I’m most definitely not calling fix or anything, but honestly, you really don’t think Qatar could have planned the World Cup final in their country any better.
The two iconic players from the club the country owns, Paris Saint-Germain, facing each other as the two standout, iconic players of the tournament. It’s almost as though it were scripted.
And yeah, it has a certain flavour about it, doesn’t it? Lionel Messi versus Kylian Mbappe, the greatest player the world has ever seen, against the guy who is likely to take over his mantle… team-mates who fly the flag for Qatar.
It’s soured for me, though, by the moral issues surrounding this World Cup: the lack of equality, human rights and the many thousands of lives taken in constructing the tournament. And the well-documented corruption, too, which delivered a World Cup that never should have happened.
What we have seen, though, is a depressingly-familiar story. As soon as the games kick-off, the focus falls on the characters on the pitch, the glamour and drama of it all. And in Mbappe and Messi, Qatar have got themselves the ultimate distraction.
It’s a PR person’s dream, the long-reigning monarch and the heir to his throne. Qatar probably didn’t need to spend all those PR dollars on countering the narrative on their human rights record when they had two global superstars who provide the ultimate distraction.
Here’s the thing; It is an incredible story and I definitely agree that Messi, in particular, has stepped up at the crucial moments in the game to provide that spark of genius when it is most required. He’s not the player he was, everyone knows that. He isn’t capable any more of dominating games, but instead uses his quality and knowledge to drift along until that moment when he can make a difference.
What’s his record in this tournament? I think he’s had a direct contribution to around three quarters of Argentina’s goals. And I think that’s the most admirable thing about him.
Join the debate! Who do you think will win the World Cup final on Sunday: Argentina or France? Let us know here.
That debate about him and Cristiano Ronaldo never stops and both have areas where they excel, but it’s the longevity of Messi which is so stunning. He’s basically playing the same role in the same way as he’s done throughout his career.
Okay, he doesn’t run as much, but it was never about running with him. He’s clever, he uses what he has sparingly, but it's equally-telling where Ronaldo has changed his game as he’s got older.
It’s funny because I look at how Messi has guided an Argentina side that started so poorly through the knockout stages and can’t help thinking if England had Harry Kane at his top, top level in this tournament, they’d have met in the final.
I’m not talking about the penalty. The best players in the world miss penalties. It’s a fact of football life, get over it. I just don’t think Harry was at his very best and I wonder if it relates to that ankle injury which forced him to have a scan after the Iran game.
This is an elite level and that means when you have periods of obvious dominance - as England did against France - then you have to take advantage. England didn’t do that in the quarter-final and paid the price against what has appeared the best all-round team in the tournament.
Kane at his best would have been there to convert some of the many chances England created. I don’t think he was, he seemed to drift too far away from the penalty area, and I wonder if it was to do with an ankle injury which was serious enough to warrant a scan.
I think that’s the only thing England lacked; that player who almost guarantees those periods of dominance will be converted into goals. Argentina have it, France have it in Mbappe (and a special mention to Olivier Giroud, as well, because there is a proper centre-forward who has delivered to his full capability).
England perhaps have it when Kane is flying, but otherwise there was potential there, but not quite the delivery. You could easily make a case that Gareth Southgate’s team had the best front three of this tournament, but they didn’t take their chances in the biggest game.
Hopefully, with more experience from the likes of Bukayo Saka, Phil Foden, Marcus Rashford and Jude Bellingham, that will come. But it means the two teams who have looked the most solid and have that X-factor up front are in the final.
Deserved? Yes. But I will say this: neither side are there just because of Messi or Mbappe. Far from it. They are there because they have the most solid formation, the strongest defence and then they can unpick top sides in a tight game.
Look at the Morocco game for France. They defended for long periods, had far less possession, but looked so incredibly solid. Ibrahima Konate was truly outstanding, and arguably he started the tournament as the fourth-choice centre-half.
That is what wins knockout trophies. It is the art of tournament football. If you don’t concede, you have a chance of going through. If you can combine that with an elite threat up front, you have more than a chance.
So, let’s not get too carried away on the cult of two strikers. Mbappe was totally subdued against England, but France found a way. Messi barely showed up in the early games, but Argentina, with their organisation and resolve, found a way.
I make France the favourites; they have everything. But this is the World Cup final and Argentina are not only organised, they have Messi and Julian Alvarez. It should be a tense final.
