To me the big deal is that these are people getting paid to be experts and give expert opinion and analysis. If I want a wide-eyed, pie in the sky, fan's opinion I'll go to a bar. Other countries don't walk around saying (at least it's very rare) that they can beat any team in the world. It was thought that the players of Brazil were saying they can beat anyone and that they are the best team in the world (even though many would agree), when the coach was asked about this he said he wouldn't allow his players to make such a comment since there was so much work to be done. When Michael Ballack was asked about the German team he said they were too weak on defence to win it all. When the very best teams are asked (such as Italy) about how far there team ranks against the best the most you usually get out of them is, "We are among the top 4 or 5 teams, we'll go as far as we can.".....Then we here the Americans talk about how they can beat everyone. And it's not a "can" as in "I CAN win the lottery tomorrow" it is a "can" as an expected "can" and this is proven by their complete shock when they were smoked by the Czechs. They couldn't believe that it was possible. What do they expect? This is a team with 2 or 3 very good players and a bunch of average players. Wynalda even said the reason was the U.S's overconfidence!!! What game was he watching? The U.S. looked scarred stiff. Why in the world would they be overconfident in the first place. So in answer to your question, what's the big deal? The big deal is it is terrible broadcasting. I expect them to highlight the U.S. and be biased but come on be a little realistic. Let me exaggerate to make my point even further, when we had the so-called "World Series of baseball" and there was a so-called Italian team in there. How would you have reacted if you heard a bunch of Italians seriously making arguments about winning the championship? Now of course the CAN win the championship in the sense that it IS possible. But of course it's possible, that goes without saying. However, it's a ridiculous statement. That's how I feel about the kind of ridiculous statements that I hear from the broadcasters on ESPN.
Re: Official Italy vs U.S.A. PRE Match Thread [R] When are people going to learn that pure athleticism is worth squat in soccer without skills? And where do people get the idea that just because some guy is athletic and great in some other sport that they'll be great in soccer? Michael Jordan sucked at baseball. Ricky Williams played baseball from a young age and sucked at baseball. If Reggie Bush was told that his life depended on being good at soccer, he'd probably still suck at soccer and lose the ball as often as Beasley did against the Czechs. What is it with American soccer fans and their obsession with athleticism? I don't see fans of hockey going "man, the US would dominate hockey if Reggie Bush played hockey!"
Well, like I said the incompetence is indefensible. We really don't have any good soccer analysts, they're all former players or idiot studio guys. I almost wish we just got BBC coverage or something so I could hear more intelligent discussion of the tournament. I was never defending the incompetence of ESPN, just the fact that it's slanted toward the USA, which all countries do. At least Julie Foudy is ok to look at.
Re: Official Italy vs U.S.A. PRE Match Thread [R] That's valid, up to a point, but putting squad A out there with good athletes and putting squad B out with elite athletes of equal skill and B is going to crush them. How many times do we see a cross go just over someone's head? Or a ball get out of bounds just before someone reaches it? Those slight differences in athleticism add up. I understand we need to be more skilled as well, but the fact remains that right now our players just don't match up with the great teams from a physical stand point; the Czechs made us look like little kids out there.
It was also a ridiculous statement that Cuba would win the Baseball World Cup. They came very close. Cuba has a population the size of a peanut compared to the rest of the countries and their players are pro only in the sense that they get paid something. Look at what Korea did. They beat the US. In baseball!!! Baseball is a bad sport to compare in a short tournament becuase there's so much luck involved but still... You're right though in a sense. US beating Italy in soccer in the WC would be like the Koreans beating the US in Baseball. Korea had a solid team but nowhere near the talent and experience of the US team. Ditto our current situation. What I would like to know is if we beat Italy on Saturday does that automatically make us a good team. I don't think it's fair that when we lose it's because we suck and are terrible and we shouldn't even be at the WC. (it's a World Cup not a European championship!) But when we win it's because we got lucky, they took us lightly, the refs, it was too hot, we didn't do it in the 30's, the new ball, etc...Can I get a promise that if we win or draw there will be no excuses and you'll give us credit? That's why it's kind of unfair to judge us on one game. Let the games play out then we'll see. Blue
So if we win it will be because of luck and a lackluster effort from the Italians? Nice to cover your backs before the game even starts. How about we play spirited and tactically disciplined and the Italians try their best and they still lose? It could never happen that way right? This is what I'm talking about arrogance. Sometimes "inferior" teams just play better. I can already see the excuses, just like last WC. The US probably won't win, but if they do it will be because they played better than the Italians. No excuses!!!
Thank you for replying, I respect your opinion more now. As for the friendlies, the US are in a similar situation cause the majority of their players are playing in Europe and don't come out just as well. As for the weighted scores by region, the paragraph I quoted lead me to believe that it was on a team by team basis and not just region. I agree with you about tradition and experience, but I just don't believe that really means a whole lot when you have two current teams and their performances. Basically when it comes down to it I am just really sick of people not respecting the US in soccer and I'm ready for the US to shut everybody up on Saturday, but if it doesn't happen then it's back to the road.
Dude I speak Spanish and be happy you don't know the language. They suck balls big time. Ther's one good pairing and thats the one that did Spain's game. I can't qute place his accent, although he says his Z's like a spaniard, th sound. The other ones call for goal is vomit inducing, Golaso, aso, aso, aso, ...Eh??? I want to smash the TV with a brick when I hear that shit! They don't know jack about soccer either. Although Mr. Cantor was too much of a Mexico homer he was light years ahead of these clowns. In Miami you can hear him on 1260 AM on the radio which is what I do during the games now. As for the Americans guys, I can only stand the British dude and his pal, the other guys are terrible. Although John Harkes is not that bad actually , but his partner is a fool. Too bad about Dave Obrien as he has a great voice but knows so little about soccer. Blue
Obviously you need an example. T&T played with a spirited effort and was tactically disciplined. England had a lackluster effort. (explanation for spazzos: they did try their best, but it wasn't their best day. OK?) T&T was quite lucky. And infact... oh, right, T&T still lost... but anyway, that would have been the setup for an upset and that is what USNT can hope for. You may not like it, but it is the way it is.
Re: Official Italy vs U.S.A. PRE Match Thread [R] Going a little off topic, but following the thread. I coach and train Youth teams, I live around Youth soccer... NONE... NONE of the kids ever TOUCHES a ball except at practice or at games. You do not play, you practice... that intangible difference that makes a great basketball player emerge from the playground will never apply to soccer in the US, because the kids do not PLAY the game.
This is what I find reprehensible and condescending. We are not T&T, get it? We would not be throwing a party and jumping up and down with joy if we tied Sweden! We are beyond that. We want to win and advance not play for pride. Now I know most Europeans think only 5 teams really have a shot to actually win but I can never bring myself to think in such a self-defeating way. I played baseball in highschool and in our district we had the #2 ranked team in the whole country. The name of their school was Southridge High. My team had never made the playoffs and we had no chance to beat them but I never thought we couldn't beat them. I felt if we played our game and tried our best we could beat anyone. I had 3 hits ( 2 doubles) stopped a ball with my face that required stitches and we lost 11-1. I still think we can beat them if we had another chance. You guys who think like this are obviously a bunch of cowards and have never played sports. I'm not a nationalist or anything but I believe in my team. One ********ing loss isn't going to send me to my white hanky and pink tutu. These guys are Americans I expect them to act like one. Yes that means growing a pair when the chips are down. All you American fans buying into this defeatist attitude miss the whole point of sports and competition. Even if we lose you'll feel better about yourself that you are a true fan. So what if you get disappointed and are heartbroken. What? You're only going to believe in them when they are great? Thats called jumping on the bandwagon. (cowardly) Go all in now for better or for worse. Even if its worse at least you were a supporter. (which is a win whatever the result) If we are not good enough this WC I can accept that, but that has not been proven yet! Believe! Blue
team usa will collapse in this wc. they have no chance to win any matches in the group. only thing they can prove is that fifa ranking is a pure joke.
picked this up from another forum: Against Ghana italy comitted the least fouls in the competition with 8 fouls. so if any of you u.s. fans think italy will play dirty, think again.
Last I checked the US-Italy game is on Saturday. The only way they would have no chance is if they're down 4-0 with five minutes to play. Let's let the players decide this on the pitch.
Absolutely if your team wins, you will get credit, but also we have to look at the circumstances, if an Italian player is red carded at the beginning of the match, and we have to play 10 against 11 the whole game and then you get a penalty at the 90th minute... and win that way, well you will not get credit. If both team play well and you win, then you will get the credit. fact is, if Italy plays it's best soccer and the US plays its best soccer, Italy will win.
Well, the human factor isn't something one needs to be "privy" to to understand. It isn't some speakeasy whose location is only available to the in crowd. It's not something that takes over a team or person, Linda Blair-style. It's just common sense. When something looks like it will be very easy to accomplish, it's human nature to take the conclusion for granted. Ideally, nothing should be taken for granted... but we know that's not real life. Italy is taking this result for granted, no matter what you or anybody tries to say otherwise, it doesn't change that certainty...
But the ref was dreadful. He called very little, including several horribly dangerous challenges. Those were mostly by Ghana's players; but the totals are in part that ref's whistle-swallowing issue.
Damn, this is do or die for the nats. This weekend were gonna have some REAL good match ups, seems like groups c,d,e got the best matches. Starting out with serbia vs arg, holl vs ivcoast, Mex vs ang, then saturday with some more sweet matches. My team is mexico , but i hope the nats can do some damage to italia, shit would be sweet. just dont start talkin smack like. OOH WEE BEAT ITALY, WE OWN THE WORLD AND ARE BETTER THAN MEX. just be cool ya dig. ;D go nizuts.
I liked the ref decisions about fouls. The total time of effective play was over 54 minutes. In Italy where refs calls for a media of 60+ fouls a match the effective time of play is around 45-46 considering also the injury time which is usually 2 minutes after first half and 5 minutes after second half. If the refs call for less fouls ( don't calling all the real dubious ones ) we'll have less cheating in the game. If Simon had began the match by calling more fouls, our players, and the ghanese too, would have certainly tried to cheat him, they ( as the most in other countries ) use to "adjust" to the referee. In Swe-Par I didn't like the start of the referee. He called too many fouls and so we've seen much more cheating ( mostly from the paraguayans but the swedes would have done the same if it was their team the underdog trying to get a 0-0 ) durin the game, all of them were non relevant for the outcome of the match, but still were cheating. I hope the refs in this WC keep calling just for the real violent and anti-sportive ones, condoning the careless unless they don't provide a clear advantage to the team which commits them.
The real violent ones didn't get called either. One of your players is darn lucky not to have a ruptured achilles tendon now, ending his world cup and putting him out for 10-12 months. And I think you're too cynical about how players react to fouls being called. They're more likely to behave like dogs. Reward behavior you want. If you reward fouls with non-calls, you get the horribly dangerous fouls you had in that game.
Why does it always have to be about size with the Americans? Is size the same thing as athletic ability? and there are different kinds of athletic ability. I saw the videos and seriously it's not tha impressive, it's great compared to the robots who are trying to catch him... but I bet you that he himself would not be able to catch the likes of Ronaldinho even if he has a faster straight line speed. I used to run the 100meters in college, and have a best of 10.85s in the 100, which would rank me amongst the fastest soccer players, but there was a guy who was slower then me, he would only run 11.5 in the 100, but he was lighter and more nimble, and it was funny but I could not catch the guy if he was running away from me, he'd change direction so quickly it's not even funny, every time I'd get close to catch him, he would change direction and gain a couple strides on me. Still I could jump further then him and higher too. Well this is the case, the running that's needed for Football is more similar to the 100 meter track event, with high knees, long strides, but the running that's needed in soccer is different, short fast strides, as to be able to change direction at any given time, and ball skill. Ball skill is so important in soccer that all the best players have been playing since age 4 or 5, every single day, for fun, at parties, after church, they'd be always kicking a ball or in poorer countries, something that looks like a ball, maybe made with paper and tape, or maybe an orange, or something like that. Why are brasilians so good with the ball? because when they were kids they had nothing to do , and only played soccer serveral hours a day, with nothing else to do.... the tipical brazilian is also very good with the ball, I'd say you could find brazilian kids who play in the streets with way more ball control than the present US team players, it's a fact. Go look at it yourselves if you don't believe me. It's the system that won't allow the US to become a serious factor is world soccer. If you want to start playing seriously at age 14, forget it, it's too late. you can learn sports that need your hands at that age, because using your hands is natural, but your feet? That needs the kind of skill that you can only gain by playing soccer every day since you are 5 y.o. The Italian pool is very big because of the system, it's by far the most popular sport, and every single male has played a bit since their childhood. There are soccer clinics where parents send their kids since young age. At these clinics, they find out who has the talent, and then allow these kids with talent to be part of programs where they are coached every day, and followed by teachers. Where soccer is the most important thing and then academics. So, Italy has 60 million people crammed up in a small area a little bit bigger then Florida, but a huge pool of young talents. That's one of the reasons, why the US should not win on Saturday.
There was no injury. There was just one violent foul ( the one on Iaquinta ). If the players react like you say to fouls not being called, the ref has to sanction them ( yellow card ). I will always prefer the old game, when in our league there was hard playing but less violence and less cheating. 'till the end of the 80's when player begin to become financial assets rather then just players we had a couple of yellow card for match, but there were more hard ( but not coward ) tackles. In most of the championship nowadays you can't see a real sliding tackle beacuse they get called as fouls, no matter if the defending player clearly GET THE BALL BEFORE TOUCHING THE ATTACKING PLAYER. I wonder if young football fans know what is a sliding tackle... once you had masters of this, the last one in my mind is Maldini but he stopped doing sliding tackles as the refs were told to sanction them anyhow. We should go back to the roots, in too many leagues football is becoming a larger version of Futsal.