Switzerland, Belgium - Argentina knocking out European teams for fun without getting out of 3rd gear.

3 quarter-finals and they've all been disappointing so far. With the exception of Columbia (all be it in the final 15 minutes vs Brazil), the losing team have lost with barely a whimper. Early goals for the 3 winning teams so far haven't helped.

It's the "best World Cup ever" simply because of the appalling promotion of their TV channels by the commentators - particularly Matterface and Pearce.

I'd dispute '82 and would argue '90 ... but many others might justifiably pull out other World Cups than either of us. This one is certainly no classic.

The defending has been appalling, and the bias from some referees has been ... well, quite frankly "Blatter-esque".

That Belgium campaign reminded me a lot of England under Sven. Quality players on paper but devoid of ideas and know how.

Another point worth making is how poor the majority of the Premiership players have been in this World Cup. Goalkeepers aside I can only think of Kompany , Zabaletta and maybe Van Persie who have shown any form

To be fair I think England were better in both 2002 and 2006 than Belgium were in this WC.

Just look at how many times people have made this sort of comment about Belgium. Sums up their disappointing performances in this tournament - something that could be said of just about every team bar possibly the rather unexciting technical proficiency and accuracy of the Germans. Best World Cup my backside.

Agree completely. Eriksonn's record doesn't look as bad as his many rather lumpen critics make out, now we can see what men of straw the so-called "Golden Generation" actually were. How players could possibly be described in that way when Erikkson says he tried to play different formations but that the players were "tactically" inflexible. We know from reports at the time that in 2002 the players revolted against three at the back and insisted on 4-4-2.

Brazil and Argentina going into defensive shells for large parts of their 2nd halves is annoying.

Don't really expect a quality final at this rate.

It was definitely shaping up to be the best World Cup based on the group stage, but the knockouts have been so disappointing. I can't name any memorable matches apart from maybe Belgium vs USA, and Colombia 's two games, but those weren't classics.

Completely agree

'90? I can't recall a single great team or titanic match in that tournament bar our semi-final. And then you have to get past the myth and remember that we were poor until that game and should have been knocked out by Cameroon.

It is probably on a par with other world cups this millennium. Other than that,it is, as far as I am concerned, significantly inferior to any world cup held in the 70s (1970, 74, 78) and in my view worse than any in the 80s and 90s.as well.

The Argies simply had too much "know how" for that Belgium team - got 1 up and then killed the game. Belgium had absolutely no quality in the final third which is a surprise given the personnel they have to choose from.

Eden Hazard yet again fails to turn up and I think the inconsistency excuse that some people put forward can now be put to bed - he isn't the messiah he's a very naughty boy ...

wilmots should be sacked, he didn't come close to getting the best out of the talent in that belgium squad. his persistent selection of fellaini who has been consistently poor for them, and his wimbledon long ball tactics, are difficult to understand when you have the likes of witsel, dembele, defour, hazard, mertens, mirallas, de bruyne to pick from in midfield...

I don't agree. Apologies for labouring the point but bar some reasonably entertaining matches and good goals, how many truly great performances by teams and individuals did we see in the group stage? There were lots of goals (largely because of poor defending) but lots of scoring doesn't in itself signify a great tournament. I can remember when we used to sneer at the americans for failing to understand that you can have a great 0-0. How times have changed,

Van Gaal would get a good performance out of that squad.

Eden Hazard was terrible but even then you wouldn't swap him for Chadli. Januzaj could have changed the game.

Wilmots has gotten praise for his sub changes... Well for this game he got it completely wrong.

Cameroon beating the holders? The Germany-Holland game? As you say, the Semi-Final?.

Good, God ... even "World in Motion"!!!

Not disputing your original choice - just saying that there have been many better than this year's "best ever"

And a very selfish boy. I actually wouldn't play him unless he can learn to do more for the team. One thing Belgium don't lack is quality in depth - they just couldn't mould them into a team that could put it together at this World Cup (although I did see them play very well in one of the qualifiers on Eurosport to be fair).

The goal average is now 2.69.

In 1994 it was 2.71, 1998 was 2.67, I don't remember either of those being known as the "tournament of goals goals goals" even though they had as many as this one.

I do believe we live in a 24/7 media cycle with much more hype than ever. Sky declared 2013/14 the best premier league season ever, after they declared 2012/13 the best ever, 2011/12 the one before that. Every season is the best ever!

i couldn't believe it when he took hazard off but left fellaini on for the full 90 minutes, wilmots has a few screws loose...

I'm sure there was something about it in 1998. I myself thought there sure are a lot of goals in this WC.

I think people are getting mixed up with actual quality against entertainment and endeavour - the group stages and 50% of the knockout games have been decent with a few classics thrown in. So entertainment wise it has been one of the best WC's I have seen.

Quality of teams is a dangerous road to go down as you can have two great teams cancelling each other out and the pushovers of years gone by have been replaced with well drilled superfit teams whose players mainly play in the top leagues. What we are not seeing is teams going for the jugular in the knock out games but I think that is mainly to conserve energy for the latter stages.

Not a great match and Belgium had their moments but expect them to fare better at the '16 Euros if they qualify. Argentina defend well but perhaps Robben (if The Netherlands beat Costa Rica) can cause them some problems.

Apart from the Brazil match last night, not been the greatest set of q/f/'s in a world cup. Hoping for a better game later on.

It's not all about goals though. Lots of matches finishing 5-0 would give you plenty goals but not much edge-of-the-seat stuff. Most of the last 16 and all the quarters so far have been close games. That what makes it better.

2002 you are right to be fair. I don't see that Belgium team beating the Argies and hammering Denmark like we did

I can't agree we were better in 2006 though. We scraped through the sort of sides Belgium got in the group and went out to the first good side we met.