Edinburgh 2026

This is the latest I've been to the festival, getting there as the final week was starting. I was planning to do a little round-up of the shows I know and the shows I'm looking forward to, maybe even a quick round-up of Camden Fringe. Which Camden Fringe I abandoned, but it ended up taking its revenge and bringing me back to London two days earlier than planned. The upside of it all is that I got to see Trial by AI, Crazy Diamond, and Unofficial Roxelana, all shows which I would've missed had I stayed in Edinburgh the whole week.

The weird thing is that I couldn't find any Edinburgh Festival catalogs in London this year, so going up I couldn't make lists beforehand. I find the festival website quiet efficient when you know what you want to see, but planning all you're gonna see in advance misses the whole point of the festival, which is discovering new talent.

Underslept and massively burnt-out, I promissed myself I'll take it easy, though in truth I don't think I would've stood any chance to do otherwise anyway.

I arrived in Edinburgh around 2pm on Monday, went to the accomodation to drop my bags and then ventured into town, again, hoping to get a book from somewhere, but there were none in the Pleasance Courtyard. No idea why I checked the Courtyard first, I suppose I was hoping to see some theatre and I do like the theatre that Pleasance programs the most. Although in the past 2-3 years, Greenside have done an excellent job and they might take over as the place for scripted drama in Edinburgh. The Space are doing ok too, and they have some great venues in the Radisson at the top of the Mile, but their artistic direction is still a bit unfocused. Oh, no, wait, I remembered. I saw the poster for Lucy Buncombe's Remember Remember on my way in, so that was the first show on the list. But that was 5.15, so figured I'd shove another one in before.

The one that fit was Olga Koch - Fat Tom Cruise. I've been meaning to see Olga for a while, she is a well-established comedianthat's done Soho a few times, and keeps popping up on my social media feeds. The show is incredibly well polished, relying a lot more on technical elemants than a stand-up show usually does, but the technical aspect of it is impeccable. The funny thing is, the better stand-up comedy it gets, the more it resebmles scripted drama. Fat Tom Cruise, brand it stand-up comedy as much as you want, but it is very much a one-woman show. Olga is a likeable performer, she's witty, she's smart and she's spontaneous, though probably the kind of spontaneity that took a lot of rehearsing. She's resorting to jokes of a sexual nature, the blessing and the curse of female comedians, but it doesn't feel excessive. A good show, but with the amount of effort and production value invested in it, it can only be good. Only nagging point for me was that, while Olga clearly assumes her Russian identity and uses this element as part of the show, she never addresses what it means to be Russian in the West in 2026, after 4 years of war perpetrated by her government. I'm not saying it's all she should talk about, I'm saying it should be acknowledged.

After Olga's show I headed to the Dome, only to find out Remember Remember has a day off. Oh well. Let's see what else is there. Ah, Valeria Vulpe is here, let's see her. The Double Bill Daniel Petrie & Valeria Vulpe has been put together with no other connection between them other than they're both young and promising comedians, and the show has been managed by the same team looking after bigger comedians, like Connor Burns, Daniel Sloss or Craig Hill. None of which I have any interest in seeing. I did want to connect with Valeria, and it would have been a lot more relevant had we stayed at Arches Lane. A lot of shows would've been a lot more relevant had we stayed at Arches Lane. As it is, pump up Barons Court and regroup. Anyway, the show. It was everything you'd expect from a tenative stand-up in a dingy archway with a half full house. The comedy was good though, very much above average. Daniel Petrie did what's probably my favourite joke at this festival, about how Londoners are taking over, but it doesn't really carry in writing. Valeria is indeed a promising comedian and if she keeps at it she will do TV, arena tours and all that jazz in a few years. Her deadpan is great, and a trademark, but it does become tiresome after a while, it gives the audience too much time to breathe between laughs, which you shouldn't, really, in a comedy show. So, break the deadpan a few times, engage the crowd a bit more, and you have a comedian ready to take over the world. A new Olga Koch, if you will. No one wills.

The last show of the day was a pun. As I was hanging around The Space on the Mile, a flyerer gave me a free ticket to Pascol - Vocal Performance. Five female vocalists ask for stories from the audience and make a song and dance based on those stories. A good idea, though the ladies are missing a few tricks: engage the audience from the get-go, talk to us and tell us how the show is gonna go before doing an interpretative dance with no interpret; trust each other more, don't worry if you get it wrong or it's not perfect, go with the flow and create, rather than wait for the creatin to come to you. I know, easier said than done. Improv is hard enough as it is, but song improv, especially with no instruments is even harder, and add having to improvise a choreograpjhy on top of that. I know, I know. But do it long enough, you'll get good at it. Oh, and as for the show not selling well: dress in matching costumes (ideally colourful) and walk the Mile singing, impossible not to draw attention.

And that was day 1. I started day 2 late, hoping I'd do some work, which I didn't really. Turns out, resting is just as important.

Didn't see my first show until 5.15, and this time it was Remember Remember. Which I wanted to see due to Lucy Buncombe. Now, I've seen Lucy in a few things, including the News Revue at Canal Cafe. I knew she's hard worker, has a great voice, can sing, and has a few funny bones. But oh my, I thought she's a good few years away from the level of Remember Remember! This is a great show: light, funny, camp, entertaining, historical, has good songs and a solid chance of being the next Six. While not perfect, it is a very good show, and with a little bit of polishing and that teeny tiny bit of luck that everyone needs, we could indeed see it on the West End before the decade is out. Which would be nice, won't it?

Still feeling it a bit, and still not having found a book, I ticked the regular Edinburgh stops (the bratwurst atop the Mile, the Mosque Kitchen, then went to see Reuben Kaye, out of duty more than anything else, and a little bit out of curiosity. Having known Reuben for more than a decade now, it's hard to be surprised by him anymore, but was interesting to see which way his art is evolving. Reuben is still one of the absolute best entertainers I know or have seen, but this latest show of his doesn't hit as hard as The Butch is Back or Journey to the Center of Attention. It's more polished, more glamourised, and has more people in the band. More mainstream, if you will. Nothing wrong with mainstream, but it does keep the creativity in check, and uncensored creativity is what made Reuben great. But, you know, at least he didn't get any death threaths for this one.

And because the festival started on a panslavic theme, I thought I might as well go and see Sasha Nezlobin at 10 Dome, make a Bistrot Square day of it. Sasha does acknowledge he's Russian: 'I was born there. It's not my fault', but he also did do something about it. Specifically, fled the country. He gets a lot of sympathy for this during his hour, and a massive proportion of Russian-speaking audience. His English is not perfect, his cultural clue-ins even less so, but he is a funny man, and can be a solid addition to the English-speaking comedy scene, especially when he lets the dark, Eastern-European humour surface. Keep an eye on Sasha, because I feel we haven't seen the last of him.

The second day on just three shows, and finishing at 10.30, God, I really must be tired. To be perfectly honest, I wasn't really feeling it by this point, wasn't able to enjoy much and wondering about the point of it all. I think it was on day 3 that I started to relax a bit, and get more into the spirit of the fringe.

Half forced on day 3 to go out and see Death of Hundun at 11.25. But I'm glad I got out of the house so early. Death of Hundun is a decent physical theatre show, wearing its Chinese cultural markers with pride, and it can be a lot better if it mixes up the timeline a little bit, and dips into the actual Hundun legend a bit more. A lot more. On an equal footing with the contemporary story.

12.50 was Cruising back at the Pleasance Courtyard. I wanted to see it in the July previews at Hope Theatre, and was definitely on my list to see in Edinburgh because Clare Stenning is in it, and I find Claire a very interesting actress. I enjoyed it, a two-hander comedy drama about thruples, cruise ships and the environment. A show I'd happily program at Barons Court, and we would do such a great job with it, too. But Claire and co. are dreaming of Soho Theatre, so, you know... wait and see what Soho Theatre says.

And then I started to well and truly relax. A Dark Line Upstairs at 2.40 pm, Zoo Playground. Known quantity, just a great show I wanted to watch again. And a good reminder of what a wonderful performer Matilde is. Without the bells and whistles of the Barons Court production, she still made it work and made it entertaining, and wasn't even at her best. I am really happy to have met Matilde and keen to work with her again. The sooner the better.

The plan was to stay and see Harry's Racists, Recesisons and Revolutions, as it should've been the next show in the same room. But of course, they had a day off. So I headed back to the Courtyard to see Keeley Hazell - Everyone's Seen My Tits. As a man of a certain age, I found the prospect of seeing Keeley Hazell live... interesting. Yes, I have seen Keeley Hazell's tits, and yes, I have masturbated over her. Never been in the same room with her before, that was the hook. Now this was an interesting show, the kind that maybe I don't see enough of. I have a lot of thoughts and a lot of questions, though it didn't seem appropriate to voice any of them when saying goodbye to Keeley after the show.

First off, Keeley Hazell still has a bit of clout. She could have a comfortable existance in a number of ways: tabloid darling, tell-all TV media, or - you know - Only Fans. The fact that she has chosen to put herself out there at the Edinburgh Fringe, performing to 60 people in Bunker Two - hats off to her. Hearing Keeley tell her own story really does put a name to the face. Or the tits, in her case. Makes her look like a real human, with hopes, aspirations, desires and vulnerabilities. Takes one's mind off the tits, even for a bit. And it's an ok show overall, though I do have a few things to add: 

1. Keeley is currently 39, her character in the play is 32, and talks as if her life is over. Well, Keeley, you're still hot and still 6 years younger than me, with a name for yourself and one of the most recognisable faces and... you know. So this complaint about squandering your life for being a brand and a worldwide male fantasy... I don't know. It feels to me like you did ok.

2. Her biggest complaint is not getting a part in Ted Lasso. With all due respect, both to you and to Ted Lasso, it's a supporting part in a moderately successful TV show. On the one hand, there will be other parts, on the other... your boyfriend selling a sex tape of yours is something you just brush aside?!? That's the real trauma if you ask me. And maybe for her too, she's just beign too afraid to admit it.

3. It's a real shame I saw this right after A Dark Line Upstairs. I like Keeley, and I like her even more after seeing her show, but purely in terms of acting skills... she's not bad, it's not that. But Matilde lights the way, and it's a lot of training and a lot of humble pie for Keeley to eat before reaching that level.

The time was 6.40, and maybe I should've gone and see another show, God knows there were plenty to choose from, but for some reason I felt like going home and taking a nap. Skipped the main attraction comedians and the pissed late night comedians, but I did go to the half past midnight Magic vs Burlesque, because it was Fou Fou Kaboom's show. I've never been to the Voodoo Rooms before, and I won't be making that mistake again! The classiest establishment I've been too in Edinburgh, the staff was really nice, and how could they not, they're Scottish? Besides, seeing the velour, the historic building, the art on the walls, I was thinking I'll get absolutely skinned. I even ventured to get a double fancy local single malt, and it was like £15?!? Loved, loved, LOVED the Voodoo Rooms. Three venues, late night shows, and they also had Tom Little performing, so had I stayed more I would've probably come back. Eh, next time.

The show itself was a lot of fun. I would've gone anyway, Fou Fou is a performer I really like, but I also wanted to see if the concept of just one burlesque performer making an entire show works. It's a concept I've been fiddling a bit with in my mind, and it wouldn't be much different than what Fou Fou has done here. High energy, highly interactive, loads of fun!

Honest honest, both the burlesque and the magic were a bit light - only two numbers of each, but even those two numbers seem moot. They could've done the whole show out of audience games, that's where the meat was! And kudos to both performers for coming up with the games and being able to engage the whole audience to such an extent! I saw a much better show than I expected, and probably my favourite up to this point.

Day 4 was pretty chill. Started it with a lax 12.50 at Gilded Balloon Teviot - which I was happy to see reopened. Shake It Up Shakespeare, an improv Shakespeare play - or Shakespeare-like, rather - which I have seen before, but I went to see again because I needed to have a chat with Silvia, who's gonna bring The Cannoneer to Barons Court in October. Had a long chat with Silvia after the show, so missed the 1-2 slot, had a leisurely lunch (Mosque Kitchen again), then went across to Zoo Playground again for Racists, Recessions and Revolutions. Harry has a great producer brain, and Isabella is a talented actress with a story to tell, which made for a very good show. Again, one that I'd happily see at Barons Court. Let's see how the chips fall.

Hang out with Isabella, Ben Sumrie who's in town with a couple of shows, and Flick, who led me to the next show, which she was op-ing. Be Not Afraid. I paused a bit to look up Camilla Borges a bit. With a name like that, she doesn't feel English, yet she is talking about South London, so second generation I suppose. The show is a sily clowning interactive romp through the Nativity story, with some good bits and pretty well thought-out overall, I think all Camilla needs is a bit of maturity and confidence to hold a bit more sway over her audience. On the evening I went the audience played ball pretty well, which made for a good show. But a good performer can squeeze a good show even out of an audience that does not play ball. I'm not sure that that's Camilla yet. Not far off, but not yet.

Because I was already in an yurt in Nicholson Square, I stayed for Halima Habil's Baba. By the way, the clowns are expanding. From the two yurts in Bistro Square who were clown central a couple of years ago, two other yurts have popped in Nicholson Square this year, while the previous one make inroads into more mainstream programming. Not allowed into a real venue yet unless you're Viggo Venn or Elf Lyons, but you know... expanding.

I met Halima briefly in March while she was in a play at RCI, and a Romanian artist, especially one that has a bit of a profile in the UK, always interests me. Halima is also a clown, with a show strangely reminiscent of Dupont Police Trainer. Her show has some of the advertised Romania-core, but if feels befuddling and confusing for an audience that presumably knows very little about Communist Romania. She is a charismatic performer and a smart clown, so the show has the chance to get better, but as it is it would just about cling on to the thrid star by the skin of its teeth.

Then the last show of the day was Ce De Lu, a recommandation from Silvia, and a show coming from Italy, so I do care. This one reminded me of Juggernaut. It has a great mask and it has monsters, and two young and promising performers. I really liked Paulette Rufin, and I could see how dedicated Pietro is. But it's the script and possibly the direction that betrays the two young actors. Six people in the room when I saw it, which is not the end of the world, and only two reviews on the website. The fringe is harsh enough as it is, but harsher by an order of magnitude when you come from someplace else and have no network to rely on, or no money to pay the PR. So I'm hoping the young actors had a good fringe, but I totally see their show as a victim of the machine.

Ce De Lu finished at 10.30, and the night is young in Edinburgh at 10.30, but for some reason I really didn't feel the late night comedy vibe this year. Maybe my age, maybe exhaustion, maybe worrying about spending yet more money, maybe the lack of company. On the other had, getting home at 11pm, asleep by midnight, and 8 hours sleep sounds really mature and responsible. So, I thought I'd tried that too for a few days.

Day 5 was 6 shows, and I swear, this is the perfect Ed Fringe day. Hear me out:

Sobremesa at 11.40 at Pater Hoose. I could've actually seen some 10 am children shows, and I kinds promised Dragon Song that I'd find them, but again, without Arches Lane there's a lot less scope for us to do children's theatre. Anyway, Sobremesa because Ben Sumrie invited me, and I found out Aggie Robinson of Ragged Claws fame wrote it. Alice - her producer - was also there, it was a Barons Court reunion, on the skinniest stage I've seen. A 4x1 m which was enough to convey this interesting kitchen sink piece, with a little bit of dancing too. The twist was that it is a Spanish-themed kitchen sink drama, with a trick missed by not using genuine non-alcoholic sangria instead of the too brightly coloured cranberry juice passed as wine. But like, proper, real theatre, you know?

Another invitation from the day before, The Three Marias, a play produced by Flavia D'Avila who I'd have really loved to see but didn't in the end. An interesting story about three female Portugese writers who spurred on the Carnation Revolution. Not the most dynamic play, but really, genuinely interesting documentary theatre, and it made me want to read the book. Which might've been the point.

Because I was up in the new town, I stayed to see Ethan's 113, which I wanted to see anyway. Ethan and Rio are quite the theatrical power couple, and a real discovery. While all of their work is a bit rough around the edges, they have a lot to say, and their language is only gonna get better. 113 has one of the guttsiest stagings I have ever seen, and by not allowing anyone to see more than half the stage it enhances the claustrophobia effect a great deal. I would have loved to dabble into this play, but they've already had three London runs and are happy to give it a rest. Looking forward to Ethan's next piece of writing though, and of course, he'll be the writer of our Christmas show this year.

Are you still with me? Three scripted dramas, all of them interesting in different ways, from creators I have a connection with! But now, because 113 started at 3.05, I missed the 3.45-4 window, so found myself with some time to fill before Edith's The Void at 8pm. I knew by know this was gonna be my last day at the fringe, so I made my way to the Scottish Storytelling Centre. A beautiful old building at the Eastern end of the Mile, I only learned about it two years ago when Seb Lopes brought me to see Sinead O'Brien's magnificent Hero/Banlaoch. Not only was that an amazing show, I thought, what a great institution! Hence why I wanted to see something else this year, and there were two options that fitted: Selkie and Through the Shortbread Tin. Not sure for what reason I chose the second one, I would've probably not regretted either. Through the Sorthbread Tin is a very Scottish story about identity, living in the shadow of Empires, culture and the forgery of it. Martin O'Connor is mesmerising performing his own writing, and the three ladies singing traditional Gaelic songs do wonders for the overall atmosphere. Pretty much the perfect show for that specific place and time, very glad I saw it.

Now, timing-wise it fitted perfectly. I knew it's a great show. But my problem was I sent an email to Sh!t Theatre earlier this year about coming to see Unlikely and they didn't, and they didn't reply. Guilty of this myself, of course, but I was still disappointed about not being able to make a connection, so I thought, what's the point. But curiosity got the better of me and I made the sprint to the big room at Zoo Southside to see Sh!t Theatre's Evita Too, about the life of Isabel Peron (not Eva of Evita fame, but Peron's second wife, who survived him and was briefly president of Argentina, watch the show and you'll get the whole story). So anyway, this show is perfect and it is exactly the kind of theatre I want to be making. Brechtian to the core, giving that I'm reading a Brecht book atm and I think he's mostly full of it but also has some good ideas that are worth implemented but have also existed in theatre ever since theatre has existed. Sh!t Theatre are funny, they're smart, their show was educational, motivational and by Jove, it WILL change the world. I am now regretting missing Drinking Rum with Expats in June, although it was the week of Waiting for Godot and would've been a difficult one anyway. But I will not be missing another Sh!t Theatre show on purpose ever again!

And ended the Fringe with Edith's Alibec The Void, which I thought was on at 8pm but was actually 8.55, so more like 9. I really liked Edith's first show (Why is the Child Cooking in the Polenta?), not so much her second, Tea and Milk, but all that's irrelevant because The Void is a big departure from her previous style. This is a clown show through and through, and it has the chance to become an iconic clown show with a bit of refinement. Edith needs to commit to the character more, and maybe not break it so often, learn to deal with answers she's not expecting or with difficult audience members. To inhabit the world she's creating more fully, if you want a snobbish answer meaning nothing.

And that was it, that was my fringe, 5.30am train to London on Saturday morning to tech some shows. 22 shows in 5 days, a good average, I just wished I was in a better mood. Before I'm done with this post that took me 7 hours to write and no one will read though, a few words on the shows I didn't see. I ended up making a list, even if I was 3 days in. Naturally, I didn't manage to see all of the shows on the list, but I regret missing the following:

- The Pitch, produced by Moya Jane Productions, which had its first ever production in Barons Court. I kinda fobbed off this show from Arches Lane and ended up doing 3 days at Theatre 503 and I ended up beating myself over it. My Decca Records moment, but I am now sure I'll see the show again, probably at a solid venue (Pleasance maybe?). Anyways, I like Moya and I hope she gets rewarded by the show;

- Allura, a dance show by a company from Seattle. I met one of the dancers and her mum when watching Pascol and promised them I'll come and see their show and then did not keep my promise. Unlikely I'll be able to ever make it up to them, unlikely I'll ever see them again.

- Mitch Benn's Ask Elvis. I really wanted to catch Mitch and have a chat with him, and I also wanted to see him in Edinburgh, which I feel is his natural environment. I couldn't, unfortunately. I am immensely privileged by having developed a personal relationship with Mitch, and having him perform bits of this show for me while flyering along the North End Road. Not quite the same thing, but hey-ho, sometimes we take what we can get.

- Billy Bones Every Ghost Story Ever is coming to Barons Court for Grimfest and would've been good to see it in Edinburgh before, but then I misread the time for Edith's show and they overlapped and I couldn't see it anymore.

- Maria Telnikoff was in Edinburgh again with Campitalism: Three Gays Try to Fix the Economy, and maybe I would've been more motivated to see this had Maria and I not drifted apart so much artistically. She seems to be trying out a new style every year, which is fine, she's still young and still refining her voice. Plus, I have seen enough Dead Effing Rebels for Camden Fringe at Barons Court to last me for a couple of fringes.

And then if course, just for fun I would've probably seen Abandoman, Acid's Reign, Kate Butch, Folk Marry Kill and all of the camp cabaret I could've gotten my hands on. But such is fringe, you always miss more than you see. And there's another one next year.

Finals

Last world cup, I didn't even make a final post. Partly because I was annoyed with the cheating, with the result, and with the disgusting display of the closing ceremony.

This year's ceremony had its share of disgusting scenes, but it's the ridiculous that was the prevailing feeling. Anyway, before the final we've had the....

Third place play-off (losers' final): France - England 4-6

The game no one wants to be in , the game, dare I say, no one really wants to see. It is perhaps different when a small(er) team gets in, like Morocco last year, they might've been happy to play another game. Or Bulgaria-Sweden in 1994 (FMM Prunea), a fairly competitive game. Or the 2002 Turkey-South Korea, when Turkey administered the world's revege over the very much pushed-forward South Koreans.

So there is a case for playing the third place play-off. But this wasn't it. Two big teams with final aspirations, both former WC winners, none of them wanted to be in this game. So they very clearly stated the case for not having a third place play-off. Me, I don't know. It's extra money for FIFA, so I'm sure Infantino don't mind.

People have been saying, during and after the game, what an amazing football match this was. It wasn't. And to prove it wasn't, there were no massive celebrations on the streets, no joy, no singing, and no vandalising on the tube, no pissing on fences and buildings afterwards. It was just comentators and the English public at large trying to convince themselves the game mattered. To assure you it didn't, take England's third goal, the clearest illustration of how non-competitve it was. Saka and Rashford break on the counter against 3 French defenders. I think they exchange 4 passes between them, barely troubled, before Saka scores. A solid 15-20 seconds. And by the time he scores, there's still only 3 defenders in the French box. In a competitive game, 8 people would've been there within 10 seconds, and it would not have been a goal.

But it looked like a nice little friendly, the score was one of a friendly, After England went in the break 4-0 up, I didn't for a second doubt that France will score a lot. Came back 10 minutes into the second half, it was 4-2 already, and it would've very likely ended a draw, had this been possible. It wasn't, and no one wanted another 30 minutes of this, so England got their win - which they wouldn't have in a competitve game - and France got Mbappe to be the golden boot at this tournament and the highest scorer ever at World Cup tournaments. 10 goals in 6 games in impressive, as is 22 goals across 3 World Cups, and his record will probably last for a while, considering he's still got at least two World Cups left in him. Biggest story of the day.

Spain - Argentina 1-0

This is it, the World Cup final. No occasion bigger than this, and if the game itself didn't match the expectations, the memes certainly did.

Now, last two World Cup finals had 6 goals each and were a topsy-turvy of momentum. This one ended 1-0 with a goal in extra-time. But, as Nick Hornby says, complaining about a 0-0 means you've somehow missed the point. It wasn't the most beautiful game, far from it. I still enjoyed it. Spain knew they were up against a team that would bully team and would play physically agressive without being punished. So they came well prepared for that. The Spanish players came well prepared, they never got dragged into arguments or fights, as the red cards would have been quick to come out. They also knew how to counter Argentinian aggression without fouling, and that was the real art. Probably where the game was won.

Leandro Paredes only got a first yellow in the second half, after giving the ref plenty of reasons to get a red card three times over in the first. Enzo Fernandes only got a first yellow for insulting the ref, and the second becasue the foul was so blatantly obvious.

Still, Spain had a goal by Nico Williams disallowed for what would've otherwise not have been a foul - Merino stepping on Otamendi. Even that they handled admirably. And after they finally scored without any possibility of cancellation, 10 minutes later, they were well prepared to withstand a last ditch Argentinian attack. Luis de la Fuente did well for not falling into the same trap as England did, but also, the depth of the Spanish bench is impressive, they are able to field two teams of equal value easily.

And so it ends. The goat leaves the stage in disgrace, mocked by the internet and bringing back the Messi v Ronaldo debate, after Portugal's weak performance buried it for good. Ema Martinez is great keeper, and he put an awfully solid shift in this final, but his shithousery doesn't work if the opponents come prepared. And the rest of the favela gang is well deserving of spending their holidays with internet mockery chasing them.

My only worry is that Lucha Martinez had a few critical errors during this world cup, I hope he clears his act. 

I am now much mellowed about Spain winning the World Cup - I should've been since the Euros, really - and the thought of not seeing Messi or Scaloni at a World Cup again is comforting.

Oh, I said the ceremony was full of ridicule and I didn't mention Trump... but I don't really need to do that, do I?

Not coming home

England - Argentina 1-2

Well, I was genuinely upset at this. And the worst thing is, Argentina deserved to win this game.

For sure, they played dirty, the first half was chocked with all the tricks from the dirty book, Simeone should've been sent off within the first 15 minutes, and the ref was only blowing in one direction. But England came prepared. Excelent game management, stay clean, keep as much as the ball as you can, wait for the opportunity.

We barely saw Messi, he must've had like 3 touches in the first half. And opportunity came 10 minutes after the break, with Gordon doing really well to sneak behind the defender and slot Rogers' cross home. 1-0 England, and we're cooking.

Argentina ups the pressure, but England absorbs, Pickford makes an excellent save then immediately asks for the water break. Look at England, being all mature, doing game management and prepping for the World Cup final.

But this, the fourth quarter as our fellow Americans would say, is where it went tits up. More specifically, the substitution in the 72nd minute, Konsa for Gordon. You take out the biggest attacking threat of the game and the only goal-scorer to play a central defender in? That's small team mentality, that's not a World Cup winning team mentality. I suggested England plays hoofball, but it wasn't even that. It was keeping formation along the 16 yard box and lettign Argentina enjoy long spells of possession and have 20 minutes to come up with a plan.

Their goal wasn't even Messi, it was divine punishment. Although yeah, ok, Messi crosses the ball completely unbothered, and Enzo Fernandes heads it from the center of the box with 0 people marking him or challenging him for the ball. True, Josh Stones almost headed it away, but likewise, England ALMOST saw this game through.

1-1 with 5 minutes to go, everyone's thinking extra-time, but I already fear for England. And at least the suffering is cut short, with Lautaro Martinez hitting one from just outside the box, central. Pickford might've gotten it, but in hit Bellingham's leg on the way in, gave the keeper no chance.

Sure, let's put Rashford in for the last 5 minutes, see if he can come up with something. He can't. Argentina, mush as it pains me to say it, deserved to win the game, and they did it without being awarded a penatly or playing with superior numbers.

Spain are latey opportunists too though, with better organisation in midfield. I fully expect the final to be boring, but hopefully Marino will seal it at the death.

Ou est Mbappe?

France - Spain 0-2

Oh my, didn't the bookies sleep well tonight?

I got no explanation for this game. Reminds me a bit - though that memory has long ben repressed, it's just the feeling that survives - of Barcelona beating a seamingly unstoppable Manchester United in the 2009 Champions League final.

How did it happen? We all saw it, none can explain it. Mbappe, Dembele, Olise, they were all on the pitch, yet none showed up. If I were to throw my mind back even further, to the 1989 Champions League final, I'd wonder - like we all wondered after the AC Milan's hammering of Steaua, if the players have been drugged or something.

The truth is, you don't have to be glamorous to be efficient. I also think the French had an off day, but if you're having an off day, make sure it's not the World Cup semi-final.

Was there a penalty for the first goal? I would not have given it. Digne's leg movement had started before Yamal attacked the ball, so the hit did not look to be intentional. I'm not even sure it would be a foul if it happened in midfield. Also true that it was a solid hit, fully into Yamal's leg. So I don't know. Once again, I'd like games to be decided by players rather than refs, but what do I know?

Whether it was or it wasn't a penalty is immaterial though, not because Spain scored another one, but because France never really looked like being in the game. Funnily enough, the stats tell a different story. France, having more shots on target? When? The half-arsed effort by Dembele deep into injury time, when it wouldn't have mattered anyway?

xG seems to be the most accurate description of the game, a stat I made fun of many times in the past. It's 0.31 to 1.63 for Spain. 

A lot of things I made fun of in the past are coming back to bite me in the ass. So I'll be cheering our boys tonight against Argentina along with the rest of the country.

Is this Spanish team as good as the 2010 one? I'd say certainly not. But they're incredibly well organized, disciplined in defence and relentless attacking, not losing heart until it's done. Went through R16 and Quarters with injury time winners. They have Lamine Yamal, who did not shine as bright as the other stars of the tournament so far, but he's still in it. And sometimes you don't have to score 8 goals, you have to score one when it matters. And Nico Williams has been playing more in recent games, maybe in time for him to be fully fit for the final.

I kind of want Spain to win now. Words I'd never thought I'd say.

Rule Britannia!

Norway - England 1-2

Ah, England playing on a Saturday, and I was off - kind of, so I could take refuge at home from the masses and the noise, and watch the game in peace. And what a great game it was!

Norway has done supremely well at this World Cup. As a matter of fact, last time they were at an World Cup, in France 1998, they had such a wonderful team that in the end it was a big reason of why I fell in love with Manchester United - a love story that still lasts today. Henning Berg, Ronnie Johnsen and of course, Ole Gunnar and, if we're to be completely honest, David Beckham had something to do with it too.

Back then, they lost the first knock-out game to Italy. This time, Ivory Coast and mighty Brazil were brushed aside. and England was looking shaky for large swathes of the game, but they used cunning.

Let me explain. The way the first half was going, it was Norway's game. That shot that opened the scoring was stunning! Pickford didn't know what hit him. And on a couple of occasions, I was left open-mouthed by Haaland's headers. They way he lifts himself in the air so effortlessly, with barely any flexing of the knees, the height he can reach and the power he puts in the ball, they're something out of this world. Very different than prime Ronaldo, but just as physics-defying, just as unstoppable.

And again, one cannot help but notice how disciplined, how well organised, how confident, and how strong in possesion this Norway team is.

Admittedly, England has done really well to pull back so close to half time. Bellingham's first goal was a thing of wonder, knotting defenders legs and throwing the ball across the keeper, with no chance for poor Nyland. Harry Kane was unfortunate to have his goal called off for offside just seconds later, but the execution was beautiful. Old school chip, the kind that forwards are to afraid to try nowadays. It would've been a different game, and not necessarily easier for England had they gone in 2-1 at half-time.

On Heggem's cancelled goal, and the preceeding Haaland foul: look, I don't know. The rules get changed, adjusted, interpreted and debated in all sorts of ways. It's obvious that Haaland's push is a foul. It comes before the ball was in play and has no bearing on the action. But a foul is still a foul, even if the ball is not in play. If it's a foul, corner should not be taken, and the ball should go to England. But why then, when the goal was cancelled, the decision was to retake the corner? Was it not a foul then?

It would be too much to suspect conspiracy, although I'm sure FIFA prefers England to Norway in the semifinal. But it is still poor refereeing, it's official decision taking precedence over what happens on the pitch. It's also a far cry from Egypt's second goal against Argentina, called off by VAR for a very soft step on foot 30 seconds earlier at the other side of the pitch. I saw a similar one in this game by the way, that was not sanctioned in any way whatsoever, nor was it brought into discussion by commentators, pundits or anyone. So Egypt's goal was clearly cancelled because of an agenda. Norway's... I'd say probably not. Should it have been cancelled? It's a 50:50 for me.

Even so, Norway knew they needed to score again. However. After the cancelled goal, and especially for the last 20 minutes of the 90, I think the Norwegians started to tire. Whether it was simply fitness, or that plus being overwhelmed by the occasion, by the intensity of the game, or both, their excellent shape and organisation started to crack. A marked drop in offensive intent, and allowing England to get close and threaten the goal on a couple of occasions, things that did not happen in the first half. As we headed towards the end of 90 minutes, Norway looked less and less like a team capable to score.

And it's in this that Engalnd's better game management showed. They held on, pushed as much as they could push, but most importantly, stayed calm and waited for their chance.

It didn't come in 90 minutes, but came pretty quickly after that. Rogers shot from a distance, Nyland spilled the ball, Bellingham was focused, and knew both how to be opportunistic, and how to convert the dropped ball. This goal looked pretty much identical with Marino's winning goal against Belgium the day before. Yet there was no talk about 'Nyland's big mistake', how the keeper should've done better and all of that. But Nyland's not playing for Manchester United, is he?

And after Bellingham's second, the game was pretty much up. Norway was tiiiired, and only threatened through a few individual actions from Nussa. Nothing to write home about, the game was done. Tuchel was right to say after the game that England didn't play as well as they should have, but Belligham is also right to reply 'whatever' to that. It was a tough, tough game, and they came out on top. 

I wanted Norway to win, but well done England! They did better on the day.

Argentina - Switzerland 3-1

Now, of course, I want Argentina to lose at the first available opportunity. That Egypt game was shambles, they should no longer be in the competition.

I didn't have much hope though, didn't see Switzerland capable of troubling them. It's probably why I fell asleep shortly after MacAllister's goal.

Woke up sometime in the 70-something minute, to see the score at 1-1, and Switzerland playing in 10. I wonder how red exactly was Embolo's red card, but I have not seen the action, so won't speak about it.

But of course, Switzerland did really well to pull level. The final minutes were an Argentina onslaught, and it was obvious that the Swiss are not hoping for much but penalties. They lookde tired too, especially going into extra time, but they did really well to anihilate Messi and hold on as much as they could.

The second goal, Alvarez in the 112th minute, was an opportunistic shot aided by a bit of luck, btu if you let your opponent get this close to your goal this much of the time, one of these what if shots is bound to get in at some point. 

There was an attempt to attack from the Swiss in the last 10 minutes, but it really was too little too late. Lautaro Martinez's 3rd goal sealed the faith of the game, but it was otherwise as useless as Neymar's penalty against Norway.

So, I don't know, well done Argentina I guess. They proved they can do it even when Messi has an off day, and they proved they can persist in attack until they get it. They were also 10 minutes away from elimination, but history is made up of what happened, not by what could have.

*

This is it then, France versus Spain and England v Argentina. I'll refer back to the movie Sixty-Six, when Eddie Marsden asks the kid: 'At the end of the day, who do you really want to win? Honestly?' and the kid replies reluctantly: 'England'

This is it, I switched allegiances, turncoat that I am, and after Portugal and Norway, I now want England to win. They won't, it's still France's tournament bar a miracle or some more cheating, I'm hoping at least England will dispatch Argentina quickly. Yes, exactly, like in the Falklands.

Watch out for Belgium

Spain - Belgium 2 - 1

One thing I really liked in this world cup is how I decide who I support during the game. Sometimes I start off as fully neutral, and am fully converted by the end of the 90 minutes, usually on the side of the underdog.

For instance, I wanted Portugal to win the tournament, but after a drab game against Spain, I cheered for Merino's late goal, as it meant we won't have to watch another 30 minutes of that game.

Throughout this tournament, I've been fairly indifferent towards Spain, although I was happy to see them draw with Cape Verde, and happy to see them beat Uruguay. Registered with indiffeernce their wins against Saudi Arabia and Austria.

Belgium, I started rather not liking them. A golden generation that has never quite achieved its potential, and now it's a swansong for most of them. Plus, I don't like the players individually. Tielemans and Witsel were always overrated, and de Bruyne is a great player, but surely you can't expect me to like him? 

I was laughing at them when they drew Egypt in the first game, but after seeing Egypt's tournament, maybe I shouldn't have. They did win their group. They didn't deserve to win against Senegal, but yeah, it's just the West African's fault for not being able to hold on to their lead. And I supported their emphatic win against USA due to politics more than anything. 

So for some reason, maybe remembering my hatred fron Spain from 15 years ago, and Belgium growing in my eyes, I kind of wanted them to win. Thought it a bit hopeless, but it costs nothing to want it.

Fabian Ruiz's goal for Spain didn't help my cause. I was wondering if Belgium is able to pull back, after all, for all their faults, Spain is a much more mature team than Senegal. And yet. And yet... I have no idea where Belgium pulled this weird looking Ketelaere kid, but my God, that equalising shot was phenomenal. 1-1 just before half time, and 3 world cup goals for the De Ketelaere kid.

And even though Spain dominated all of the game, it was flowing more into Belgian's hands. After Big Rom came in, danger was looming.

Now, the BBC comentataors made a huge deal of Courtouis having to go out injured, but Lammens is the better goalkeeper. Hugely unfortunate the way Spain's winning goal came in, but it gives ample opportunity to pundits to criticise him now, and we won't hear the end of 'if Courtouis was still on...'. But let me ask you this: it was a powerful shot, hard and low, like the manual says. Lammens keeps it out without emotions, but can't retain the ball. In such a situation, is it not the central defenders' job to get to the ball first? Why is Merino allowed to get to the ball free from any pressure? And what chance does tha fallen keeper has in this circumstance? So, lay off of 'Lammes' fault wagon' please.

Also, weirdly, everyone glossed over very quickly over the fact that Belgium should have had a penalty at 1-1, when their central defender hit a ball with the hand, far away from the body. Not sure why, and in the interest of not gettign too conspirational, let's say I have a blind spot in the rules of football. They changed the rules of handball so much, most refs probably have blind spots too.

I was hoping for a late Belgium equalizer, and Big Rom went relatively close on a cross, plus de Bruyne had a great shot on the turn, but it was not to be.

At the end of the day, it feels right that Spain would progress. I dreamt of a Norway-Belgium final but this is not a fairytale. This is real life, with Mbappe impossible shots, with Haaland the beast dispatching Brasil like it's nothing, and with refereeing decisions always going Argentina's way.

Not yet

Morocco - France 0-2

Well, that was harsh, wasn't it?

I thought Morocco played ok, but France is on a different level. And even if on TV the shape of the Moroccan team looks good, they looked well organised in defense and having some attackin and especially counter-attacking intent, the numbers tell a different story. That momentum graph was all white.

The xG is a stat I still don't understand well, hence I don't trust a lot, but France had 10 shots on target before Morocco's first. 

And you know, all of that is good and swell, you can still frustrate them into 0-0 and penalties, which the Moroccan keeper Bounou has proved a great saver of. It happened in the first half.

By the way, that penalty that Mbappe missed looked soft to me. Not to say there was any favouring of the referee, but also, not sure if Morocco would have gotten it if it was on the other side. Also, weird that Mbappe's execution was so poor. I guess even the best have their off moments.

Not that it mattered in the end. That first Mbappe goal was a wonder. Most forwards take a step on the inside in that position, to make space to shoot. Not Kylian. He curled that bloody shot to perfection. 

And then Dembele killed any hope fo Morocco getting back into the game with another banger which looked effortless. 18 yards out, barely any pendulation of the foot, powerful, precisely aimed shot. Poor bounou had a hand on it, but try and stop that if you can.

It is as predicted in the end, and the last African team goes out in the quarter-final, an all-too familiar story. Morocco have a lot to be proud of, not least showing that last tournament's semi-final was not a fluke, and showing, maybe for the first time, that an African team CAN go all the way. Cameroon 1990, Nigeria 1994, Senegal 2002, Ghana 2010 have shown that African teams should be taken seriously, but it will forever be Morocco the first African team to reach a World Cup semi-final. 

Before the quarters started, I was hopeing for a Morocco-Norway final, now it kind of looks like there's no stopping France, but I would like to see Norway in the final.

And how cool would it be, in 4 years time in Spain, to have maybe a Japan-Morocco world cup final?