View Full Version : World Cup 2006: Other matches [R]
AfrcnHrbMan
13 Jun 2006, 12:00 PM
I'd have to agree with guignol on several things. The first one Ghana clearly had a great scoring chance only to be blantantly pushed off that ball. I'm amazed that there is even a discussion about it. In the second chance kick, I believe was also deserved but maybe not so much as the first one. I dont care if he dove. As a matter of fact i dont believe you CAN dive on a foul. He was illegally impeded from a clear chance to score, i dont care if he made a hash of it, its still a penalty.
And oh yea Italian football also makes me vomit :p
guignol
14 Jun 2006, 05:45 AM
i was really impressed with the brazil-croatia match last night. croatia had the gnaque by god! i'm not sure which of the two sides i'd be more afraid of! :eek:
but the real treat was watching ronaldo. what a prince! he uncorked a screamer over the bar from 25m... which was where he was standing all night. let's see, i was watching the match on the couch... but i went to kiss my little girl goodnight, went to the toilet at halftime... oh yeah, i got a glass of lemonade from the fridge... in short, i covered about as much ground watching as he did playing. but it's true he touched about 5 balls, and i only touched (scratched) 2 :D
RandyNA74
14 Jun 2006, 08:45 AM
I'd have to agree with guignol on several things. The first one Ghana clearly had a great scoring chance only to be blantantly pushed off that ball. I'm amazed that there is even a discussion about it. In the second chance kick, I believe was also deserved but maybe not so much as the first one. I dont care if he dove. As a matter of fact i dont believe you CAN dive on a foul. He was illegally impeded from a clear chance to score, i dont care if he made a hash of it, its still a penalty.
And oh yea Italian football also makes me vomit :p
You're right, you can't dive on a foul, but you can certainly dive before a foul is committed - i.e. before there is physical contact. That's what the Ghanaian player did in that instance. Hell, if Italy were awarded penalties for every time an Italian player dove before a "foul" was committed, we would have more WCs than Brazil.
guignol
14 Jun 2006, 08:47 AM
more on ronaldo:
"A pale shadow of a once fearsome predator," tut-tutted the Express, "overweight and lethargic," muttered the Telegraph, "more Pilsbury Dough than Ronaldo," scoffed the Mirror, while the Sun reckoned it was "more a case of Ronaldo McDonaldo ... who looked to be suffering from one Big Meal too many."
Brazil's daily papers were no more complimentary. Former World Cup striker Tostao, writing for the Folha de Sao Paulo, said: "Brazil were slow and bureaucratic and only improved when Robinho came on for Ronaldo, who was slow and weird."
Other critics agreed that the world champions had effectively beaten Croatia with 10 men. "You felt sorry for Ronaldo," wrote Juca Kfouri, one of Brazil's best-known columnists. "It was a torture to see him like a wobbling heavyweight, staggering around the pitch as if what was going on around had nothing to do with him. To control a simple ball seemed a Herculean task."
AfrcnHrbMan
14 Jun 2006, 11:48 AM
How bout those Spainards huh? That last goal by Torres was the most beautiful setup ive seen thus far. They looked very quick, precise, and determined. Anybody think theyre gonna make a run for the title this year?
sl7vk
14 Jun 2006, 12:07 PM
How bout those Spainards huh? That last goal by Torres was the most beautiful setup ive seen thus far. They looked very quick, precise, and determined. Anybody think theyre gonna make a run for the title this year?
Yes. Maybe they've put their usual World Cup disapearing act behind them.... Maybe.....
Always have the talent, but we shall see if they have the heart when faced with being a goal down early in a game.
gaijin
14 Jun 2006, 12:15 PM
Spain should have done better in 2002 and will probably reach or do better this time around. But that back-line lacks any real physical presence.
The left back is a bit dodgy too.
RandyNA74
14 Jun 2006, 12:34 PM
Spain should have done better in 2002 and will probably reach or do better this time around. But that back-line lacks any real physical presence.
The left back is a bit dodgy too.
What happened to Del Horno? Granted, I practically didn't follow soccer at all over the past season, but it's unusual for Spain to field a player I never heard of before (i.e. the dodgy LB).
gaijin
14 Jun 2006, 12:37 PM
What happened to Del Horno? Granted, I practically didn't follow soccer at all over the past season, but it's unusual for Spain to field a player I never heard of before (i.e. the dodgy LB).
Got injured and was replaced by Getafe's Pernia, who was voted best left back in La Liga last season.
Totally untried at international level before this game.
Nanbawan
14 Jun 2006, 12:41 PM
The problem for Spain is that they might qualify from this group without really competing. And that also might unsettle them in the KO stages.
RandyNA74
14 Jun 2006, 01:01 PM
The problem for Spain is that they might qualify from this group without really competing. And that also might unsettle them in the KO stages.
Very true. I'm happy that Italy is in a tough group, so we can hit the ground running.
sl7vk
14 Jun 2006, 01:03 PM
Very true. I'm happy that Italy is in a tough group, so we can hit the ground running.
If and that's a big if at this point.... But if we get out of our group, I'd like nothing more then to play the Italians in the second round.
RandyNA74
14 Jun 2006, 01:06 PM
If and that's a big if at this point.... But if we get out of our group, I'd like nothing more then to play the Italians in the second round.
I don't think that's possible. Not sure what group you guys are paired with, but for us it's either Brazil or the runner up (Australia? Croatia?) in the second round.
A quarterfinal match would be rather intriguing, however. ;)
sl7vk
14 Jun 2006, 01:18 PM
I don't think that's possible. Not sure what group you guys are paired with, but for us it's either Brazil or the runner up (Australia? Croatia?) in the second round.
A quarterfinal match would be rather intriguing, however. ;)
Good point. Although getting out of the second round might be asking us a bit much at the moment.
SportBoy333
14 Jun 2006, 05:31 PM
I saw Germany vs Poland. Poland did well to hold them as their keeper was great but the Germans clearly deserved the 3 points. I thought Ecuador would go through all along instead of Poland and things are looking good now.
quentinc
15 Jun 2006, 08:50 PM
I thought (and still think) that the Czechs have the capability to win the tournament, but that was just awful. I've never been so down after a match in my life. At least it gives us a realistic idea of where we are as a country, and how far we have to go. Everyone has been pointing to the 2002 quarters and first in CONCACAF as a launching point, and ignoring the fact that we're probably not good (there's a reason I typically avoid the USMNT forums: they're full of dumbasses, and there's no point in trying to correct everyone).
SportBoy333
15 Jun 2006, 09:18 PM
If you saw Sweden vs Paraguay on ESPN today you'll notice that one of the announcers(John Harkes)was talking about Kim Kallstrom and saying how if he has a great World Cup a big European club will want to sign him. This guy, John Harkes was obviously clueless to the fact that Kallstrom had already signed with Lyon for next year. Its a minor quibble but it goes to show you that these American announcers are clueless about French soccer and they dont do their homework. I hope guingol reads this because he lives in France and doesnt get ESPN and I thought he'd want to know this occured.
guignol
16 Jun 2006, 04:01 AM
with your permission i'm reposting it here: http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=367408
Pierre-Henri
16 Jun 2006, 05:30 AM
At least it gives us a realistic idea of where we are as a country, and how far we have to go. Everyone has been pointing to the 2002 quarters and first in CONCACAF as a launching point, and ignoring the fact that we're probably not good.
Physically and tactically, i'm sure USMT could do much better than this. But they don't know how to play under heavy pressure. The MLS is fun, with a lot of goals, but all regular season games are friendlies, really. Non-MLS players are substitutes, and don't play big games with their team. International games in the CONCACAF are very far from the highest level (it's the explanation for USA ludicrous FIFA ranking). And MLS doesn't take the continental cup seriously, since US teams are bashed by mexican sides over and over again.
Soccer was an opportunity to have a different kind of sport experience for the US audience, but MLS repeated all the common mistakes of american sports :
- No relegation (because everyone has to be a winner). Since I lived this with Strasbourg, I can tell you a league with possible relegations is a completely different thing. Just imagine the supporters sweat : "oh no, if we don't win this game, next season we're in A-league...". It builds character.
- Fun before performance (in soccer, lots of goals don't mean the teams are good, it means the defenses suck)
- Isolationism (while soccer is the most international thing on earth)
- Weird draft system
- And, above all : NO PRESSURE. Americans like their sports dull : endless (and mostly worthless) regular seasons, plenty of time-outs, best-of-7 qualifying rounds, no relegation....
In all sports, Americans don't know how to play do-or-die games anymore.
ilv2
16 Jun 2006, 09:58 AM
The MLS is fun, with a lot of goals, but all regular season games are friendlies, really.
ugh, no way - i don't have any statistics but i'm quite sure mls is the most boring league in the world in terms of quality and entertainment. Understandably so, as the former leads to the latter and the former is pretty much non-existent.
I agree w/ the rest of the points though