Have to agree.
At the start, it didn't matter to me who won, but Martyn Tyler's biased commentary on SBS turned me to France. He disputed every decision that went France's way and agreed with every one that went Croatia's way - sorry I exaggerate, there was a free kick awarded to France in the 84th minute that he agreed with. Spent the whole game rubbishing France's achievements at the World cup - sorry I exaggerate again, in the 92nd minute he admitted that they were a good football team.
If you've seen all those wins, they were never, outstandingly, the better team. Yes, they got the necessary goals but they were never outstanding, despite their reputation. Belgium bettered them for a good part of their game. In other games they were cool and laid back, snatching wins from counters at times. Against Croatia they never excelled because they weren't allowed to. Croatia had their number in all aspects except goalscoring - I feel heartsick for the Croats because they really deserved more. They were really the best, but maybe not the most effective because of this defeat, team in the tournament for me. Never did we see the French 'boss' a game like Brazil in the 1970 final.1964white wrote:
France beat Argentina, Uruguay, Belgium & Croatia to win the World Cup
Best team in the tournament even though they got lucky in the first-half
OK, it's all about goals, and Croatia were desperately unlucky with that, whereas France had so much luck it was unbelievable and I really don't think they were the better team - they were also grimy if not dirty. I remember the punch on Perisic and all that.
In the end, the better team wins, but maybe that should be "the more effective team wins".