Holland or Portugal?

[lost]

OK, providing we get through to the next round, who would the rest of you prefer to be facing?

In times gone by this would have been a no brainer, one would go for Portugal every time. However, given the fact that they don't play bad football, and have one of the better squads of players in world football nowadays, perhaps the dutch would be a better option to be facing. One thing that i do know is that big Phil scolari has ko'ed us from the last 2 tournaments in the quarter finals with , what many would have considered going into the games, inferior squads (yes, many would call me a fool for saying that in 02 many thought that England's team were better than Brazil's, but i am saying before the tourney, not after the dust had settled.) Also, if we were to face him again, i am sure that he would once again beat us.

I would much prefer to be facing van bastard and his gayboy kids for a place in the semis, than Gene Hackman and the Portuguese again.

[Bobinhood]

Theres something to be said for revenge, though. Redemption. Like last year when the pool lost to the mancs to a ferdinand 92nd header, than later tossed them from the fa cup...sweet wine indeed. Ditto getting spanked by chelski at home, than bouncing them also...best games of the year.

So scolari needs out back of the toolshed pants down, and ronaldo ...well what can we say about ronaldo. nothing good, clearly :D I mean, we only lost to these guys on kicks and brazil before that on goaltender error, so i say lets have at em. we got argentina last time, now its time for the ports the brazil's and the germans to all feel the lash. Arrr matey. that would be the best win possible.

Mind you, i respect the dutch team also, they are pretty classy, sp either way if we get there should be a good match up.

[When Hell Unfreezes]

OK, providing we get through to the next round, who would the rest of you prefer to be facing?

In times gone by this would have been a no brainer, one would go for Portugal every time. However, given the fact that they don't play bad football, and have one of the better squads of players in world football nowadays, perhaps the dutch would be a better option to be facing. One thing that i do know is that big Phil scolari has ko'ed us from the last 2 tournaments in the quarter finals with , what many would have considered going into the games, inferior squads (yes, many would call me a fool for saying that in 02 many thought that England's team were better than Brazil's, but i am saying before the tourney, not after the dust had settled.) Also, if we were to face him again, i am sure that he would once again beat us.

I would much prefer to be facing van bastard and his gayboy kids for a place in the semis, than Gene Hackman and the Portuguese again.


Fool - we want that worthless shower of Portugese sh!t....................:rolleyes:

[Matt Clark]

Portugal were there for the taking two years ago and they've not got any better since. With a bit of luck and some character we could do Portugal handily.

Holland, by contrast, have the whiff of a team quietly gathering momentum to me.

[thebigman]

portugal, no decent strikers

[lost]

No one here thinks that losing to Scolaris team in the quarters of 2002, and then in the quarters of 2004 bodes badly for a quarter final meeting with him again in 2006? Sorry folks, as shit as Portugal may be, this is way way way too much repetition for my liking, we would lose again. For me, its got to be the dutch. I would have no doubts about defeating the dutch, they are even thinking of dropping Ruud for the next round tie. WTF? They are a bunch of kids from a second rate league, except for one or two who are past their sell by date anyway(Cocu, Van Der Sar), van Persie is good but rarely does anything important, Robben is dangerous but can't win matches alone, van der vart is the same as van persie, great ability but rarely performs. We would be looking at a euro96 style win in this game i feel, a perfect springboard for a 99% impossible match v Brazil in the semis.

[Matt Clark]

No one here thinks that losing to Scolaris team in the quarters of 2002, and then in the quarters of 2004 bodes badly for a quarter final meeting with him again in 2006?
Well ... no. Unless you're someone who believes in bogey coaches, as opposed to bogey teams. The losses in 2002 and 2004 are unrelated on a range of levels, from the actual teams involved through to the manner of the loss (we didn't actually lose to Portugal, they scored more penalty kicks than us after the game).

Sorry folks, as shit as Portugal may be, this is way way way too much repetition for my liking, we would lose again.
Two misconceptions in one sentence. Portugal are far from "shit", they're a good side. Just not as good as Holland and therefore the more beatable of the two.

We would be looking at a euro96 style win in this game i feel
Pffft. You're not actually in Holland right now, are you? In, say, a Bulldog Cafe?

[BridgeMonkee]

portugal, no decent strikers

and we have one (coming back from injury)

[BridgeMonkee]

Holland or Portugal? IF we can beat Ecuador. . .

Portugal for revenge.

Holland more likely to win the game though eh.

[Grell]

Portugal.

Regards,

Grell

[lost]

Well ... no. Unless you're someone who believes in bogey coaches, as opposed to bogey teams. The losses in 2002 and 2004 are unrelated on a range of levels, from the actual teams involved through to the manner of the loss (we didn't actually lose to Portugal, they scored more penalty kicks than us after the game).


Two misconceptions in one sentence. Portugal are far from "shit", they're a good side. Just not as good as Holland and therefore the more beatable of the two.


Pffft. You're not actually in Holland right now, are you? In, say, a Bulldog Cafe?

OK, a few misconceptions from yourself:

a) We didn't lose to Portugal, huh? Guess that is why they were in the final and we weren't.

b) Portugal not as good as Holland? Guess thats they were in the final and Holland weren't.

c) The games in 2004 and 2002 were very similar: We took the lead through Michael Owen in both games, and couldn't hold onto a lead in either match, we couldn't pass the ball during either matches, SGE sat in silence for both matches while Scolari ran about screaming like a madman pushing his players onto us, both matches would have left England as the one outstanding candidate left in the next round of the tourney, both were in the same stage of the tournament, quarter finals.

d) i just think that the way the dutch play is more suited to England than Portugal. The Portuguese know that if they keep the ball we are fooked, whereas the dutch don't have a possession style of play, they are more suited to attack, or counter attack. they have more emphasis on individual dribblers and finishers than the Portuguese, whose game will be far more passing based, IMO. We all know that England cant pass the ball more than 2 or 3 times succession, when we play Spanish, Portuguese or Brazilian sides we look like a pub team, everyone can see this, and it is reflected in results, why can't you see this?

[matty boy]

i would prefer holland. rio wouldn't let ruud have a lookin and van persie can only play with space, gary would do over robben

[Footstomper]

i would prefer holland. rio wouldn't let ruud have a lookin and van persie can only play with space, gary would do over robben
If we have to choose who to play, we aint got a chance of winning anything. Dont like the question.

Just bring em on!

[Matt Clark]

a) We didn't lose to Portugal, huh?

No, we didn't. We drew 2-2. The penalty shootout that followed is irrelevant to any attempt at assessing how likely we are to win another football match against Portugal.

b) Portugal not as good as Holland? Guess thats they were in the final and Holland weren't.
Portugal's performance two years ago (on home soil) is also a very poor indicator of the threat the two teams pose to us now, here at the 2006 World Cup. Portugal in 2004 were already at something of a high water mark - don't let the repeat appearance of the likes of Figo fool you. The Dutch have undergone a far more positive spell of evolution and development under van Basten since 2004 than the Portugese under Scolari in the same timeframe.

c) The games in 2004 and 2002 were very similar: We took the lead through Michael Owen in both games, and couldn't hold onto a lead in either match, we couldn't pass the ball during either matches, SGE sat in silence for both matches while Scolari ran about screaming like a madman pushing his players onto us, both matches would have left England as the one outstanding candidate left in the next round of the tourney, both were in the same stage of the tournament, quarter finals.
Incidental similarities that have no bearing on the fact that England would struggle harder against a dynamic, young team like Holland at this World Cup than they would against Scolari's Portugese team. Like I said - there's no such thing as bogey coaches.

That said, which ever team we face will have beaten the other - and as both are better than we are, it's ultimately a moot point which of the two would be better for us in a quarter final. I'm on record as saying we'll get knocked out on penalties at that stage in any case - who does it is just a matter of flavour.

We all know that England cant pass the ball more than 2 or 3 times succession, when we play Spanish, Portuguese or Brazilian sides we look like a pub team, everyone can see this, and it is reflected in results, why can't you see this?
I can see it. And I've never argued the opposite. You just underestimate the Dutch capabilities to play precisely the same sort of game. Did you watch them against the Argies? One of the reasons van Basten's work with the Dutch has made them a more potent threat than the Portugese is that he has instilled in them the vital ability to play at a range of tempos, using either patient possession or rapid thrusts with minimal passes per move, as the game dictates.

[benficafan3]

Portugal were there for the taking two years ago and they've not got any better since. With a bit of luck and some character we could do Portugal handily.

Holland, by contrast, have the whiff of a team quietly gathering momentum to me.

And England has?:rolleyes:

[lost]

I disagree with almost every word you have just said, but we will have to agree to disagree, i havent got the time to go through all your points, in any case for the most part i would be re treading the same statements that i have already made.

(BTW, if you are sure that we will lose on pens at any stage of the tourney the odds are just over or just under 2-1, not bad, not that i agree or disagree on this point, just thought you might like to know the odds and make a couple of quid)

[Clan]

And England has?:rolleyes:

That wasn't really the point.

[Matt Clark]

And England has?:rolleyes:

:rolleyes: right backatcha, dipshit. At least follow the thread of the conversation before jumping in with your tiny little brain.

[Jay-Wakes]

Portugal.

[leg_breaker]

Holland. They don't look as good as Portugal. Their formation is very flat and their attacks are predictable. Portugal are far more dangerous.