blackpool fc mark Giving England respect is all I've been trying to do. I agree with you that England is not the greatest team in the world. Except when I say it, Matt puts his cleats up and calls me a spaz, sinner Ron, calls me a joker, divingheader has me as brain damaged and usssouse questions my knowledge. All I've been trying to do is agree with all of you that England is not the greatest and that there are many others that are better. I'm glad we've got that settled. There were a few differences of opinion on which 10 odd teams were better, but that's no big deal. We can agree to disagree.
Oh no you don't. WHICH 10-odd teams are better? Prove us all wrong in our belief that you know even less about football than you do about going to the toilet by yourself.
Brazil, Argentina, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Netherlands, Turkey, Mexico, Czechs... This is just my opinion. No need for anyone to choke on a crumpet. I'm sure most of you will at least agree with 5-6 of those.
Mexico and Turkey. LOL! You really are an imbecile ... EDIT: Just spotted Germany too. Tee hee ... ! Give it up Wildman. Have some self-respect. Insofar as that is possible given your infamous NASL lies the last time I pulled you to pieces.
Re: blackpool fc mark Fixed your post. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=797535#post797535
It just does not seem possible to have a civil dialog around here. If your opinions differ from that of the moderator, (heaven forbid) the cleats and elbows start flying. Yellow card for you. I stated up front that were a few teams that you might disagree with, and 5-6 that you'd probably agree with. So we are only in disagreement with 3-4 teams. We have more common ground than you might think. Let's be civil.
You're a troll, Wildman. You chose to forgo the right to civility the moment you succumbed to the laughable delusion that you have what it takes to prosper as such a creature in this company. You made your bed.
Wildman you are indeed an imbecile. Give it up now to save yourself from further embarrassment. England are quite easily in the top six of world football. There are two things that stop as being up there with Brazil and Argentina, that is not enough depth in strikers and the lack of a left sided midfielder - although Gerrard filled in there superbly on Saturday. Some say we also lack a number 10 - but as a unit our central midfielders can match any in world football so we dont really need a Zidane type player. I mean Scholes would probably get in any team in the world so how can justify dropping him. Just give it up man
You can have three, Brazil, France for getting more points in euro qualifying and the Czechs for getting more points as well, the rest either got less points in qualifying, failed to automatically qualify for euro 2004, have been beaten recently (going to go for wc qualifying as recent) by England or in the case of Mexico have been beaten by minnows, like the USA, recently. (I'm only joking, honest. )
I've always tried to look at things objectively without regard for team or national sentiments. I'm sure that may come across as a little biting or perhaps a bit caustic, that that is not the intent. As I said, we probably have many more common football viewpoints than differing viewpoints. We both agree England have a terrifically talented national team, that would be the envy of 95% of the worlds 200 some odd nations. No disagreement there. England are among the elite. How can I make it any plainer that they have a great team? We are in agreement.
Circus Clown of a Troll Don't forget me, Alex_1, who accused and proved that you are a very poor troll - and will do so again at the end of this message. Okay. Then prove it. You gave a list of teams. Why are they better? Humor me. And that doesn't mean posting a picture of yourself on this message-board. Give specifics. Analyze their style of play. Give us real examples. ------------------ You are about to witness the collapse of the troll. It's sad, really. I believe that sometimes the most ignorant of trolls provide the best comical value. They slip and slide, getting a laugh at trying to wind you up. But Wildman still avoids the use of specifics, and when he did use them in the form of a ten team sample (most likely from the FIFA world Rankings as I stated before) of selections "better than England, he actually did himself in further. Here is the clincher - this troll does NOT have the ability to state a case as to why those teams are actually **better** than England - other than stating the obvious. Recent results will go unnoticed or un-recalled by this troll. You must then ask yourself "why is that?" The answer is obvious. He can't. He is to a football what helium is to a child's ballooon.
Wow. All of this happened before I could post my message. Oh well. The troll already collapsed. Good job!
Alex, it's not a simple as you say. You ask me to post why I think these other teams are better. Asking me to do that will only further raise the ire around here, which I stated was not my intent. There is no way to prove opinions, mine or yours. I was just looking for a little civil dialog. The World Cup does a great job at defining who the top 2-3 teams are, as you can not deny that Brazil, Argentina, Germany and Italy are usually contenders. However, it would not be correct to state that the USA is a top 8 team simply because they reached the final 8 in the WC. There will never be a 'nations' league of 20 teams where each nation battles it out for a home and away and play a 38 game season. That is the only way in my opinion to truly define the best. The rest is only opinion, that can not be proved one way or another.
Arf ... I believe that is known as a 'hasty retreat under heavy fire'. Dear me, eh Wildman? Not only are you a bad troll, but your a gutless bad troll.
Matt, I was not trying to be gutless. I was only trying to be sensitive to raising the blood pressure around here with reasons for my list of teams. However, if you insist on reasons, I shall provide them. Brazil-- They need to explanation. Case closed. France-- Almost the same as above. They are an EU football factory with their players in demand in leagues all over. Italy-- The Azzurri are always a difficult side. The are known for their defense, but their offenseis is very potent with guys like Vieri, Totti, Del Piero. Germany--Some how the Germans always seem to be in the final four. The German press always seems to attack the status of German football, but they are always contenders. Kudos also to the ladies. They are big and strong, and Ballack, just may be the most potent midfielder in the world. Netherlands; Van Nistlerooy, Makaay, Hasselbaink Kluivert, Davids, Stam,. This team is a cavelcade of stars. The Orange will shine again. Mexico--The top team in Concacaf is better than the 5-6 team in Europe (ie. England) To disagree is fine, and I'm sure some of you will decry this as idiotic. That is insulting the Mexicans and the Nats team. They have a fine team. It makes no difference that the US currently seems to have their number. I give Mexico a slight edge over England. I like their skill and creativity. Don't have time for the Turks, Argies, Spain and Czechs at the moment.
Wildman That does not explain anything. your opinion does not mean these teams are better, have you actually looked at the results of some of these countrys and who and how they have played in the last 2 years or so..ie mexico(lmao), germany, holland etc then compared them with Englands. It is evident u havent otherwise u wud not spout such patta. Englan hav only lost 1 competative match since Sven took over there IS a reason 100% of posters disagree with u, u know by the way how did u come to support such a selection of teams? i would like to hear this response
Hey Wildman, I did not say you were brain damaged. I said that everybody thought the Stork ws brain damaged. I was defending you. I said lets give you a chance. You have posted about ten times since then and have yet to tell me a Pele story. Your chance has come and gone. Did you just list Turkey as better than England? I know you are pressed for time, but please do explain that one. You mean just since saturday Turkey got better? Or do you mean just in the WC, cause they went farther? Or do you mean that lossing away 2-0 doesn't count? Or do you mean failing to beat a team under a media bombardment at home when they have zero fans in the stadium and are missing several top players doesn't count? PLease Please Please, I gotta know. What do you mean? Mexico? Do you watch TV with the sound off and randomly assign countries of origin to the teams that are playing? When I saw Chelsea beat Villa, did you see Mexico beating England or something? Brain Damaged is a bit harsh, but delusional I'll believe.
Dammit, once again you managed to overload my bullshit detector and knock it off line. Note to self and others: as a precautionary measure, turn off your bullshit detector when glancing at any thread in which Wildman has posted. It's not like you'll need to depend on it to sniff him out.
toonarmy, you are right these are my opinions. There is no way to prove them, as there is no way to prove that England is a top 5 team. The only way there will be proof is if the top 20 nations play a home and away with each other, but that is not going. So, the next best we have is the WC, EU Championships, Olympics etc. I arrive at these teams based on their play in various competitions, and the quality and depth of their individual players. I don't know what all the hullabaloo is all about. We are all in agreement that England have a fine time. We only differ on the number of teams.
It means that when I have seen the Turkish team play, they looked more threatening than the English team. I've seen Turkey play more than just in the WC, and likewise I have seen England play more than just in the WC. Likewise for the other nations. So my opinions are based on a fair amount of input.
Wildman it is massively obivious that the things you say are purely meant to squeeze out a reaction from other posters in this thread. The slow constent trickle of dog poo that pours from your mouth sure does get a reaction, but dont you ever wonder why, when we reply to your posts, we are quite frankly pi22ing are selfs laughing. If your posts had reason or any sort of logic to back them up you would surely recieve a pleasent post back to yourself debating on why we agree/disagree. The fact that you have not had a single person agree with you, and not only disagree with you but actually fall about laughing aswell, tells you only one thing......your an idiot. PS when are you gonna tell us about your escapades with the great pele and many others? Im sure them guys were a real great bunch of guys!