This World Cup Is Beating A Dead Dark Horse

Every international tournament, the widely used and abused dark horse designation is bandied about as pundits, fans, and cretins (gamblers) try to be the first to predict a deep run for an unexpected team. The term dark horse itself is vague enough to apply to about half the field, depending on one's own criteria. It fits a team that could be a sneaky knockout-stage qualifier from a tough group, it fits a small nation that could even win a knockout match, and it fits a surprise quarterfinalist. However, the concept is most consistently applied to a team outside of the World Cup elite (made up of the eight countries that have won it, plus the Netherlands) that has a realistic shot at getting to the semifinals. In that way, the dark horses are supposed to be the best of the rest, the best hopes we have of getting something more interesting and novel than just some combination of Argentina, France, Brazil, Spain, the Netherlands, Germany, and England in the final four. The problem is that the World Cup doesn't really work like that. Looking at a list of semifinalists since the first World Cup of the millennium (2002 in South Korea and Japan), you could make the argument that only two true dark horses have made the semis: 2006 Portugal and 2018 Belgium. Those two teams came into the tournament loaded with talent and expectations, and, had things gone slightly differently—if Portugal doesn't give up a penalty to France, or if prime Eden Hazard-Romelu Lukaku-Kevin De Bruyne don't forget how to score against a French defense that shipped three against an underwhelming Argentina—they could have gone on to lift the trophy. (Maybe the trick to be a dark horse World Cup winner is just to avoid France.)