Positives for WC: Some new teams and faces, more parity across the globe, VAR was good.
Negatives for WC: It was a kind of bad parity where it felt less like weaker teams had gotten better but that the other teams got worse, I didn’t think the quality of play was that high, VAR was unable to solve some glaring human failures so I think there is a lot of work to be done regarding potential rule changes and interpretations, after match reviews, more refs or better comminucation between officials, etc.
In fairness, with the way football is nowadays, parity can only be achieved by the so called 'stronger' teams playing worse. Look at Leicester winning the PL, that only happened because both Man City and Chelski massively underperformed, which is why it's a blip in the pan. One or the other might underperform, but both... That's rare (not saying Leicester didn't deserve to win the PL). So, if it requires the likes of Germany or Spain to play badly to achieve a sense of parity, then sorry, but long may the underperformance of stronger sides continue, and long may the underdog take a few out with them.
As for this world cup as a whole, I loved it because of some of the crazy results. Spain 3 Portugal 3, Belgium beating Brazil, Germany losing to South Korea and getting knocked out in the group stage, Russia knocking out Spain. It's been great. Yes, the stronger teams may have underperformed, but I feel that makes for a more interesting spetical. Rather than a procession to a semi-final of Germany, Brazil, Spain and... France I guess. Yawn fest.
As for England, I feel like we were overrated and lucky. Lucky to beat Tunisia, lucky to win on penalties (although about bloody time, maybe we can go into penalty shootouts with a hope of winning them) and lucky to get a 'weaker' draw in the knockout rounds. But the only game we played really well (except for Panama) was Sweden.
