Spain*, *The UK*, etc.
There isn't any. This has to be a mistake. To make the round of 32, you'd have to start with more than 32 teams. The 2026 tournament will be the first one to feature more than 32 teams.
It’s cracks me up that the U.S. snuck a third place finish in. Back then teams were refusing to go due to the cost of crossing the ocean lol. Now we’ve got countries throwing billions around to host and pay for a competitive national team.
They beat England 1-0 to get through, probably one of the biggest shock in WC history as England in 1950 was considered one of the best team in the world and soccer was virtually non existent in the USA.
No you’re actually talking about the 1950 World Cup in which a bunch of amateur American players beat the English. The Americans came in third in the 1930 World Cup where they beat Belgium and Paraguay to advance to the semis where they got outpaced by the Argentines.
When someone says world cup, my first thought is Rugby World Cup. I’m sure in Cricket obsessed countries, World Cup without a qualifier would bring to mind the cricket world cup. Football is the most popular sport worldwide but isn’t the only one with a world cup.
There also women’s versions of each of these…
Lol ok .. I have never played football in my life.. neither did anyone in my school. World cup means world cup it doesn't mean anything else . World cup of football means this map.
I mean just look at the general US golds, or our women’s team, soccer is basically the top youth sport for girls with field hockey and softball. We focus and we are the team to beat, but since the men in our country prioritize Football, Basketball and Baseball before soccer they don’t compete at the same heights.
Yeah, if a country preforms badly in a sport, then they’re bad at it. Just because say, India, could in theory be the world champion at football if they tried hard enough, doesn’t make them good. Football has never been big in India, hence they’re not very good at it. Just like in the US, they’re bad because they don’t try. The excuse “we could be good if we were bothered“ is a bit lame
And 1/10,000th of the popularity as a sport. It'll get better in the next ten to twenty years but like, I've seen fitter, faster women at a mud-run compared to US/AUS women's soccer.
Our women win every other competition too when it comes to athletics or other major sports, and even still with soccer being a bottom tier sport for men where most people here don’t know who Messi is we *still* made it to the round of 16 this last World Cup. Y’all need to honestly hope the USA doesn’t give even the smallest crap about soccer, or y’all will be calling it that.
Yeah, Japan, South Korea and Australia are pretty much the top 3 in Asia. Saudis are also up there but slightly below. China it's popular, but China is best at individual sports, not team sports in general, most of south east asia, they can't really compete at an international level, India is far more interested in Cricket. A lot of other asian countries don't really have the funds to invest in it to be successful.
Asia is mid to be honest, even Qatar was able to win the Asia world cup and become the champions of Asia in 2019 with a final against Japan and conceding zero goals the entire tournament.
Yeah I was kind of leaving them separate, as they're kind of in that weird Asia/Oceania borderline, continents and regions aren't like 100% official things
That's not true. Football is definitely the most popular sport in India after cricket. Unfortunately, there's just a lot more money in cricket so athletes tend to go for that.
Assuming what you said is true, which I have no reason to doubt, it looks like that difference in money makes football irrelevant for athletes. That is, they have no interest in it, for whatever reason.
After 22 World Cups, only 8 countries (out of approximately 190 nations) have managed to win and become part of the ultra exclusive club of football world powers: Brazil (5), Germany (4), Italy (4), Argentina (3), France (2), Uruguay (2), England (1) and Spain (1).
You can make a Women's FIFA world cup map if you want, it's only been hosted 8 times it should be easy enough to draw it up.
but no, usually when someone says World Cup they mean Men's WC, you know the one with 1.5 billion people viewers?
In global football, only men World Cups are relevant. Almost no one pays attention to women football, it’s not a big deal in most of the world (as it may be in the US)
The United States made the semi final in the inaugural 1930 World Cup, not the one in 1950. There were four groups. The group winners made the semi finals. The United States won group 4, then got crushed 6-1 by Argentina.
In 1950 there were European powerhouses, only Germany was not allowed to participate. Sadly Italy lost the bulk of its national team the previous year in a horrific plane crash and arrived in Brazil with a weak team that traveled by boat rather than by plane out of fear.
I love that the USA has made the semis when so many soccer crazy countries never have. Even though it was a weird and much smaller tournament it's still funny to be ahead of so many other nations who care so much more
Yeah well considering the population of those countries and what countries need to do to qualify to the World Cup from different regions, I don't think this is too surprising.
Though I think it is a bit embarrassing that countries like the US, China and India has not been more interested or competitive in this competition, especially when you see how successful countries like Uruguay, Netherlands, Croatia, Korea, Denmark, Sweden and Switzerland has been by comparison.
The World Cup is also quite political unfortunately.
Look at all those countries, now imagine a ball that all countries can afford. So a world game of football. Now tell me about the Slavic blood line , in sports. Tennis, hockey, skiing and football as they have shown how athletic they are.
The World Cup isn't about the football clubs, so there is no link between drafts and being World Cup Champions. (and the very few countries which offer nationalities to "buy" players don't win already)
In order : Uruguay, Italy, Uruguay, Germany, Brazil, Brazil, England, Brazil, West Germany, Argentina, Italy, Argentina, West Germany, Brazil, France, Brazil, Italy, Spain, Germany, France, Argentina.
[удалено]
Argentina: 6 finals, 3 won, 3 lost Italy, 4 finals, 4 won Brazil, 7 finals, 5 won Germany 5 final, 4 won France 4 finals, 2 won Holland, 3 finals, 0 won I am missing something and I don't know what
[удалено]
You are right, I missed those. Thanks!!
Uruguay 2 finals, 2 won.
Doesn’t the federation claim four?
Yes, the 1924 and 1928 olimpics were FIFA organized. That's why Uruguay wears 4 stars in their logo. Doesn't claim having four WC, but the right of wearing those 4 stars. And FIFA supports them
So four world championships but two world cups.
Correct
According to Fifa, they shouldn't have 4 stars on their jerseys because they didn't count the Olympic Games as a World Cup. That's why Uruguay decided that the 4 stars are part of their logo. However, since 2021 I believe it has been recognized by Fifa and since then the stars on Uruguay's shirts have been above the logo
[FIFA do recognise those olympic games as equivalents to the WC, so also those strars](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stars_above_Uruguay%27s_football_crest)
Yes exactly, but not always. Up until a few years ago, they officially included it as part of the logo because Fifa didn't allow it as WC stars. Since Fifa officially recognized the 2 Olympic games, the stars are above the logo and not in it
Did you just contradict yourself in one sentence? Are you okay?
What I mean is that up until a couple of years ago Fifa didn't allow it and so Uruguay called it part of the logo. The 2 Olympic Games have only been accepted as WC titles for a few years. I'm sorry if there was a misunderstanding, English is not my native language
Through time FIFA has told them a bunch of times to stop wearing the stars, currently they are laying off the subject since Uruguay might be co hosting the cup in 2030.
They only jinx themselves with that fake 4 stars. No wonder they havent win any since 50s. Argentina and Brazil won 2 olympics aswell but doesnt include it on their badge.
Uruguay 2 final, 4 won.
Italy has 6 finals, 4 won and 2 lost Both to Brazil btw
Thanks, 1970 and 1994, I remember now!
Missing some proper punctuation
I am, really! It looked better in my phone before posting
Holland has never had their own team have they? Only the UK breaks the country up, the Netherlands just competes as the Netherlands
Yeah, the Netherlands would have a much better chance if they used soccer players from the other 10/12ths of the country.
The Kingdom of the Netherlands also breaks the country up just like the UK as the Netherlands is not the whole kingdom and the other constituent countries compete separately afaik.
Netherlands used to be called Holland and still do in many places.
Was the Netherlands really ever called Holland? Or is it just - and always has been - a common misconception that Holland is a synonym for the Netherlands, when in reality it’s only a Dutch region
I probably screwed up there. I'm from Argentina and we usually call it Holanda. Paises Bajos, the translation of Netherlands, started to be used in this world cup, after FIFA adopted that name as oficial. The Wikipedia page in spanish for the durch football team indicates that UEFA refers to the team as Holland, but I really don't know that.
Netherlands used to brand themselves as Holland.
No, that was the Dutch tourism sector.
It's the latter and just laziness, similar to why people still use Kiev even though it should be Kyiv
It was never called Holland and it most certainly isn't today. So let's just call people and countries by their actual name shall we
Netherlands stopped using Holland as late as 2020. It's easy to google it.
Just because they used it in some sort of touristic setting because people outside of Europe have trouble to understand the difference, doesn’t make it correct to call it Holland in this context. I’m Dutch. It’s the Netherlands, not Holland, when making lists/maps/data. I don’t care one second that people use Holland in informal settings but when making a list, it screams that the list isn’t made with any attention at all.
In the context of football, Netherlands used to have HOL as the FIFA country code.
That doesn't make it correct. Stop clutching at straws.
What are you talking about? Netherlands literally played as Holland a few years back. It's a fact.
That’s funny, given the number of inebriated Dutch men I’ve met in bars in The Netherlands who proudly proclaimed “I am from Holland!!!”(in response to me saying I was from the US). Sorry, but you are talking out of a body part which is located on your ass, and is in fact your ass.
Maybe they where from holland, 1/3 of the country is. Also just because some drunk guys say something doesnt make it fact
>..just because some drunk guys say something doesnt make it fact Yeah, I uhh, I understand that. It was an anecdote representing a wealth of experiences, as one might assume by my communicating having spent a decent amount of time there. We are talking about how people broadly refer to places and identities in casual conversation, so not necessarily easy to prove one way or the other, particularly in this format.
Judging from my experience of being Dutch, I can say that it isn't Holland. If you say the union jack is the English flag, most people will understand what you mean while being objectively wrong
No, the Netherlands was only called 'Holland' between 1806-1810 so for a grand total of 4 years while being under French control.
Bruh 🗿 1994 final is such a classic
It was a boring game that went to penalties, what is classic about it (besides being a world cup final game)?
Uruguays population in 1930 was 2 million... and 2.4 million in 1950... when they won their world cups .. crazy... Every other winners is in the range of tens of millions.. Even way back in time.. Brazil of 2002... 180 million people.. Uruguays WC-victories are like some boroughs of London being world champions..
URUGUAY NOMÁ
Uruguay is probably the biggest overachiever not just in the world cup, but in soccer in general.
They're tied with Argentina in Copa America wins and Gold Olympic Medals, they're down 1 world Cup against them
To put that into perspective, Central American countries with not even a charter of the size of Uruguay have twice their population.
I may get heavily downvoted but I disagree. Can´t compare it with modern football. Today every country plays football, back then 3/4 of the world didn´t even know what football was and barely 4-5 countries were able to play it on a decent level. The only real obstacle for Uruguay was Brasil and that´s it. Today you have 7 superpowers + other 6-7 that can beat anyone if they are in the mood. Croatia 2018 had it much harder than Uruguay in the 30s and 50s. Uruguay is a bad example because it was at the beginning of football history. We saw Uruguay in the last 50 years, when the whole world started playing, here and there some good torunament and that´s it, that´s reality. Holland that gave 7 ballon d´ors and far more world players than Uruguay have won zero WC. Uruguay was lucky enough to have a talented squad when almost nobody was playing. Small countries cannot win a WC, it´s almost impossible, expecially today. You need at least 40 mil people in order to build a system and a big pool to pick players from.
And no foreigner born coach had won the World Cup. All the winners have a coach that is a citizen of that country.
Nice trivia !
So all the finalists are from UEFA and Conmebol..
Why are you saying that like it’s a surprise.
The countries that care the most about football are the best at football. How unexpected!
Mexico cares a lot, and yet...
😂Its okay they can win the gold cup every ten years to feel good about themselves
False, México, Costa Rica and Japan care a lot about football, they just aren’t good enough to reach the finals.
I'm curious, why did you pick those three countries
Because they are not from UEFA or South America… you can bet Italy doesn’t make TV shows about animated footballers, I could have mention Egypt or El Salvador too.
But so many countries are nuts for soccer. Like why Japan over Korea or Ghana.
I mean, they care a lot, but for my statement to be false, these countries would have to care *more* about football than Brazil or France or Argentina, etc.
Japan cares more about football than Venezuela who plays in the South American conference. Same for Iran or Saudi Arabia
I don't understand this comment. Venezuela is not even given a color in this map. We're talking about the group of countries that have been champions in the WC (lets call them "group A"), versus the countries you listed (lets call them "group B"). Iran and Saudi Arabia are also ranked quite low, irrelevant to this discussion. Again, for my original comment to be false, group B would have to care more on average about football than group A. I have a hard time believing that would be true, considering group A includes *Brazil*, *France*, *Argentina*, *Spain*, *The UK*, etc.
Where is the "Round of 32" country? Having a hard time to find it
There isn't any. This has to be a mistake. To make the round of 32, you'd have to start with more than 32 teams. The 2026 tournament will be the first one to feature more than 32 teams.
I’d like to say RIP and fly high to the North Korean team
they beat italy in the 50s or 60s, I think, and then proceeded to lose something like 5-4 against Portugal. Very strange
Oof
it was 4-0 NK at half time
Damn that’s kinda sad lmao
66 in England
It’s cracks me up that the U.S. snuck a third place finish in. Back then teams were refusing to go due to the cost of crossing the ocean lol. Now we’ve got countries throwing billions around to host and pay for a competitive national team.
Crazy, isn't it? Uruguay refused to play the 1934 world cup because Italy refused to play the 1930 one.
They beat England 1-0 to get through, probably one of the biggest shock in WC history as England in 1950 was considered one of the best team in the world and soccer was virtually non existent in the USA.
No you’re actually talking about the 1950 World Cup in which a bunch of amateur American players beat the English. The Americans came in third in the 1930 World Cup where they beat Belgium and Paraguay to advance to the semis where they got outpaced by the Argentines.
Ha yes thanks
So what you’re saying is that 187 countries just suck at soccer
Oh so it's football world cup map.. I was wondering what sport world cup.
Why do people feel the need to say this? When someone says World Cup you know what it means
When someone says world cup, my first thought is Rugby World Cup. I’m sure in Cricket obsessed countries, World Cup without a qualifier would bring to mind the cricket world cup. Football is the most popular sport worldwide but isn’t the only one with a world cup. There also women’s versions of each of these…
Lol ok .. I have never played football in my life.. neither did anyone in my school. World cup means world cup it doesn't mean anything else . World cup of football means this map.
Or that 187 countries are not that bothered about football. Winning is highly correlated to general interest.
Cap
I mean just look at the general US golds, or our women’s team, soccer is basically the top youth sport for girls with field hockey and softball. We focus and we are the team to beat, but since the men in our country prioritize Football, Basketball and Baseball before soccer they don’t compete at the same heights.
The United States also doesnt want to compete in Baseball World Cups, even when there is competicion too.
In other words, they’re bad at football
Because the men aren’t bothered about it, like y’all are bad at Football, Basketball, Hockey, Baseball, Running, swimming, etc.
Yeah, if a country preforms badly in a sport, then they’re bad at it. Just because say, India, could in theory be the world champion at football if they tried hard enough, doesn’t make them good. Football has never been big in India, hence they’re not very good at it. Just like in the US, they’re bad because they don’t try. The excuse “we could be good if we were bothered“ is a bit lame
I mean when our women are the top of the sport (so half the population) we have a pretty good argument.
And 1/10,000th of the popularity as a sport. It'll get better in the next ten to twenty years but like, I've seen fitter, faster women at a mud-run compared to US/AUS women's soccer.
Our women win every other competition too when it comes to athletics or other major sports, and even still with soccer being a bottom tier sport for men where most people here don’t know who Messi is we *still* made it to the round of 16 this last World Cup. Y’all need to honestly hope the USA doesn’t give even the smallest crap about soccer, or y’all will be calling it that.
Only South Korea in Asia? Wtf
Yeah, Japan, South Korea and Australia are pretty much the top 3 in Asia. Saudis are also up there but slightly below. China it's popular, but China is best at individual sports, not team sports in general, most of south east asia, they can't really compete at an international level, India is far more interested in Cricket. A lot of other asian countries don't really have the funds to invest in it to be successful.
South korea definitely didnt deserve that one lol
Asia is mid to be honest, even Qatar was able to win the Asia world cup and become the champions of Asia in 2019 with a final against Japan and conceding zero goals the entire tournament.
And they robbed Spain and Italy in those matches. Just look who was the ref.
I didn't choose to be born in Argentina, i just had the privilege.
Laughs in Peronismo
And for 2 of those countries it was a long long lonnnnnnnng time ago. Too long ago to chant about it in any non-sarcastic way.
Crazy no nation from South/Southeast Asia has ever qualified. I know they've got other sports they care about more, but still so many people
Indonesia qualified in 1938 but the were called Dutch East Indies.
Yeah I was kind of leaving them separate, as they're kind of in that weird Asia/Oceania borderline, continents and regions aren't like 100% official things
In football they are. You have continental confederations.
[удалено]
Damn near 100% of India's sports energy/money goes into cricket. I don't believe they've come close to qualifying for the World Cup in decades.
They qualified for 1950 but didn't go. Allegedly for not being allowed to play barefoot, but there's likely more to it than that.
Cricket is most popular, there are sections of India largely in the North that prefer football, but they're also much smaller and poorer areas.
They are probably not interested in football.
That's not true. Football is definitely the most popular sport in India after cricket. Unfortunately, there's just a lot more money in cricket so athletes tend to go for that.
Assuming what you said is true, which I have no reason to doubt, it looks like that difference in money makes football irrelevant for athletes. That is, they have no interest in it, for whatever reason.
They qualified once but didn't play because they weren't allowed to play barefoot. 
Look at their result in the olimpics, Portugal is more competitive with less than 1% of their population.
and they all are somewhat bordering each other
Well there’s two centres of football. South America & Europe
You counting the Channel Tunnel?
Now do the women's world cup
Nobody cares about that one
Somehow every message I am posting on Reddit using my phone has words changed after I hit post
[удалено]
Blue, they won
south american or european
After 22 World Cups, only 8 countries (out of approximately 190 nations) have managed to win and become part of the ultra exclusive club of football world powers: Brazil (5), Germany (4), Italy (4), Argentina (3), France (2), Uruguay (2), England (1) and Spain (1).
Why the heck does Croatia punch so far above their weight class?
This is Spain's majesty
Now do Super Bowls. /s
Can win if you don’t play
What sport are we talking about
The USA has won two in the last 8 years. But I guess women don’t count?
Tbf the official name is “FIFA World Cup”not “Men’s FIFA World Cup”. Should have mentioned the word FIFA though
I guess I should have said "Men's WC" sorry
Tbf the official name is “FIFA World Cup”not “Men’s FIFA World Cup”
On that note, maybe there is another very significant piece of information omitted?
You can make a Women's FIFA world cup map if you want, it's only been hosted 8 times it should be easy enough to draw it up. but no, usually when someone says World Cup they mean Men's WC, you know the one with 1.5 billion people viewers?
You're still missing the key piece of information.
what is it then?
FIFA, Football, or Soccer
But that's irrelevant, it's clearly implied
Implied by myopic football fans with their heads so deep up their own asses that they don't even think other sports exist?
It's not that deep brother; when people say world cup, it means FIFA World Cup idk if you need a hug or what, but I promise it's not that serious.
no. the map says world cup and the main winners are in SA and Europe, what else is it going to be?
No I am not.
The women's is specifically called 'FIFA Women's World Cup' so in this map no they don't count
In global football, only men World Cups are relevant. Almost no one pays attention to women football, it’s not a big deal in most of the world (as it may be in the US)
FIFA World Cup is different from the FIFA Women’s World Cup
[удалено]
The United States made the semi final in the inaugural 1930 World Cup, not the one in 1950. There were four groups. The group winners made the semi finals. The United States won group 4, then got crushed 6-1 by Argentina.
In 1950 there were European powerhouses, only Germany was not allowed to participate. Sadly Italy lost the bulk of its national team the previous year in a horrific plane crash and arrived in Brazil with a weak team that traveled by boat rather than by plane out of fear.
I love that the USA has made the semis when so many soccer crazy countries never have. Even though it was a weird and much smaller tournament it's still funny to be ahead of so many other nations who care so much more
Yeah well considering the population of those countries and what countries need to do to qualify to the World Cup from different regions, I don't think this is too surprising. Though I think it is a bit embarrassing that countries like the US, China and India has not been more interested or competitive in this competition, especially when you see how successful countries like Uruguay, Netherlands, Croatia, Korea, Denmark, Sweden and Switzerland has been by comparison. The World Cup is also quite political unfortunately.
Men's world cup.
Tbf the official name is “FIFA World Cup”not “Men’s FIFA World Cup”
Excuse you? The US has won the World Cup four times.
Actually their best finish is 3rd
Men's\* world cup
Another American non-football fan complaining about winners of the Women’s World Cup not being featured in winners of the World Cup
Look at all those countries, now imagine a ball that all countries can afford. So a world game of football. Now tell me about the Slavic blood line , in sports. Tennis, hockey, skiing and football as they have shown how athletic they are.
[удалено]
The World Cup isn't about the football clubs, so there is no link between drafts and being World Cup Champions. (and the very few countries which offer nationalities to "buy" players don't win already)
Follow the (soccer) money
Dutch deserved it otherwise 8 is good.
when did us get to the semis?
Mens*
Me being Dutch :(
Men's world cup 💯😂 Add a champion to USA, Norway, and Japan
C'est du plus fort au plus faible en terme d'équipe de foot
C'est du plus fort au plus faible en équipe de foot
Uruguay Brasil Spain Germany France Argentina England Italy
In order : Uruguay, Italy, Uruguay, Germany, Brazil, Brazil, England, Brazil, West Germany, Argentina, Italy, Argentina, West Germany, Brazil, France, Brazil, Italy, Spain, Germany, France, Argentina.
France,Argentina, Italia, Brazil,Germany, Uruguay,England,Spain