So the world cup starts today

[tricky1972]

p.s. I don't think you can put 5th favourites as dark horses rat! they're hardly unfancied.

Dark Horse Definition

1.little-known person: somebody about whom very little is known or who tends to be reticent, especially somebody who subsequently reveals unexpected talents

2.unexpectedly successful candidate: a candidate who gains an unexpected amount of support in an electoral campaign

3.unexpectedly successful contestant: a little-known competitor who achieves unexpected success in a race or other sports contest.

Belgium fit into 2 and 3 quite comfortably!

I dont see many backing them to win or be a dark horse. They are one below England in the current FIFA world rankings! And thier captain (amongst others) is refering to England as a Dark Horse so figure that one out rapid ... your in too much of a rush to try and score points [/quote]

Yes but if you look at the original post on thi

[triz]

It did raise a smile when i saw ratty pick belgium,if anyone was gonna it'd be him

My thoughts were that while they may fit in the definiton ratty lays out, everyone has pretty much tipped them to do well and be dark horses, so i wanted to see something a bit less obvious. Frankly belgiums team is quality and how they are a place below England is beyond me.

[Rapid]

p.s. I don't think you can put 5th favourites as dark horses rat! they're hardly unfancied.

Dark Horse Definition

1.little-known person: somebody about whom very little is known or who tends to be reticent, especially somebody who subsequently reveals unexpected talents

2.unexpectedly successful candidate: a candidate who gains an unexpected amount of support in an electoral campaign

3.unexpectedly successful contestant: a little-known competitor who achieves unexpected success in a race or other sports contest.

Belgium fit into 2 and 3 quite comfortably!

I dont see many backing them to win or be a dark horse. They are one below England in the current FIFA world rankings! And thier captain (amongst others) is refering to England as a Dark Horse so figure that one out rapid ... your in too much of a rush to try and score points [/quote]

[Rattea]

Thats an opinion not a rule! Triz's opinion only as they are a good bet in his opinion to do something. Maybe its a reference to them being his own dark horse!

I think you will find the rest of the world is viewing them as a dark horse! Going on Fifa rankings you cant have Columbia, Switzerland, Uruguay even possibly Chile as a Dark horse. Is it not allowed to England as a Dark horse.

Belgium have not been in the world cup for 12 years I beleive and their best ever effort was a semi fainal in 1986. 16/1 at the bookies is an outside chance and a dark horse. They have never won a major international title. If thats not a dark horse then what is one ... have a look at the link and the definition again! Belgium are the epitome of what a Dark Horse is - view external link

[Rattea]

Winner Brazil

Golden boot Aguero


England exit Quarter Finals

Dark horses Colombia...do they count?

If Belgium cant be a Dark Horse at 11 in the Fifa rankings then how can Columbia at 8!

And remember Rapid was telling us the climate in South America gives South American teams an advantage which would suggest this plays into Columbias chances and against Belgiums!

But as we know Rapid will back track from this as and when it suits

[Rapid]

Thats an opinion not a rule! Triz's opinion only as they are a good bet in his opinion to do something. Maybe its a reference to them being his own dark horse!

I think you will find the rest of the world is viewing them as a dark horse! Going on Fifa rankings you cant have Columbia, Switzerland, Uruguay even possibly Chile as a Dark horse. Is it not allowed to England as a Dark horse.

Belgium have not been in the world cup for 12 years I beleive and their best ever effort was a semi fainal in 1986. 16/1 at the bookies is an outside chance and a dark horse. They have never won a major international title. If thats not a dark horse then what is one ... have a look at the link and the definition again! Belgium are the epitome of what a Dark Horse is

so you've found one article referring to them as a dark horse, so it becomes FACT? did you overlook the FACT that the opening statement is [i]'Expectations are high among Belgian

[triz]

Thats an opinion not a rule! Triz's opinion only as they are a good bet in his opinion to do something. Maybe its a reference to them being his own dark horse!

I think you will find the rest of the world is viewing them as a dark horse! Going on Fifa rankings you cant have Columbia, Switzerland, Uruguay even possibly Chile as a Dark horse. Is it not allowed to England as a Dark horse.

Belgium have not been in the world cup for 12 years I beleive and their best ever effort was a semi fainal in 1986. 16/1 at the bookies is an outside chance and a dark horse. They have never won a major international title. If thats not a dark horse then what is one ... have a look at the link and the definition again! Belgium are the epitome of what a Dark Horse is

I agree the term dark horses can be pretty subjective and there is enough grey area to cause an argument (especially on this board ). Do you base it on FIFA rankings,recent t

[roseylee]

winners argentina

runners up germany

top goalscorer aguero

dark horses belgium or uruguay

england exit group stage

[Rapid]

*sigh*

I'm changing my dark horses to argentina