LOL no. My comment was in response to people saying that Brazil's third was as good as Wilshere's against Norwich, and umm, it wasn't. Brazil's third was a random home game in March under Wenger.
The Netherland's first goal against the US to me was very reminiscent of the Arsenal goal vs. Norwich. Not as pretty a goal from an on ball skills perspective, but 8 players touched the ball, starting with Virgil at the back. A total team goal, once that ball reached midfield you just knew the US was in trouble. Actually all 10 infield players touched the ball if you include the exchange that led to Virgil receiving the ball.
I don't think players could replicate the Norwich goal even if they tried. The low percentage of each of the last 3 flicks in combination -- Giroud backheel, Wilshire insane back heel flicky thing while running then sticking his arms out calling for the ball, insane Giroud side chip perfectly on target. I wouldn't even call it a team goal -- it's Giroud and Wilshire feeling it.
Should've there. Have to wonder if Cheddira does better with the chance if he had played at all in the last month.
I think it was a season or two later, and also against Norwich. It didn’t have the crazy flicks that @danielh points out mark the Wilshere goal, but it did have a dizzying rapid-fire sequence of combinations that led to Rosicky walking in alone the way Wilshere ended up. EDIT: It was the same season, actually a few months earlier, and it was Sunderland. Also Giroud’s last flick was very reminiscent of the Wilshere. At 1:13 of this video:
Conversely, I think Ziyech has been quite easily the worst player for Morocco. Walking around doing nothing out of possession and then doing stepovers on the ball in his own third
While we’re on the subject, I came across highlights of the other Norwich match that season when looking for that goal. That game had Arteta, Özil, Wilshere, Cazorla and Ramsey all starting, and Rosicky replaced Cazorla in the second half. The passing and combination play in that team was breathtaking.
Whoa! I was watching on delay when the result got spoiled for me. But I still zipped through the match and then watched the whole shootout at normal speed. I have zero connection with Morocco, other than having a trip there scuttled by Covid in March 2020. But man I had goose-bumps and tears were almost starting. And I already knew the ultimate result beforehand! Hello? I smiled big on their last win and it continues today. Bring on Suisse! Allez Maroc!!!! Edit: One thing I like about Morocco is it's support. I even liked the way they whistled consistently whenever Spain had the ball, which was a lot! Then they quickly switched to cheering when they regained the ball and countered. Funny that I like the whistling, given how I hate vuvuzelas... I guess I'm cool with any natural noise the body can produce.
Sure, but they weren't colonizers. Conquerors? Sure. But, as someone born in a former colony and who lived there long enough to remember it, it's pretty stark just how much more cruel colonialism was even when compared to expansionist empires.
Well, well, well. Any doubts about replacing Ronaldo for Ramos in their XI are now fully vaporized, no? OMG what a strike!
Gonna be very funny when they win the World Cup and Ronaldo gets 4 minutes in the entire knockout stage.
That would be absolutely fine by me, except for the part about them winning WC. IMHO everyone needs to move on from CR7. His national team included. As for Portugal, I for one am REALLY surprised with today's performance. I gave Switzerland a legit chance of winning today. But it was never even remotely close. Even if there was/is some sickness in their camp, I doubt it was the only reason why it turned out this way today.
I’m not clear on the distinction you’re making. Virtually all colonies become colonies because they were conquered. Is the distinction you’re making based on the amount of time the colony is under the control of the conquering nation? Is it about the colonizers exploiting the resources of the colony? If so would you define Rome as an expansionist empire or a colonizer? Their expansion was primarily about access to natural resources, often gold and silver. I’d consider them colonizers. Alternatively, is the distinction you’re making based on the fact that European colonial powers colonized non white countries around the world? If so, is this really different than an Arab power conquering and/or colonizing most of Spain? The end result is basically the same, too many people die or are exploited either way.
Re Morocco I just did a super cursory skim of their Wiki page and it seems that the following European powers took control of parts of the country at different times: Portugal, England, Spain & France. So yes, if they shockingly advance to the Semis they could theoretically knock out 3 of those 4 colonists. And I guess that context isn't completely lost on their supporters.