Third place play offs

[lackedpunch]

I've never seen one of these. Are they worthwhile? Roberto Martinez talking tonight after Belgium's defeat stressed the importance of doing well in the last game, so he for one holds the TPPO in esteem.

For those people who have seen these games, a few questions:

Which have been the best and most competitive matches?

Which have been the least competitive, most deadest rubbers?

Does the scale of loss in the semi final have an effect on the performance in the TPPO, with teams who lost narrowly in the semi final doing better in the TPPO than teams who got a tonking in the semi?

[Felicity, I guess so]

I made large amounts of money on the hugely entertaining Turkey 3-2 S Korea match in 2002.
I knew both teams would be up for it and that Sukur would surely, finally, score. I loved every minute, obviously.

[tee rex]

Roberto Martinez talking tonight after Belgium's defeat stressed the importance of doing well in the last game, so he for one holds the TPPO in esteem.

It doesn't much matter how the managers regard it, they don't have an "or else!" to cajole the players with. In any event, they usually pick a team to give fringe players a go, so any "let's do this!" motivation speech is likely to fall flat.

Personally I'd love to see England (ha!) give it a go against Belgium, but that's because I care about history books, I don't expect the players to, when they get only 5 minutes off before the season starts. Poland, Turkey etc can claim they have finished third, which sounds better than "losing semi finalists" (though not all formats had SFs). Going one better than 1990 would be a prize worth having. If England leave Russia with two defeats, the revisionism begins.

The 1990 game was a good one, anyway.

[Pietro Paolo Virdis]

Third place games are not seldom better than the final because of the sides who surprisingly make it that far and perhaps never again will in decades.
Sweden, Croatia, Turkey. The celebrations when they get home can be as massive as for the winning side.

[Satchmo Distel]

They are often good games because they are open. Every game since 1974 has had at least three goals; since 1990, four goals.

But the prize itself seems meaningless. I doubt that Italy beating England in 1990 affected the mood of either squad coming home.

In England, I'm pretty sure they were not shown live until the 1990 one. Will this year's be shown if it is Croatia v Belgium? I'd probably watch it without being sure if the players were up for it, and I'd probably want Belgium to win it for being the better team over the tournament. But would it really matter? Not convinced.

[Ray de Galles]

Bilić made much the other night of how important his and the rest of the Croatia team’s bronze medals were to them (and, he implied, the country) in 1998.

[Satchmo Distel]

Yeah it depends on the team. I could see how Wales might have wanted another game in 2016 but Germany would not, simply because it's a unique tournament in Welsh history but not in German. But the Euros scrapped them after 1980 due to lack of interest and they do not seem to have been missed.

[Pietro Paolo Virdis]

For Croatian sport I would say. Kostelic in skiiing, Ivanisevic Wimbledon win on a wild card, several more have said how that 98 team and the summer inspired. Several in this team as well. They were kids back then but it has meant a great deal to motivate them.

[Pietro Paolo Virdis]

Yeah it depends on the team. I could see how Wales might have wanted another game in 2016 but Germany would not, simply because it's a unique tournament in Welsh history but not in German. But the Euros scrapped them after 1980 due to lack of interest.

Yeah, you could tell on the Dutch 1998 that they were really not putting in as much of an effort to win that game as the Croatians did. It was much more important to the Croatian players, while the Dutch almost couldn't care less whether they end up third or fourth.

[Satchmo Distel]

It was also Croatia's first World Cup they were allowed to enter.

[Pietro Paolo Virdis]

I also think that if England end up playing for third, if they don't win that game people will hardly remember them in 10-15 years. They will be nowhere near as remembered as the 1990 side. But if they do win that game, they will be in a completely different manner.

[Satchmo Distel]

If the game is fiercely contested, yes, because Belgium would be in a different league to the other teams England beat.

[Incandenza]

If it comes down to England v. Belgium, I wonder if Belgium will be going all out to try to have Lukaku get a hattrick so he can get past Kane for the golden boot.

[Walt Flanagans Dog]

In England, I'm pretty sure they were not shown live until the 1990 one. Will this year's be shown if it is Croatia v Belgium?.

Of course it will, times have changed and anyway in this particular circumstance it would form part of the massive build up towards the final.

That 1990 game is the forgotten game of England football - the BBC have been corrected a couple of times in their retro coverage recently - in the chat about the Tunisia game in 1998 they stated it was England's first WC game since losing on penalties to W Germany, then in Monday's 'coverage' of the 1990 semi they said at the end it was Bobby Robson's last game in charge of England.

Meanwhile TRLB of this parish is attending the game on Saturday, regardless of who is playing.

[Flynnie]

Yeah, you could tell on the Dutch 1998 that they were really not putting in as much of an effort to win that game as the Croatians did. It was much more important to the Croatian players, while the Dutch almost couldn't care less whether they end up third or fourth.

On the other hand, the Dutch team of 2014 seemed to want to end a surprising tournament with a medal, while Brazil wanted to rescue some pride after 7-1. Alas, they defended like oafs yet again and the Dutch won at a canter.

PPV mentioned Sweden, weirdly Bulgaria in 1994 were completely not arsed despite being a perfect "take the third place game seriously" candidate, being a small country without a huge amount of footballing tradition. I seem to recall Sweden putting in a pretty bog-standard amount of effort and being up 4-0 at half time. I'm guessing Stoichkov spent much of the game pouting.

[jwdd27]

I don't recall ever watching a 3rd place game live, and I'm working on Saturday so that won't change this year.

My memory tells me that England's 1990 game was a runout for the squad, but having checked, Robson didn't make that many changes - Dorigo and Steven replaced penalty missers Pearce and Waddle, Stevens replaced the injured Butcher, and McMahon the suspended Gascoigne.
I remember at the time being slightly disconcerted by the air of friendly celebration between the teams, as if they'd already got over the defeat, which I hadn't.
They should do away with it, make it like Olympic boxing where semifinal losers share third place.

[Walt Flanagans Dog]

I don't recall ever watching a 3rd place game live, and I'm working on Saturday so that won't change this year.

My memory tells me that England's 1990 game was a runout for the squad, but having checked, Robson didn't make that many changes - Dorigo and Steven replaced penalty missers Pearce and Waddle, Stevens replaced the injured Butcher, and McMahon the suspended Gascoigne.
I remember at the time being slightly disconcerted by the air of friendly celebration between the teams, as if they'd already got over the defeat, which I hadn't.
They should do away with it, make it like Olympic boxing where semifinal losers share third place.

I thought the same until you pointed that out - I've always remembered it as being wholesale changes in the outfield (I knew Shilton played cos he made a blunder). I expect if it's England v Belgium on Saturday we're in for a near repeat of the group game line-ups, with Kane maybe starting this time to attempt to secure the golden boot.

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

I was thinking about Kane vs Lukaku for the golden boot in this game.

[Wouter D]

Yeah, you could tell on the Dutch 1998 that they were really not putting in as much of an effort to win that game as the Croatians did. It was much more important to the Croatian players, while the Dutch almost couldn't care less whether they end up third or fourth.

I am still pissed off at that Dutch team for this. Conversely, the 2014 edition was very satisfying.

Quite often the third-place playoff is one of the best match of the tournament. The 2002 and 2010 editions were all kinds of fantastic. Long may it last.

[Jah Womble]

I've seen most since 1978, but terrestrial television here has only in the past twenty years been showing the game. (Completely forgetting France/Poland during the recent France/Argentina thread was to my great shame...)

2014 - Netherlands 3 Brazil 0 (Achieved little more than compound the hosts' misery.)
2010 - Germany 3 Uruguay 2 (Entertaining, and with some good finishing. Hoped to see Forlan at least get bronze.)
2006 - Germany 3 Portugal 1 (Deserved victory for the disappointed hosts.)
2002 - Turkey 3 S Korea 2 (Gave us the fastest goal in World Cup finals history - so fair dos for that.)
1998 - Croatia 2 Netherlands 1 (Good first half, which gave Šuker his Golden Boot.)
1994 - Sweden 4 Bulgaria 0 (Only saw the first half of this, via Eurosport. Bit of a procession, but shame Stoichkov missed his pen to take the GB outright.)
1990 - Italy 2 England 1 (Not great, but played in good spirit. Nice howler from Shilton to end his international career.)
1986 - France 4 Belgium 2 (Cracking game only seen thanks to bizarre atmospheric conditions that enabled Dutch TV signals down in south-east Kent. UK TV ignored it.)
1982 - Poland 3 France 2 (Looked good in highlights - ignored by British TV at the time.)
1978 - Brazil 2 Italy 1 (Finest third-place goal ever, curled home by Nelinho.)
1974 - Poland 1 Brazil 0 (Missed it because of the school fete.)
1970 - W Germany 1 Uruguay 0 (Wasn't allowed to stay up.)

[G-Man]

Yeah, except that I did see 1974's game (it was not exciting) and missing the1986 edition, I broadly echo Jah Womble's memories.

Of course nobody is under any illusion that the 3rd place play-off is for the booby prize, but I think that it is valued more elsewhere than in the UK.

[Duncan Gardner]

Of course nobody is under any illusion that the 3rd place play-off is for the booby prize, but I think that it is valued more elsewhere than in the UK

But the Euros scrapped them after 1980 due to lack of interest and they do not seem to have been missed

Other sports (eg hockey) have play-offs to determine lower placings, but as Satch suggests there's wide indifference in football, not confined to Britain.

[Walt Flanagans Dog]

Famously of course, it was tried in the FA Cup and didn't last long.

If there was a tangible prize attached - like automatic qualification for the next tournament - it would obviously be taken more seriously but that's not going to happen given that the holders don't even get that now.

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

As a competitive finals match it is hugely important in the FIFA rankings, which will determine seeding pots ... no, it's bollocks, isn't it. I think it's fair to say it's mostly remembered by countries like Poland, Turkey and Croatia for whom it represents their international pinnacle. In that respect England v Belgium might both want the accolade. For England, 3rd place would represent their best ever World Cup outside England.

[Ray de Galles]

Yeah it depends on the team. I could see how Wales might have wanted another game in 2016 but Germany would not, simply because it's a unique tournament in Welsh history but not in German. But the Euros scrapped them after 1980 due to lack of interest and they do not seem to have been missed.

I remember picking my side for that hypothetical game (being careful to start any players yet to make an appearance in the tournament) and would have been perfectly willing to stay in France for it.