# EN World World Cup blog



## johnsemlak (Jun 4, 2006)

Can't believe a thread hasn't started on this yet.  Less than 5 days till the world's biggest sporting event starts.  I just bought a new HD-ready tv in time fore it (not sure if I'll have HD broadcasts here but I"m hoping).  So as not to miss matches I'm dusting off my recently unused VCR. (Ironically, I specifically bought it 4 years ago for the 2002 world cup to record matches, and this may be the last time I use it, as I'll certainly have somehthing more modern next time around.)

Any predictions?  Can anyone beat Brazil? (I certainly think it's very possible, but I'm a bit stumped as to who will do it).


----------



## Chainsaw Mage (Jun 4, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Can't believe a thread hasn't started on this yet.  Less than 5 days till the world's biggest sporting event starts.




What?!!?!? Dude, the Superbowl ain't 'till January.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 4, 2006)

Venezuela's going all the way!

Wait, we didn't qualify. Dang.

Brazil is definitely beatable. Argentia, I believe, at a 1-1 record against them during qualifiers. And Argentina isn't quite #2 in the world, so Brazil is definitely beatable. They're good, but I think they've been on the decline since 98.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 4, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Venezuela's going all the way!
> 
> Wait, we didn't qualify. Dang.
> 
> Brazil is definitely beatable. Argentia, I believe, at a 1-1 record against them during qualifiers. And Argentina isn't quite #2 in the world, so Brazil is definitely beatable. They're good, but I think they've been on the decline since 98.




Plus there's the frequently-mentioned issue that the tourney's in Europe this time and a European team as won every WC in Europe except in '58.  That should give some hope to the strong European teams, which now probably include Italy, Holland, England, and the Czech Rep. (IMHO in that order).

Personally, I'm hoping that a team outside of Europe breaks this trend but we'll see.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 4, 2006)

Wow, I'm a big Italy fan, but you're ranking Italy _very_ favorably.


----------



## MavrickWeirdo (Jun 4, 2006)

My company was recently bought by Phillips, which is located in Holland.

They set up a Magnavox big screen TV in the cafe, which will show a live streaming internet feed of all of Holland's games (None of the american cable companies had the full coverage they wanted.)


----------



## BOZ (Jun 5, 2006)

it's because the board is mostly american, and americans are generally culturally stunted when it comes to affairs of the world in general.  

i remember when the world cup was hosted in Chicago about 10 years ago, and most of us were like, "Great!  What's the world cup?"


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 5, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> it's because the board is mostly american, and americans are generally culturally stunted when it comes to affairs of the world in general.
> 
> i remember when the world cup was hosted in Chicago about 10 years ago, and most of us were like, "Great!  What's the world cup?"



Well, the MLS started, I think, in 97. Soccer is a foreign concept to many.


----------



## MonsterMash (Jun 5, 2006)

Of course I have to say ENGLAND, but then after that the more likely candidates to win are Germany (home advantage + Germany always do well), Brazil (outstanding attacking team), France and Argentina. Dark horses Italy, Spain.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 5, 2006)

While everyone's expecting a genius-level performance by Ronaldinho Gaúcho, the one player to keep an eye on is actually Kaká. He's outperformed every other brazilian player during the initial training (even 'warhorse' Cafú, his Milan teammate), and has been the maestro of the team lately.

Also, if you can believe it, Brazil is starting to play better with the reserves Robinho (from Real Madrid) and Juninho Pernambucano (from Olympique de Lyon) than with main players like Ronaldo (still not at 100%) or the laterals (Cafú and Roberto Carlos).

It is a general consensus that the current generation of players is the best since the art-soccer dream team of 1982. But Brazil has never won a Cup when it's considered favorite.

If I have to point at any teams to be runner-ups (  ), I'd point to Portugal (with 2002's champion coach Felipe Scolari) and Japan (Japan almost defeated Germany, in Germany, two weeks ago; coached by soccer living legend Zico).


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Jun 5, 2006)

I can't even begin to speak intelligently about World Cup teams, but I am looking forward to the start of the matches.  I just hope that there is some opportunity here in the US to see matches between teams other than the US.


----------



## MavrickWeirdo (Jun 5, 2006)

Check out websites of team sponsers


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 5, 2006)

MavrickWeirdo said:
			
		

> My company was recently bought by Phillips, which is located in Holland.
> 
> They set up a Magnavox big screen TV in the cafe,




Funny they didn't buy a *Philips TV*.  I, on the other hand, started this thread just after buying a brand new Philips tv.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 5, 2006)

I'll watch this World Cup with interest, but I'm really just waiting for the 2010. By then, Venezuela should qualify (currently the only South American team to have never qualified, I believe...) and Freddy Adu will hopefully be on the US team.

I can't wait to see Freddy Adu when he's in his prime! The soccer world is going to rock.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 5, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Wow, I'm a big Italy fan, but you're ranking Italy _very_ favorably.




Hmm, maybe, I actually don't follow Italy or Serie A carefully, but from what I read, they've got  possibly the tourney's best goalkeeper, a solid defence as usual, and an array of established strikers all playing for big name clubs.

They thumped Germany 4-1 IIRC in one of the more impressive results in WC warm up matches.

There are other good European teams for sure.  But nearly all have glaring weaknesses.  Plus, I haven't read of any injury probelms on the Italian side (EDIT--wrong,here's some news on a key injury) while there''ve been probelms affecting players like Rooney, Owen, Jan Koeller (who's apparenlty healthy now but the Czechs also have other injury problems not to mention an aging team).

Now, I"m not taking into account the possble effect of the football scandals going on in Italy right now.  My gut instinct is to assume they won't affect things much, but who knows.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 5, 2006)

MonsterMash said:
			
		

> Of course I have to say ENGLAND, but then after that the more likely candidates to win are Germany (home advantage + Germany always do well), Brazil (outstanding attacking team), France and Argentina. Dark horses Italy, Spain.




I certainly think England have their best chance in years.  Certainly, defence is much more solid than in '02, the midfield perhaps hte best in the WC on paper--with Gerrard in particularly good form as displayed in the FA Cup.  The obvious problems are the injuries up front.  Dunno, any chance Rooney can actually have an impact in this WC?  

Who's England's keeper?


----------



## Chainsaw Mage (Jun 5, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Funny they didn't buy a *Philips TV*.  I, on the other hand, started this thread just after buying a brand new Philips tv.




Isn't Philips and Magnavox the same thing?


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 5, 2006)

Chainsaw Mage said:
			
		

> Isn't Philips and Magnavox the same thing?




Hmm, apparently so.. I guess that explains that.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 6, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Hmm, maybe, I actually don't follow Italy or Serie A carefully, but from what I read, they've got  possibly the tourney's best goalkeeper, a solid defence as usual, and an array of established strikers all playing for big name clubs.
> 
> They thumped Germany 4-1 IIRC in one of the more impressive results in WC warm up matches.



Wow. I always thought Germany's Kahn was the best goalkeeper, but maybe I just haven't been keeping up.


----------



## Sidekick (Jun 6, 2006)

Time for Ben to chip in his 2cp   

I'm predicting England, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Brazil and France to make it to the quarterfinals.

beyond that its down to the draw and who turns up on the day to play their heart out.

My girlfriend has predicted a France v Brazil final or as she puts it - Henry v Ronaldiniho  

England have a good chance at it. but the 'rooney' thing has been far too damaging if you ask me. Having the coach effectively say the 'we're not good enough without Rooney so we'll take even if he is on crutches - just in case' isn't particularly good for morale.

I ond't hink he'll play at all, or if he does then boy will get himself a career wrecking injury. He's only 20 he's got 3 more WCs in him. He should stay home!

Oh and the England keeper is Paul Robinson - he plays for Tottenham and is quite good actually.


oh and Jdvn1 - Kahn is no longer the 1st choice keeper for Germany - its Jens Leehman (GOOO JENS). Kahn's been too busy playing ego games and drinking until all hours of the morning with his 20-yo girlfriend (or so my german flatmate tells me). Jens will do them proud I'm sure (he's incredible for Arsenal).


I'm soolooking forward to it - I've got about 5 teams that I'll be supporting (NZ didn't make it surprise surprise) and none of them is my home nation so there's not as much emotional investment in it - I just get to watch great football for 4 weeks.

SWEET


----------



## jonesy (Jun 6, 2006)

And once again we failed to qualify. Did get pretty close this time though, so maybe next World Cup. One can always hope.  :\

I'm going to root for England and Spain just like always. And I wish Japan all the luck in the world, 'cause oh boy are they going to need it in their group or what.


----------



## jester47 (Jun 6, 2006)

If you are in Seattle:

http://www.georgeanddragonpub.com/football.html


----------



## Klaus (Jun 6, 2006)

jonesy said:
			
		

> And once again we failed to qualify. Did get pretty close this time though, so maybe next World Cup. One can always hope.  :\
> 
> I'm going to root for England and Spain just like always. And I wish Japan all the luck in the world, 'cause oh boy are they going to need it in their group or what.



 Japan is the second-best team in that group. I fully expect Brazil to qualify in 1st and Japan in 2nd. Croatia will have a rough time beating Japan to the punch, and Australia is just the sparring of the group.

I'm rooting for Brazil (duh), Japan and all the African countries, specially Angola.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 6, 2006)

Sidekick said:
			
		

> oh and Jdvn1 - Kahn is no longer the 1st choice keeper for Germany - its Jens Leehman (GOOO JENS). Kahn's been too busy playing ego games and drinking until all hours of the morning with his 20-yo girlfriend (or so my german flatmate tells me). Jens will do them proud I'm sure (he's incredible for Arsenal).



Wow. I heard something like that a year ago and read an article where Kahn was complaining about crazy gossip.  Weird.


----------



## MavrickWeirdo (Jun 7, 2006)

nevermind


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 7, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Japan is the second-best team in that group. I fully expect Brazil to qualify in 1st and Japan in 2nd. Croatia will have a rough time beating Japan to the punch, and Australia is just the sparring of the group.
> 
> I'm rooting for Brazil (duh), Japan and all the African countries, specially Angola.




I think you're being a bit rough on Australia and Croatia, but we'll see.  That group will have an interesting battle for second.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 7, 2006)

Well, remember that Australia is, technically, on roughly the same level as the 5th-best South American team. They might be good, but they likely won't go _too_ far.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 7, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> I think you're being a bit rough on Australia and Croatia, but we'll see.  That group will have an interesting battle for second.



 Japan almost defeated Germany not a month ago, in Germany (but yielded a 2-2 tie). Zico has turned Japan into a very dangerous opponent (it also tied with Brazil last year in the Confederations Cup, and that Brazil team has 9 of the 11 main players of the current team). Nakamura has been 'eating the ball' (i.e., playing very well) lately.

Croatia, OTOH, fared poorly on the matches prior to the Cup (and just lost to Spain 2-1). Australia defeating Uruguay to go to the Cup reflects badly on Uruguay more than it reflects well on Australia.

Unless a couple of zebras occur (zebra is the brazilian slang for unexpected match results), Brazil and Japan should qualify as 1st and 2nd in that group.

Here's a fun thing to do before the Cup starts: share the football slang from your countries, preferably translated in the most literal way! I'll start:

- Snake: a really good player;
- Earthworm: a young player that just might grow into a snake;
- Practice Lion: a player that is very energic and aggressive during practice matches, but is useless in a real match.

Your turn!


----------



## Sidekick (Jun 8, 2006)

I'll be supporting Australia in that group.

Brazil don't NEED my support (although I will be cheering them on in the knockouts - you can't deny true class).

And to be honest, Aussie need all the support they can get - to me that's the pool of death.

oh, and this is the only opportunity I'm going to get to support Australia in sports without being called a 'tratior' or 'turn-pike' - lets just home the folks back in NZ don't find out...


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 8, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Japan almost defeated Germany not a month ago, in Germany (but yielded a 2-2 tie). Zico has turned Japan into a very dangerous opponent (it also tied with Brazil last year in the Confederations Cup, and that Brazil team has 9 of the 11 main players of the current team). Nakamura has been 'eating the ball' (i.e., playing very well) lately.
> 
> Croatia, OTOH, fared poorly on the matches prior to the Cup (and just lost to Spain 2-1). Australia defeating Uruguay to go to the Cup reflects badly on Uruguay more than it reflects well on Australia.
> 
> ...




Well, those are some interesting results, but friendlies (and unfortunately the Confederations Cup is practically a friendly, as it's hardly a big tournament) are unfortunatley not reliable indicators.  As for Zebra's, the bookies I've consulted seem to think any victory for Japan would be a significant if not major upset.  Asian teams, except when the WC was hosted in Asia, have rarely won any games at all in the WC.

Still, anthing can happen...


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 8, 2006)

Russian Football Slang

Actually, though I've lived here for 10+ years my Russian slang is horrible--hopefully an actualy Russian will help out.  (as for my native English, I'm sure some others can provide that).

Russians call a penalty an '11-meter shot'

So far that's all I can think of.  Maybe more will come to mind as I listen to Russian commentary.


----------



## jonesy (Jun 9, 2006)

Some football slang:

Aavistus = _Prediction_: sarcastic way of saying the goalie headed for the wrong corner in a penalty kick
Filmaus = _Filming a movie_: when a player fakes an injury
Fuskaa = _Cheats_: used when someone plays on the border of the rules
Hassuttaa = _Fools/makes fun of_: when someone goes through the defence in a creative way
Ihmeparantuminen = _Miracle healing_: when a player quickly gets up after being carried off the field
Kanuuna/tykki = _Cannon_: a really powerful shot
Kolmas kerros = _Third floor_: when the ball goes way over the goal in a penalty shoot
Kolmiopeli = _Triangle game_: three players slicing through the opponents defence with quick passes
Korkki = _Cork_: a corner kick that you are awarded after an opposing defender loses the ball
Kuoletus = _Killing_: when you calmly and softly take control of a kanuuna that came at you
Kyttäyspeli = _Staring game_: when all you do is defend and wait for the opponent to make a mistake
Liimanäppi = _Gluefinger_: a goalie who doesn't lose control of ball
Nosto = _Lift_: when you aim the ball in an arc towards your players near the goal
Osoitteeton laukaus = _A shot without an address_: when a shot misses absolutely everything
Maalinsylkijä = _Goalspitter_: player who makes a lot of goals
Viikate = _Scythe_: doing a slide with the intention of reaching the ball and instead taking down an opposing player
Yhden kosketuksen peli = _One touch game_: immediate passes without anyone holding the ball for more than a second


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Jun 12, 2006)

Can somebody help me out in understanding something?  If I go to the FIFA schedule, for game already played, they post the score in the Time/Score column.  Usually there are two sets of numbers there.  The first is obviously the score.  What is the second set in parentheses?  For example for the opening match between Germany and Costa Rica, it reads 4:2 (2:1).  Today's match between Australia and Japan says 3:1(0:1)


----------



## Spud (Jun 12, 2006)

The score in brackets is the half time score.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Jun 12, 2006)

I figured it was something simple like that, but could not figure it out.  Thanks.


----------



## delericho (Jun 12, 2006)

Well, Scotland didn't make it. Again 

It seems most Scots have adopted Trinidad & Tobago as our team of choice, which pretty much guarantees they'll be eliminated on goal difference. Personally, I expect Brazil or Germany to win it. I don't rate England's chances, as they are reasonably good in defence, but rather lacking up front.


----------



## jonesy (Jun 12, 2006)

And sadly it seems I was right. Japan is in trouble. As the situation stands I fear it's going to be a three game tournament for them.  :\


----------



## Imruphel (Jun 12, 2006)

While some may say I'm biased being an Aussie and all (although as I have been assimilated by the Singaporg Collective my origin may not be apparent) but Australia is a bit of a dark horse and tonight's game proves it.

Don't forget we beat Greece a couple of weeks ago and sent several Dutchies to hospital in the recent friendly. And, frankly, we've got an outstanding coach who is the essential difference between Oz now and Oz of the past 32 years.

Anyway, once our dream is over I'll go back to barracking for France and England but, sadly, I don't think England has it in them. So, Allez le Blue!


----------



## Crothian (Jun 12, 2006)

USA is getting their ass kicked


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Jun 12, 2006)

On the slightly more positive side for USA, earlier the Czechs had two shots on goal and two goals.  Now they have 5 shots on goal, but only 3 goals - we _can_ stop shots!  :\


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 12, 2006)

Ugh, that was truely embarressing.  I think the Czechs are a great team, and one that might actually win the tourney, and I'm hoping that they showed it today.


----------



## dagger (Jun 12, 2006)

Losing hurts, but by 3 goals makes it nearly impossible to get out of the 2nd round..


Come on NFL and College football!!!


----------



## jonesy (Jun 12, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Ugh, that was truely embarressing.  I think the Czechs are a great team, and one that might actually win the tourney, and I'm hoping that they showed it today.



The single complaint about them is that they got way too many pointless yellows. If they get rid of that, then they'll be medal contenders (or should that be trophy contenders).


----------



## TheNovaLord (Jun 12, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Japan is the second-best team in that group. I fully expect Brazil to qualify in 1st and Japan in 2nd. Croatia will have a rough time beating Japan to the punch, and Australia is just the sparring of the group.




Oopsie on the prediction!!!


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Jun 12, 2006)

dagger said:
			
		

> Losing hurts, but by 3 goals makes it nearly impossible to get out of the 2nd round..
> 
> 
> Come on NFL and College football!!!



 Don't give up.  We can still be Sam Lowry to Brazil. 

"All I can say is don't fall at the last fence.  The finishing post's in sight.  See you in the paddock...keep your eye on the ball."


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 12, 2006)

jonesy said:
			
		

> The single complaint about them is that they got way too many pointless yellows. If they get rid of that, then they'll be medal contenders (or should that be trophy contenders).




Yeah, 4 yellows, looking at the match report.  Could haunt them later.


----------



## Capellan (Jun 12, 2006)

I'm thrilled with the Australian result today (it's three goals and three points more than I feared we'd get, and after only one match, too).  The Socceroos are definitely in a whole 'nother class since Hiddink took over.  Of course, Farina (the last guy) was a joke of a coach, so they could hardly have got worse ...

I'll be attending the Brazil vs Croatia match tomorrow night.  Should be a corker.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 12, 2006)

TheNovaLord said:
			
		

> Oopsie on the prediction!!!



 Them's the breaks, eh?  Japan totally handed over the match on the second half. Them samurais don't seem to have legs for the distance.

The best teams so far have been Argentina, Czech Republic and Italy. All other matches were atrocious to watch.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jun 13, 2006)

As an Australian, I have mixed feelings about our sudden victory.
Yes, we finally won a World Cup match - OK, yes, we finally scored a World Cup goal, that's fine, OK, now SHUT UP. Australia are such bad winners when it comes to sport, and now it's going to be "in your face" type behaviour from the media for the next ten or eleven years. We'll DEMAND admittance to South Africa 2010 sinply for winning a match. Basically, we haven't won anything. We still have to beat Brazil and Croatia. We MIGHT be able to squeeze a narrow win or a draw out of the Croats, but Brazil will plough through the Socceroos like corn stalks, so at most we'll get six points, enough to go to the second round, in which we'll probably have to play Italy, who will again act as a sort of eleven-man combine harvester. So it's not really much of a victory, though I'm happy we finally did it. I just wish we'd stop crowing about it already.

I'm also pleased the United States lost to the Czech Republic. I think it's nice that there's one sport the Americans aren't that good at. No offence, Americans...oh, well, yeah, offence. Who cares? I'm 5,000 miles away and we won last night and you didn't!


----------



## jonesy (Jun 13, 2006)

STARP_Social_Officer said:
			
		

> ...we'll probably have to play Italy, who will again act as a sort of eleven-man combine harvester...



Oh great. Now I have an image stuck in my head of the entire Azzurri on a combine harvester chasing Cary Grant with an australian accent through a corn field.


----------



## Ruavel (Jun 13, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Japan totally handed over the match on the second half.



Actually I'm pretty confident we pretty much dominated that match from the 1st minute.  Don't let the 1-0 half-time score fool you. The Japanese defense was under pretty constant pressure throughout the match (12 shots on goal to Japan's 2). The goals were (as I see it) a matter of time, though I would have felt much better if they'd come sooner rather than later.

Lucky for us Japan played the game Guus had predicted (Defend-Fast Counter) cos it's really the only one they've got. He trained the Socceroos fairly heavily to be ready for it.  Tonight's game between Brazil & Croatia will be viewed with great interest.    



			
				Capellan said:
			
		

> The Socceroos are definitely in a whole 'nother class since Hiddink took over.



Aren't they just. We looked like a world class team last night.  Let's see if we can do it again in either of our other group matches.



			
				STARP_Social_Officer said:
			
		

> I just wish we'd stop crowing about it already.



Already...?  We only won the game last night/yesterday...!    
Trinidad & Tobago are still celebrating, and they only drew their match...


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 13, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Them's the breaks, eh?  Japan totally handed over the match on the second half. Them samurais don't seem to have legs for the distance.



I agree, but I also think the US did the same thing. Their offenses were just gone. The US, especially, has to take more shots from outside the box.

Both those games disappointed me. I expected Japan and Czech Republic to win, but I at least expected a better fight from the Americans.


			
				Klaus said:
			
		

> The best teams so far have been Argentina, Czech Republic and Italy. All other matches were atrocious to watch.



Agreed. I hope to see those three times in the final four, with either Germany or US as the fourth.

I must be one of the few guys on the planet that thinks Brazil's not going to be in the final match.


----------



## MonsterMash (Jun 13, 2006)

Well a lot of results so far have gone as expected though I was seriously wrong about Ecuador, and I think Trindad & Tobago will regard a draw against Sweden as a very good result. 

In the games coming up today we have 
South Korea : Togo - my prediction 2:1
France : Switzerland - prediction 2:0
Brazil : Croatia - prediction 2:1

and tomorrow the start of the second set of group games with Germany v Poland


----------



## jonesy (Jun 13, 2006)

I'm going to go wacky and predict:
South Korea 1 - Togo 1
France 1 - Switzerland 2
Brazil 2 - Croatia 3



			
				Ruavel said:
			
		

> Don't let the 1-0 half-time score fool you.



And the judge himself apologized for allowing it because the goalie got knocked down by the japanese players.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 13, 2006)

Wow, surprise from the France game.

Though, you guys don't give Brazilian defense enough credit.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 13, 2006)

Wow.

Just wow.

What a half-assed game Brazil played. Ronaldo was practically dragging his fat butt throughout the field (and even then, not too far), barely playing and taking up the spot where Adriano would usually occupy (which kept Adriano from playing well). When the breathless Ronaldo was replaced by Robinho (a much younger, lighter and sprier player), Adriano moved up to take Ronaldo's place, and the team gained much more speed. Even then, the day was saved purely by the grace of Kaká's magical kick and Dida's wonderful defenses. Final score 1-0 for Brazil.

This team has a long way to go if it truly wishes to be champions...


----------



## Asmo (Jun 14, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Wow.
> 
> Just wow.
> 
> ...




...and still it was the best game in the World Cup, imho. (says a lot about the World Cup so far, I guess)

Asmo


----------



## jonesy (Jun 14, 2006)

I rather liked the Czech - USA game actually. The only thing missing was goals from both teams and it would have been quite exciting.



			
				Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Wow, surprise from the France game.



Oh I don't know about that. They don't have that different a team from last time, and they're doing pretty much like they did then.


----------



## MonsterMash (Jun 14, 2006)

Well I got one right then (South Korea -Togo).

Time for todays predictions:
Spain   1 : 1 Ukraine
Tunisia 2 : 1 Saudi Arabia
Germany 3 : 1 Poland


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 14, 2006)

jonesy said:


> Oh I don't know about that. They don't have that different a team from last time, and they're doing pretty much like they did then.



My dad and I were joking that the Swiss was just trying to stay neutral, so they were going for a tie.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 14, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Final score 1-0 for Brazil.
> 
> This team has a long way to go if it truly wishes to be champions...



I don't think they're going to get it this year anyway. Didn't they lose and draw against Argentina in the qualifiers? I think Brazil's weaker than everyone else thinks.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 14, 2006)

jonesy said:
			
		

> I rather liked the Czech - USA game actually. The only thing missing was goals from both teams and it would have been quite exciting.




Had Reyna's shot off the post went in I think we would have and an exciting match (probably ending 3-1 but more attractive).


So far the early matches (those starting at 3 pm in germany--and in 30 C weather) are producing some bizzare results and play.  In the England-Paraguay match, the England looked especially tired in the 2nd half.  In the Aus-Japan game players were very tired towards the end and played a bit ugly.  Spain simply romped Ukraine 4-0.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 14, 2006)

*RE Brazil*

Brazil started slow in 2002 too with several tight victories (Belgium came precariously close to knocking them off in the 1/16 round IIRC).  They're a team that certainly can raise their game.  I'd say they're still the favorite (even though I htink they'll get beat eventually, if that makes any sense) in the way that Pete Sampras was always a favorite to win even against players who were hotter at the time--he was just higher class. Still, evey once in a while someone like Philipoussis got the right game going at the right time and maybe a little luck and pulled it off.

I think a key issue for Brazil now is their coach--he has to have the balls to make the right decisions now--first and foremost to probably bench Ronaldo.  Scolori wasn't afraid of those choices but I don't know about the current manager.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 14, 2006)

Parreira is, in political lingo, 'frying' Ronaldo. He is giving Ronaldo the next two games to show that he actually WANTS to play better (backstage talk says he's not showing much effort right now). That serves two purposes: lets Ronaldo get match time (to improve his physical and emotional conditions) and lets Ronaldo bench himself. If he proceeds playing like this, the coach will have the fans support to bench him and put Robinho in his stead, moving Ronaldinho Gaúcho further ahead and closer to Adriano.

Parreira is a very cautious and conscious coach. He coached Brazil in 1994. His technical assitant, Zagallo, played for Brazil in 1958 and 1962, and coached Brazil in 1970 and 1998.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 14, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> I don't think they're going to get it this year anyway. Didn't they lose and draw against Argentina in the qualifiers? I think Brazil's weaker than everyone else thinks.



 Sorry, that's one loss, one win, with Argentina winning the more recent of the two games 3-1.


----------



## threshel (Jun 14, 2006)

Rant warning!

I love football/soccer/whatever you call that game where you can't touch the ball with your hands.  I learned to play while my Dad was stationed in Germany, and played consistently for over ten years.  My first exposure to the World Cup was while we lived in Germany, the 78 cup (grats Argentina).  Ever since, I've been hoping, waiting, and in weaker moments, even praying for US involvement.  Well, until 2002, we were something of a joke.  But, hey, I thought, that's ok, because we're new to this, and things will improve.  And boy, was 2002 a nice improvement.  Finally, it seemed like we had a decent talent pool, and were on the verge of being serious contenders.  Leading up to this year, we have more players with international experience than ever, and I was excited when we qualified.

Then I watched the game v. the Chech Rep.  What was that?  Y'know, I can take losing if the guys play hard, but that was pathetic.  The whole team played flatfooted, didn't hustle, and shied away from any challenges.  I think we had one quality shot on goal.  One.  They played like they were scared.

My god, grow a pair.  This is the World Cup.

/rant.

:/
J


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 14, 2006)

threshel said:
			
		

> Finally, it seemed like we had a decent talent pool, and were on the verge of being serious contenders.



Yet, our top players pale in comparion to Argentina's, Brazil's, France's, etc.


			
				threshel said:
			
		

> Leading up to this year, we have more players with international experience than ever, and I was excited when we qualified.
> 
> Then I watched the game v. the Chech Rep.  What was that?  Y'know, I can take losing if the guys play hard, but that was pathetic.  The whole team played flatfooted, didn't hustle, and shied away from any challenges.  I think we had one quality shot on goal.  One.  They played like they were scared.



No, they didn't play well. I'm looking forward to 2014, when Freddy Adu will be 24, and hopefully leading the US to a World Cup and being hailed as a modern-day Pele.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 14, 2006)

In order to have a better team, the US really need to look into doing some talent exchange, hiring players from Brazil, England, Argentina, Germany and France to play in their local teams. They need to send their players in tours/workshops in those countries. They need to make people *like* soccer, by broadcasting games of Milan, Barcelona, Internazionale, Olympique de Lyon.

Japan had *no* soccer scene fifteen years ago. Then Kashima Antlers hired Zico, one of the best players in Brazil's history, and in four years soccer was a craze there. Now they're in their third World Cup in a row, and while not outrgaeously good, they're better than the lower-rung teams, like Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and the first timers.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jun 15, 2006)

Ukraine lost to Spain! I can't believe it! The whole world was backing them. Except Spain, obviously. Well, I was, anyway. I always back Ukraine in these things - I've no idea why, sort of an adopt-a-country mentality, I suppose. 4-0 is the biggest defeat so far this World Cup, and they lost because they were too damn slow. The ball would float away, they'd run to get it, but Spain would beat them to it. They had something going for them defensively; of Spain's four goals, two came off free kicks and one off a penalty, so if Ukraine had been less aggressive, faster and held onto the ball more, that would have been worth seeing.

I'm also hoping an Arab team like the Saudis, Tunisia or Iran makes it through into the quarters or better. Just because it'll get up so many noses.


----------



## jonesy (Jun 15, 2006)

STARP_Social_Officer said:
			
		

> Ukraine lost to Spain! I can't believe it!



Maybe the eternal underachievers (Spain) are finally getting their game on.  



> I'm also hoping an Arab team like the Saudis, Tunisia or Iran makes it through into the quarters or better. Just because it'll get up so many noses.



Tunisia against the Saudis was an entertaining match too. At least in the second half. Lots of back and forth movement between the goals, great interceptions, and a lot of situations at both ends.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 15, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> In order to have a better team, the US really need to look into doing some talent exchange, hiring players from Brazil, England, Argentina, Germany and France to play in their local teams. They need to send their players in tours/workshops in those countries. They need to make people *like* soccer, by broadcasting games of Milan, Barcelona, Internazionale, Olympique de Lyon.



Mind you, the US soccer league started in 1997. It's still very, very new.

To my knowledge, the US has tried to get players from those countries, but they're slow to come. The MLS isn't nearly as presitigious to play for as Primer or Serie A.


----------



## jonesy (Jun 15, 2006)

Trinidad & Tobago is making England look worryingly much like Sweden. Owen has been totally invisible, and the rest haven't been much better. A really frustrating match to watch.


Woohoo! Gooaaaal! Times 2! England finally started playing.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 15, 2006)

yeeeeeees!


----------



## Klaus (Jun 15, 2006)

It took England 80 minutes to realize that their signature move, showering balls for Crouch to head-butt to the goal, was diminishing them to the same level of Trinidad & Tobago. As soon as the English Team began to play with the ball on their feet, instead of on the air, they dominated the game, with two very dangerous kicks by Lampard in a row. This made the T&Ters nervous, leading to them letting Beckham make a precise pass (as opposed to the showers they were using earlier) and having a much shorter player (Sancho) play interference against Scarecrouch (who commited a foul in that jump, pulling Sancho's hair, but no one complained, and the referee had no way of seeing it).

The English Team had better begin exploiting the quality of their players, instead of using the signature move of bad teams.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 15, 2006)

The substitutions changed the pace of the game completely - and very much for the better on England's side.  Owen is still not match fit, and is doing nothing for England right now.  Maybe he'll be OK later in the tournament, but he should be kept off for a while.

Rooney is a tremendous morale booster.


----------



## LostSoul (Jun 15, 2006)

Oilers win last night, England wins today.

Good 24 hours for me.


----------



## LostSoul (Jun 15, 2006)

Morrus said:
			
		

> The substitutions changed the pace of the game completely - and very much for the better on England's side.  Owen is still not match fit, and is doing nothing for England right now.  Maybe he'll be OK later in the tournament, but he should be kept off for a while.




Agreed.  Owen has disappointed me.


----------



## jonesy (Jun 15, 2006)

Despite no goals as of yet, Sweden - Paraguay is definitely the best game so far. Plenty of speed, lots of action, no holding back. Me like.


----------



## Asmo (Jun 15, 2006)

Yes!!! Ljungberg saves Sweden with a late goal!! I´m incredible happy!! The dream lives on!

Asmo


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 16, 2006)

I only saw the last half of the England game, but those were two sweet goals.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 16, 2006)

Whoah!

Argentina just slapped Serbia around for 6-0!


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 16, 2006)

I heard that one at work and couldn't believe it.

After 1/2 match the Holland-Ivory Coast match is turning out to be good, though some rather unusual referee decisions are taking place.


----------



## jonesy (Jun 16, 2006)

The orange defense was a mess, but Ivory Coast missed a ton of chances so it evened out. Orange win barely.

African teams aren't doing all that well in these games. 6 matches, 5 losses, 1 draw.



			
				Klaus said:
			
		

> Whoah!
> 
> Argentina just slapped Serbia around for 6-0!



Damn. I totally missed the whole match. But great!


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 16, 2006)

I was hoping for a draw for the Ivory Coast. Well, I'm glad they got a goal at least.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jun 17, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Whoah!
> 
> Argentina just slapped Serbia around for 6-0!




Now, is it just me, or what? I've I'd been the Serbian team, and I was down 5-0, I'd say it was time to just bugger off to the pub. I mean, is there any point in staying? If you're getting beaten up, you leave, don't you? Or is it just me?


----------



## LostSoul (Jun 17, 2006)

STARP_Social_Officer said:
			
		

> Now, is it just me, or what? I've I'd been the Serbian team, and I was down 5-0, I'd say it was time to just bugger off to the pub. I mean, is there any point in staying? If you're getting beaten up, you leave, don't you? Or is it just me?




I've been beaten worse in many matches.  You just try to score one bloody goal.

I did play (on the winning side) in a 19-1 game.  It was awesome.


----------



## jonesy (Jun 17, 2006)

STARP_Social_Officer said:
			
		

> Now, is it just me, or what? I've I'd been the Serbian team, and I was down 5-0, I'd say it was time to just bugger off to the pub. I mean, is there any point in staying? If you're getting beaten up, you leave, don't you? Or is it just me?



Oh please. Australia 31 - American Samoa 0, back in 2001.


----------



## Perun (Jun 17, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Whoah!
> 
> Argentina just slapped Serbia around for 6-0!




That's Serbia-Montenegro 

Apparently, it's a combination of a multitude of factors, including injured players and tensions between players (related to the recent dissolution of the state union). At least that's what I've been hearing around here.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 17, 2006)

STARP_Social_Officer said:
			
		

> Now, is it just me, or what? I've I'd been the Serbian team, and I was down 5-0, I'd say it was time to just bugger off to the pub. I mean, is there any point in staying? If you're getting beaten up, you leave, don't you? Or is it just me?



 Even getting the score to 5-1 is worth a try. Goal differential is a factor.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 17, 2006)

Perun said:
			
		

> That's Serbia-Montenegro
> 
> Apparently, it's a combination of a multitude of factors, including injured players and tensions between players (related to the recent dissolution of the state union). At least that's what I've been hearing around here.




That's very likely a factor.  It must be a difficult time for the players to focus.  The team contains players from both countries.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 17, 2006)

OK I'll do my round of predictions for today.

Portugal 2 Iran 0.
Czech Rep 3 Ghana 1
Italy 1 USA 0 (I woudn't be shocked if that ended in a draw)


----------



## Klaus (Jun 17, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> That's very likely a factor.  It must be a difficult time for the players to focus.  The team contains players from both countries.



 Only the goalie was Montenegran.

More important than the score was the kind of football Argentina played: fast, precise, artistic and a marvel to behold.

Other teams should be afraid. Very afraid.


----------



## jonesy (Jun 17, 2006)

The first african victory by Ghana means USA is now the only team in Group E not to have 3 points. It's going to be a crucial match for them tonight.


----------



## Spud (Jun 17, 2006)

Its painfully obvious Argentina have peaked too soon...

Mind you the way we are playing England should peak sometime next year.

Though the Argentina match was a joy to watch (even though it was Argentina) and Serbia & Montenegro are no mugs. Off now to watch the italians give the yanks a footballing lesson..


----------



## jonesy (Jun 17, 2006)

What on Earth is wrong with Italy? Zaccardo scores for the other team, de Rossi gets himself a red card, and the whole team has seemed really dazzled from the very start. Did someone pour ants into their pants or something?

Edit: and now Mastroeni takes a red card. Even players again. Man this match is crazy.


----------



## Spud (Jun 17, 2006)

Thought sicknote (reyna) has had a good game so far, but Italy have not been there at all. Bet Zaccardo couldnt do that again if he tried and the red card was horrendous. Stupid tackle for the americans to even things up, no need they could have even gone onto win (well possibly not being the Italians)


----------



## Crothian (Jun 17, 2006)

Wow, this ref in the USA game is red card happy


----------



## jonesy (Jun 17, 2006)

Spud said:
			
		

> Stupid tackle for the americans to even things up...



It shouldn't even have been red, it was just a late sweep. That was a yellow if I ever saw one.

And now USA gets another red. This isn't football, this is a mess.

The field looks really empty with three players missing.


----------



## Spud (Jun 17, 2006)

jonesy said:
			
		

> It shouldn't even have been red, it was just a late sweep. That was a yellow if I ever saw one.
> 
> And now USA gets another red. This isn't football, this is a mess.
> 
> The field looks really empty with three players missing.




I dunno, it was late and the refs have been told to clamp down on the late tackles (i think the studs were high as well from memory), its one of those could go either way.  Either way it wasnt a tackle he needed to make, should of stayed on his feet.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 17, 2006)

Phew!!  The US escape with a point.

A few notes from a US perspective:

I thought the US played best on 50-50 balls-they won numerous such challenges and I think this kept possesion in the US's favor until late.  Their agreesive play did result in two reds, but overall it was positive.  I did think the two reds were mistakes by the US-neither were threatening situations.  Still, the overall agression was needed.

Landon Dononvon and Claudio Reyna played very well, IMO, and Keller made 2-3 brilliant saves.  Gooch also played well.

Good tough result against a potential WC winner, and combined with the Czech-Ghana result it keeps the US in with a chance.  I'll walk into my (almost entirely British) office with my head much higher Monday.


----------



## Spud (Jun 17, 2006)

Reyna played well, Keller made a few good saves and USa were lucky in some marginal offside decisions, but you were playing a below par italy side. Not taking anything away from you but Italy are no where near a world cup winning side.

Having said that if you get some grief on monday England are (with the way Sven is playing us) no where near a World cup winning side either.


----------



## nerfherder (Jun 18, 2006)

That was a very gutsy performance by the US.  I only caught part of it because I was moving from pub to pub, but they deserved the point from that.

Cheers,
Liam


----------



## Klaus (Jun 18, 2006)

The tactical scheme the US was using was atrocious: 4-5-1. Only one attacker? No wonder their only goal was scored by an Italian! They should have opted for a 4-4-2 and, lacking the individual quality of the Azzurra, tried showering the area with balls to be headbutted in (sorry for my lack of technical football terms in English, eh?). The only reason this match ended a draw was due to the total lack of cool-headedness (is that even a word) by the Italians. They got exasperated when they scored that self-goal.

On other news, Portugal advances to the 1/16 round for the first time in 40 years (and did anyone see the flying kick an Iranian performed on Figo's face?), and Ghana is the first African country to win a match in this Cup. Go Ghana!

On sad news, one of Brazil's foremost comedians, who was in Germany shooting sketches for his TV show, died of a heart attack 10 hours after an informal soccer match. His name was Claudio Besserman Vianna, better known to us as Bussunda. He was famous for his mocking imitation of Ronaldo and of our president, Lula. He died two weeks from turning 44 and leaves a wife and child.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 18, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> The tactical scheme the US was using was atrocious: 4-5-1. Only one attacker? No wonder their only goal was scored by an Italian! They should have opted for a 4-4-2




Of course I'd love it if the US scored 3 goals but calling the attack atrocious seems harsh.  Anyway, I'm not a tactical expert but it seems to me 4-5-1 was chosen because Landon Donovan plays better behind the front line rather than part of it, and the US doesn't really have another forward of decent quality to pair with Brian McBride.  IIRC Landon did play up front 4-4-2 with McBride vs the Czechs and their attack in that game most certainly was atrocious; there was a marked improvement in the US's attack in this game, IMO, even if it didn't result in goals.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 18, 2006)

I wasn't criticising the attack, but the tactical layout. If you put only one attacker, your offensive power is reduced, and you crowd the midfield. This is a very defensive position, to the point where it hurts the offensive. We have a saying here that says "those who don't score a goal suffer a goal".

If the US wanted a defensive stance, a 5-3-2 would give them a virtual wall of defenders. And note that even though there were 11 US players and only 3 Italian players in front of the goal, the Italians still managed to score that goal.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 18, 2006)

On to today's matches.

My predictions (I only got one right yesterday--though both the results I got wrong were one's that pleased me):

Brazil 2 Australia 0.  Brazil is a strong favorite obviously but I honestly have know idea what the score will be.  It might be real tight like Brazil's victory over Croatia, or Brazil might find its offensive rythem and light it up.  Australia may have some say in the final result, but it's a monumental task for them obviously.

Croatia 2 Japan 0.  Croatia looked very good against Brazil and I think they'll take this one comfortably.

France 1 South Korea 0.  France has not scored a goal in 4 straight WC matches.  This one should be a nailbiter and could go either way, but I think France will finally break through.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 18, 2006)

Spud said:
			
		

> Its painfully obvious Argentina have peaked too soon...



Gotta say, I disagree there. Argentina has been playing very strong for at least a year now. I think everyone's not giving them enough credit.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 18, 2006)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Wow, this ref in the USA game is red card happy



They say the refs have been giving more cards than usual--I didn't see the third red card, but the first two were fair. He was just calling it tight.

The US was playing very aggressive from the start, though. They were playing very well (especially compared to last game), but they could have been more careful.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 18, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> The tactical scheme the US was using was atrocious: 4-5-1.



I'm pretty sure it was technically 4-1-4-1. The US was awesome at controlling the midfield, if only their "attacking midfielders" would have done a little more attacking at the net...


----------



## nerfherder (Jun 18, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> They say the refs have been giving more cards than usual--I didn't see the third red card, but the first two were fair. He was just calling it tight.



I agree that both reds were fair - De Rossi's elbow was vicious and Mastroeni's two-footed tackle was late and dangerous.  The last sending off (which I also didn't see) was for a second yellow card, so not really that surprising.

Cheers,
Liam


----------



## Klaus (Jun 18, 2006)

Whew!

Brazil 2-0 Australia, with goals by Adriano (honoring his newborn son, also named Adriano) and his replacement, Fred (a very good player from Olympique de Lyon). Ronaldo showed some improvement, but he seemed to miss the beat more often than is acceptable for a professional player.

And Croatia and Japan ended tied at 0-0. If Croatia defeats Australia on Thursday, they move to the next round. Japan's only chance is to defeat Brazil and hope for a tie between Croatia and Australia.

Coming up next: France has not scored a goal in a World Cup since the final match of 1998. Can they beat the jinx?


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 18, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Whew!
> 
> Brazil 2-0 Australia, with goals by Adriano (honoring his newborn son, also named Adriano) and his replacement, Fred (a very good player from Olympique de Lyon). Ronaldo showed some improvement, but he seemed to miss the beat more often than is acceptable for a professional player.



Ronaldo created the first goal with some fantastic footwork though.  Still below par though over the whole match.


> And Croatia and Japan ended tied at 0-0. If Croatia defeats Australia on Thursday, they move to the next round. Japan's only chance is to defeat Brazil and hope for a tie between Croatia and Australia.



 And Australia advance with only a draw.  THey'll have a tremendous advantage in that match.  Croatia will rue their missed opportunites in the Japan match.


----------



## Turanil (Jun 19, 2006)

Okay, no knowledge of soccer, but with my precognition power I claim that Spain will win the world cup.   

Will be back when all of this is over.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jun 19, 2006)

I think Australia will qualify. I hate boosting the already-hyped inflated sense of worth concerning the Socceroos, but they were actually the better team against Brazil (I thought, anyway). Brazil were lucky rather than skilled, at least until the last few minutes when the aforementioned "Fred" came in. That's a brilliant name for a footballer, by the way. Anyway, I thought Brazil were off their game, which is why Australia was able to hold them to a 0-0 draw by the half-time mark. Australia will have to beat or tie with Croatia, and I think they'll be able to do that, given Croatia's performance against Japan. That means, of course, we'll play Italy in round two. Italy will, let's be clear, bitch-slap the Socceroos back to the Antipodes. But a second-round defeat is pretty good, considering the only other time we've been in it we finished dead last in our group and didn't score a goal.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 19, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> And Australia advance with only a draw.  THey'll have a tremendous advantage in that match.  Croatia will rue their missed opportunites in the Japan match.



Though, Australia can't get that into their heads. They have to play to win. If you play for a draw, you'll end up losing.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 19, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Though, Australia can't get that into their heads. They have to play to win. If you play for a draw, you'll end up losing.




Oh, no doubt. You've got to have a winning mindset.  But it still gives them a significant advantage.

I thought Croatia looked abysmal in their match with Japan, though I only saw the second half and I'm guessing the heat of the daytime match caused a great deal of fatigue late.  Still, they haven't scored a goal in the WC yet, and now they must win against Australia. Will be very tough for Croatia.


----------



## Ruavel (Jun 20, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Though, Australia can't get that into their heads. They have to play to win. If you play for a draw, you'll end up losing.



Guus Hiddink doesn't play for draws... and if we play as well as we did against Brasil, I think it could be a tough match Croatia.

That said last time the two teams met, Croatia pasted Australia 7-0 in a friendly...


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 20, 2006)

And tonight we'll be treated to 4 matches instread of three.  I'm looking forward to Germany-Equador--both sides have been impressive so far.  I won't dare to predict it.

I'm interested to see if T&T can do something against Paraguay.  T&T certainly have looked capable of scoring in their matches; Paraguay might be deflated and flat after loosing the first two matches.  If Trinidad can actually pull off a win, who knows what the final standings of that group will be.


----------



## Ruavel (Jun 20, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> I'm looking forward to Germany-Equador--both sides have been impressive so far.  I won't dare to predict it.



If I had to, I'd put my money on Equador.  The German defense can be a little leaky at the moment, but it's going to be an awesome match.



			
				johnsemlak said:
			
		

> I'm interested to see if T&T can do something against Paraguay.  T&T certainly have looked capable of scoring in their matches; Paraguay might be deflated and flat after loosing the first two matches.  If Trinidad can actually pull off a win, who knows what the final standings of that group will be.



 T&T played their two matches with such heart and commitment, I'd love to see them go through.  Not convinced they'll make it though, but certainly hope so.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 20, 2006)

Ruavel said:
			
		

> If I had to, I'd put my money on Equador.  The German defense can be a little leaky at the moment, but it's going to be an awesome match.



Funny, I'd put it on Germany.


----------



## Ruavel (Jun 20, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Funny, I'd put it on Germany.



and boy would you have won...  what a shocking display of football from Equador...


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 20, 2006)

Ruavel said:
			
		

> and boy would you have won...  what a shocking display of football from Equador...



 You know it! I was expecting 1-0 or something!

Germany is a spectacular team, I think, but ... eesh.


----------



## Asmo (Jun 20, 2006)

Sweden-England 2-2, a very exciting game. Sweden will play against Germany while England faces Ecquador. 

Asmo


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jun 21, 2006)

Everyone's been poo-pooing Germany, suggesting the team is lacklustre and carried entirely on Ballack's performance. I haven't yet seen a game in 2006 where Germany didn't dazzle and shine with their performance. I think the Germans are much better than people say, and I think they are going to win the World Cup on home soil, defeating Brazil in the final.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 21, 2006)

Asmo said:
			
		

> Sweden will play against Germany



Oh, that'll be a good game!


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 21, 2006)

STARP_Social_Officer said:
			
		

> I think the Germans are much better than people say, and I think they are going to win the World Cup on home soil, defeating Brazil in the final.



I also think Germany is better than people say, though I don't think it'll be Brazil and Germany in the final.

Heck, I don't think Brazil will make it to the final.


----------



## Ruavel (Jun 21, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Heck, I don't think Brazil will make it to the final.



Not if they insist on starting Ronaldo...!!!

damn waste of space he is for Brazil at the moment...


----------



## Klaus (Jun 21, 2006)

Indeed.

One of the current rumors say that the coach will start with Robinho and Ronaldo, then replace Ronaldo with Adriano on the second half.

But as long as Brazil relies on tired old-timers like Roberto Carlos and Cafu, we're in trouble. Hopefully the substitutes Gilberto and Cicinho will see some action against Japan.


----------



## MonsterMash (Jun 21, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Indeed.
> 
> One of the current rumors say that the coach will start with Robinho and Ronaldo, then replace Ronaldo with Adriano on the second half.
> 
> But as long as Brazil relies on tired old-timers like Roberto Carlos and Cafu, we're in trouble. Hopefully the substitutes Gilberto and Cicinho will see some action against Japan.



Got to be said that if England end up playing Brazil I'd like to see us use Downing and Lennon as pure wingers with lots of pace running at Roberto Carlos and Cafu who I don't see as having the legs to cope with it for long.


----------



## MonsterMash (Jun 21, 2006)

Asmo said:
			
		

> Sweden-England 2-2, a very exciting game. Sweden will play against Germany while England faces Ecuador.
> 
> Asmo



Sweden showed good team spirit and refused to give up. England kept going to sleep as soon as they scored and looked very vunerable at set pieces. Lots for Sven to work on in the run up to Sunday's game.

I think Sweden have a good chance to beat Germany.


----------



## Balgus (Jun 22, 2006)

*Us Lose To Ghana 2-1*

with a sad showing, and only one point, US is knocked out of world cup.

In brighter News- Australia is using a computer porogram (i wouldnt be surprised if it were the Xbox FIFA 2006) to study their opponents and run practice sessions. They sa it shows and exploit weaknesses better than pouring through old videos.

I know that pro football (American) use Madden every year to run practice runs.  This past year, Madden added a new feature where you can design custom plays.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 22, 2006)

Very disappointed by the US result but it was a tough group.  I'm looking forward to the Brazil Ghana match--I think the Brazilians may be challenged in that one.

The Croatia-Aus match was the best I've seen in teh WC so far.  Result see-sawed four times.  Lot's of chances on both sides.  Three red cards (or more?--I think the ref literally ran out of them).  It was just packed with drama.  Aussies are happy with the result obviousy and deservedly so.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 22, 2006)

And finally Brazil began playing in the Cup! Lots of moving around, lots of opportunities that didn't score only because Japan's goalie performed three or four miracles (specially in the first half). Juninho Pernambucano's rocket in the second half was beautiful, and Ronaldo is now the greates scorer in World Cup history, alongside Gert Muller. He left even Pelé behind. Not bad for a player who's still 25 pounds overweight.


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Jun 23, 2006)

Go you Aussies!!!  That would have to be the most bizzare soccer game I have ever seen.  We came from behind twice to draw it and make it through to the round of 16.    

It really was a strange game though.  Our coach, Guus Hiddink, decided to play our number 2 goalkeeper instead of Mark Schwartzer who had barely done anything wrong in the first 2 games.  And what a terrible decision that was.  Kalac had one of the worst games that I had ever seen and let in a goal that very nearly cost us the game.  Luckily Harry Kewell was finally able to find the goal.

We got 1 penalty and were robbed of another 2.  Just to make things even weirder, one of the Croation players got shown 3 yellow cards.  He got a second yellow a few minutes before the end of the game but the ref didn't show him a red for it and he stayed on the pitch.  He finally got sent off when he was shown a third yellow card a few seconds before the end of the match.

We got the result we needed in the end though.  Bring on Italy.

Olaf the Stout


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 23, 2006)

I said it since the beginning, Group E is the toughest group by far.

Thus, it's no shocker that the two highest ranked teams in that group got knocked out (Czechs #2, USA #5), and Italy and Ghana (#12 and #48?!) move on. Also, Ghana is the only African team to move on to Round 2. And they're the lowest international ranked team to move on to round 2.

Props to Trinidad and Tobago--they didn't score _any_ goals, but they played good matches against good teams, and played one to a draw.

So, four games left, and France is not liking where they are right now. Any predictions?

EDIT: Hm. Well, France needs to win their game and for the Swiss-Korea game to not draw, and they're automatically in. If the Swiss-Korea game does draw, then France has to rely on Goal Differential.

If Spain wins their game (highly expected) and Tunisia wins their game (possible), Tunisia is in, and they're the other African team that has a chance to make it to round 2

There are currently four undefeated teams:
Germany, Portugal, Brazil, and Spain. That speaks very highly for these teams.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jun 23, 2006)

OK. This crow I'm eating tastes delicious. We actually made it to Round 2. Well, I guess that proves I don't know anything. I take my defeat in good grace. However, I mantain this is as far as we will go. Our next opponent is Italy. They will murder us.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 23, 2006)

Olaf the Stout said:
			
		

> Just to make things even weirder, one of the Croation players got shown 3 yellow cards.  He got a second yellow a few minutes before the end of the game but the ref didn't show him a red for it and he stayed on the pitch.  He finally got sent off when he was shown a third yellow card a few seconds before the end of the match.
> t




That was really bizzare, and that ref should be punished for that mistake.  If that had had an effect on the match's result that would have been real grounds for protest.  I remember seeing that guy on the pitch and saying 'Didn't he get sent off?'


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Jun 23, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Japan is the second-best team in that group. I fully expect Brazil to qualify in 1st and Japan in 2nd. Croatia will have a rough time beating Japan to the punch, and *Australia is just the sparring of the group*.
> 
> I'm rooting for Brazil (duh), Japan and all the African countries, specially Angola.




Funny how things work out!      Go Aussies!

Hindsight is a wonderful thing though.


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Jun 23, 2006)

Sidekick said:
			
		

> I'll be supporting Australia in that group.
> 
> Brazil don't NEED my support (although I will be cheering them on in the knockouts - you can't deny true class).
> 
> ...




Wow, a New Zealander supporting Australia in a sporting event.  Are you feeling ok?


----------



## Perun (Jun 23, 2006)

Congratulations, Australia! 

We played bad. The media are probably going to draw and quarter our coach, along with the couple of players (Kranjcar, Tomas, Olic). Apparently, we deserved to lose.

But, anyways, we'll just go cheering for Australia now. It's not like they don't have any Croatian players (7) 

Regards.


----------



## jonesy (Jun 23, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> So, four games left, and France is not liking where they are right now. Any predictions?



I predict France won't score.



> There are currently four undefeated teams:
> Germany, Portugal, Brazil, and Spain. That speaks very highly for these teams.



And I am really surprised, and pleased, to see Spain in that group.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 23, 2006)

jonesy said:
			
		

> I predict France won't score.




I've been predicting that France would break out of the Anemic play that's dogged them since 2002 but every time they seem to confound me.  It's just unbelievable that a team with such talent as Henri-arguably the World's best striker, Zidane, Trezeguey (sorry, spelling) can't score.

In tonight's match France are presented with a Togo team that are 0-2, have conceded 4 goals to 1, and are in the midst of disasterous player/organization relations.  Failing to win, let alone score, should be unthinkable.  But they might surprise me, yet again.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 24, 2006)

*My round of 16 picks*

OK, the Group phase is over.  France snuck in with their first WC win in 8 years, and Switzerland top their group in impressive form, it has to be said.  Perhaps not the toughest of groups, maybe.

Here's my picks for the Round of Sixteen:

Germany over Sweden.  Sweden never seem to get flogged so this one will be tight I think, possibly going to penalties even.  I'd say maybe 2-1 AET.

Argentina over Mexico.  I'm rooting for Mexico but Argentina is tooooo much.  Could be a walkover.  I'll predict 2-0.

Equador over England.  This is the toughest pick IMO.  England have looked paltry so far but many people think they can play better.  Equador looked awesome until they got thrashed by Germany in a dead rubber.  My guess is they lost it a bit after conceding their first goal of the WC, but they should learn from that and play England tough.  1-0.

Holland over Portugual.  Whoa, OK, this might be the toughest pick actually.  Great Holland team vs the solid Portuguese coached by one of the best.   This one goes to penalties.

Italy over Australia.  Go Socceroos, but I just can't see this happening.  Italy have weathered the storm of their domestic scandal.  Both of these teams are underappreciated IMO.  Australia have looked good but so far their only actual win is against Japan.  Anway, I'll predict 1-0.   

Swizerland over Ukraine.  Swizerland's solid win over South Korea is more impressive than anything Ukraine acheived in their group, IMO. Switzerland have been quite good in what is probably a very weak group.  I'd say they'll win here but will probably get smothered in the quarters by Italy.  Not sure about the score (I never get those right anyway)  I'll put 1-0 because I think it's close, but Switzerland haven't conceded so far (that is an impressive stat, incidentally).

Brazil over Ghana.  I'm rooting for the Black Stars.  Like Australia, that won't help them much, esp without Essian. 3-1.

Spain over France  I'm waiting for France's talent-laden team to wake from it's slumber.  Still, with Spain's form versus France's form it's difficult to see them win here.  I'd say this one might be decided in part a Barthez blunder.  2-0.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 24, 2006)

jonesy said:
			
		

> I predict France won't score.



Against Togo? I honestly don't believe you thought that was going to happen.


			
				jonesy said:
			
		

> And I am really surprised, and pleased, to see Spain in that group.



Me too! Though, the tougher games are coming up now. 

I can't wait to see if Ghana is going to pull something out of their hat of tricks.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 24, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Germany over Sweden.  Sweden never seem to get flogged so this one will be tight I think, possibly going to penalties even.  I'd say maybe 2-1 AET.
> 
> Argentina over Mexico.  I'm rooting for Mexico but Argentina is tooooo much.  Could be a walkover.  I'll predict 2-0.



I think these are no-brainers. It's possible Sweden and Mexico could play excellent football and Germany and Argentina to fall on their faces, but they're really strong teams. I don't see that happening.

Plus, both teams have been impressive so far.


			
				jonsemlak said:
			
		

> Equador over England.



Had Equador been in a tougher group, I wouldn't have expected them to make round 2. As such, I can't expect them to go very far. Then again, I haven't been following Equador. I'm still rooting for England. When England's on, they're on.


			
				jonsemlak said:
			
		

> Holland over Portugual.  Whoa, OK, this might be the toughest pick actually.  Great Holland team vs the solid Portuguese coached by one of the best.   This one goes to penalties.



Maybe this one and the Equador-England game will go to golden goal (or do they do penalty kicks?)? This is a close game to call, but I'd have to go with Portugal here.


			
				jonsemlak said:
			
		

> Italy over Australia.



Okay, Australia has played excellent football, but Italy's my favorite team, hands down. I don't think they're going all the way, but I'll root for them as long as they last. They're a solid team with a lot of color, and good calcio basics (did you like how I used the Italian term there?). Plus, Italy fought hard in, I think, the hardest group of the first round. Go Italy!


			
				jonsemlak said:
			
		

> Swizerland over Ukraine.
> 
> Brazil over Ghana.



Yep. Though, Ghana's got to be the most interesting team of the second round. FIFA ranking of 48? Wow. _And_ they snuck past two of the top 5 teams in the world? Whoa.


			
				jonsemlak said:
			
		

> Spain over France.



France is loaded with talent, but so is Spain. I mean, both top-10 teams. C'mon. This will probably be the best game to watch--two first class teams going head to head. I'm surprised you can call this so easily, because I can't at all. And, I like both teams, so I can't be biased about this as much.  How about this? I've been reading a Spanish author who's really cool, so I'll call Spain. But... I really like crepes. Too close to call.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 24, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Had Equador been in a tougher group, I wouldn't have expected them to make round 2. As such, I can't expect them to go very far. Then again, I haven't been following Equador. I'm still rooting for England. When England's on, they're on.



  Remember England also played in a weak group, weaker than Equador IMO.  Germany is tougher than sweden (at home, at any rate); Costa Rica is tougher than T&T; and Poland are probably at least as good as Paraguay.  Equador look a lot better than Paraguay, and played better in qualifiying.  Given that England only just beat Paraguay, I'd say that bodes well for Equador.

That said, England have a great team thsi year so they might raise their game in the knockout stages.
.







> France is loaded with talent, but so is Spain. I mean, both top-10 teams. C'mon. This will probably be the best game to watch--two first class teams going head to head. I'm surprised you can call this so easily, because I can't at all. And, I like both teams, so I can't be biased about this as much.  How about this? I've been reading a Spanish author who's really cool, so I'll call Spain. But... I really like crepes. Too close to call.




Well, I won't know if it's easy to call until we have the result, but based on current form it seems clear cut--France have looked less than impressive while Spain have been nearly perfect.  Also, France really struggled in qualification for the WC.  But again, France has loads of talent and they might rise to the occasion.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 24, 2006)

I was dissapointed with the American team's lack of aggression, and Bruce Arena's refusal to pump up the offense early in the games.  The group we were in, we should have tried to strike early, score, THEN play defense...

But the officiating has been so BAD...not just that call that got the Black Stars their game-winning PK, either.  That same game saw a yellow card for a hand ball near the sidelines.  WHAT?

Its one thing to be consistently bad, but so many games have featured inconsistently bad reffing- what, REALLY is the difference between a late tackle from behind that gets a card and one that doesn't?  And when was the last time you saw 3 players ejected from a game?

AAAAAAaaaaaaaanyway...

I'm hoping to see good things from Ghana- I love underdogs.  Argentina & Portugal have looked good and should do well too.

And I'm expecting France to fall over in their Brie & Champaigne...they really haven't looked that good.


----------



## Spud (Jun 24, 2006)

If its a deliberate hand ball ita yellow card, no matter where the offense is. Having said that the reffing has been a bit dodgy in places, Graham Poll in particular. Many football fans in the Uk find it shocking that he is regarded as the best ref in england.

England should beat Ecuador, even with the swede in charge. Sweden will be too strong for Germany, even on home soil.


----------



## Jupp (Jun 24, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Swizerland over Ukraine.  Swizerland's solid win over South Korea is more impressive than anything Ukraine acheived in their group, IMO. Switzerland have been quite good in what is probably a very weak group.  I'd say they'll win here but will probably get smothered in the quarters by Italy.  Not sure about the score (I never get those right anyway)  I'll put 1-0 because I think it's close, but Switzerland haven't conceded so far (that is an impressive stat, incidentally).




Since yesterday evening Switzerland is acting really crazy, for Swiss standards anyway. I think some folks will party through to the Switzerland-Ukraine match. I really, really hope they make  it to the quarter finals so they can play against Italy  And the Swiss LOVE playing against Italy. They have not won too many times against them but the matches have always been exciting and they always managed to poke them and make their lives hard during those 90min. I think it's going to be one big event, even if we might loose in the end.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 24, 2006)

I hope Ghana doesn't use their usual trick of violence. It's the single most violent team in the Cup, with a record of faults and cards.

But Brazil's coach, Parreira, started his career coaching Ghana almost 30 years ago, so he's somewhat familiar with their play style.

And I pray that he uses the substitutes and keeps old-timers Cafu, Roberto Carlos, Emerson and not-so-efficient Zé ROberto and Adriano on the bench.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 24, 2006)

Germany defeat Sweden 2-0, a scoreline that doens't reflect Germany's strong peformance.  Sweden did have a missed penalty, but Germany could have added more if they had played with more urgency in 2nd half.  It was a very dominating performance--63% possesion.


----------



## jonesy (Jun 24, 2006)

The Swedish defenders were standing around like statues. Did you see near the end how Hansson almost deflected a shot straight into the goal, _and he didn't even notice because he was looking in the wrong direction_.

And the Swedish center was wide open because of this even though the Swedes had way more players at the scene than the Germans. When it's a 1-5 attack you'd think the defenders would win the ball...but no. 



			
				Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Against Togo? I honestly don't believe you thought that was going to happen.



You'd be right. But I was kind of hoping it would.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 24, 2006)

Spud said:
			
		

> If its a deliberate hand ball ita yellow card, no matter where the offense is.



That's a relevant issue--I've seen lots of players claim the other side had a hand ball.

If I kick the ball and it hits your hand--and your hand was at your side the entire time (ie, you didn't move it specifically to block the ball), it's not hand ball. For a hand ball to be a hand ball, it has to be deliberate. And that's exactly how the refs have been calling it.


----------



## Agamon (Jun 24, 2006)

What a sweet goal by Rodriguez to win against Mexico.  Looking forward to Argentina vs Germany, should be a great match.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jun 25, 2006)

Germany defeated Sweden. I thought it was an excellent match, and I thought the Germans were in better form than ever. With Brazil pretty much guaranteed a victory over Ghana, it's looking like my prediction may have some weight. Now Germany will have to play Argentina, which will be their toughest game yet. I predict they'll win, but only after extra time or penalties.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 25, 2006)

Argentina didn't look so hot against Mexico (even if the extra time goal was neat). They'd better pick up the pace if they want to defeat Germany backed up by 60,000 fans. And boy, did the referees suck in these matches...


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 25, 2006)

As for the handball yellow, I don't think it was deliberate- it cost his team a throw in.

And did you catch the one in the Argentina/Mexico match where the ref carded the wrong player?


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 25, 2006)

Just watched the 1st half of Mex-Arg on replay.  (still have the 2nd to go).  Man, that foul by Heinze should have been a red card.  I don't know any way it should have been interpreted differently.  The Mexican had a definite 1 on 1 goal attempt if it wasn't for that foul.

Not to mention that that was a horrible defensive mistake by Heinze, absolutely dreadful.  That was play unworthy of the MLS.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jun 25, 2006)

The England V Ecuador game kicks off in a couple of hours.  England are reported to be going with a five man midfield and Rooney upfront.  If they do, it'll be interesting to see how they deal with the new formation (as reported, 4-1-4-1).  Ecuador will have a lot of possession, so the England midfield will need to be at their heals, breaking up attacks.

I think it'll be a tough game, with England to squeeze through 2-1.  England will have a good first half and score 1 goal, and then wilt in the sun in the second half, concede a goal and be under constant pressure from that point on.  Crouch then to come off the bench, cause mayhem in the Ecuador defense and get a late winner!

Maybe...

BTW, it's amazing what good team spirit and home advantage can do for a team.  They were absolute pants a couple of months ago, but now they've certainly set themselves up as amongst the favorites IMO.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 25, 2006)

And England win on, what else, but a Beckham free kick.  It was an interesting moment when it went in--no one in the Bar I was at was sure it was in until the England player actually picked the ball up from inside the goal.

I've firmly believed for years that Beckham is worth being on the field for whatever team he plays for solely for his free kicks.  Besides that he's one of the best at it, in a tight match like that his free kicks were the only real threat.


----------



## Spud (Jun 25, 2006)

Theres the thing though, Englands only threat was the free kicks but if we dropped the show pony we would have lennon on in place of him a real threat on the right and still have threat from dead ball with Gerard and Lampard.. No one in a football team is worth aplace just for their ability with the dead ball (and the one thing i will grant you is beckam is half decent at that, but this was the firsty goal in four years so only half decent)


----------



## Crothian (Jun 25, 2006)

Anyone watching the yellow card fest game?  I'm hoping they break the record of most yellow cards in a game.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 25, 2006)

Yeah, I wonder if this has entered teh recordbooks.  The ref's Russian by the way.

Looks like the portuguese are going to eek this one out.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jun 25, 2006)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Anyone watching the yellow card fest game?  I'm hoping they break the record of most yellow cards in a game.




16 yellow cards and 4 reds.  I believe that equals the number of yellow cards dished out in a World Cup match and beats the red total tally.  Might be wrong though.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jun 25, 2006)

Spud said:
			
		

> Theres the thing though, Englands only threat was the free kicks but if we dropped the show pony we would have lennon on in place of him a real threat on the right and still have threat from dead ball with Gerard and Lampard.. No one in a football team is worth aplace just for their ability with the dead ball (and the one thing i will grant you is beckam is half decent at that, but this was the firsty goal in four years so only half decent)




I agree.  I thought his contribution was poor today, up until the goal of course.  Personally, I'd drop Lampard (he's been very poor), revert to 4-4-2 with Gerard and Carrick in central midfield and give Lennon a crack on the right, with Rooney and Crouch up front.  Sven won't do it, though.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 26, 2006)

STARP_Social_Officer said:
			
		

> Germany defeated Sweden. I thought it was an excellent match, and I thought the Germans were in better form than ever.



Agreed.

On the other hand, I think the Portugal-Netherlands game was a disgrace for both countries involved.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 26, 2006)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Anyone watching the yellow card fest game?  I'm hoping they break the record of most yellow cards in a game.



Obviously pushing the Portugal player who was looking after his teammate? Should've been red, not yellow.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 26, 2006)

The game could've been saved if the Russian refereee had pulled out a red card on the Netherland...ish ... er player who did a flying kick on Cristiano Ronaldo's thigh in the first 10 minutes of game (it's the same one who elbowed Figo on the face near the end of the game). Showing just a yellow card was a disgrace, and signalled to the Netherlands that it was a free-for-all game. Cristiano Ronaldo played for another 10 minutes before leaving the field in tears (after starting the play that ended with Portugal's goal).

The true disgrace was upon the Netherlands for their utmost lack of fair play, to note:

Portugal defended against an attack by the Netherlands, then began a counterattack, oblivious to the fact that one of the Portuguese defenders had fallen, injured. Portugal was well past the midfield when the Russian referee stopped the play so the player could be attended to. Upon restart, instead of kicking the ball to the side and returning the possession to Portugal, the Netherland...ish...ers just ran with it, prompting an already enraged Deco to stop the play with a heavy foul, earning him a red card. But by then, beacuse of their utter lack of fair play and gentleman attitude, the Netherlands began being booed by the entire stadium, who cheered every time Portugal had the ball.

This match is being known as the Battle of Nurenberg.


----------



## OakwoodDM (Jun 26, 2006)

Dannyalcatraz said:
			
		

> And did you catch the one in the Argentina/Mexico match where the ref carded the wrong player?




Actually, that's the mistake the commentators made as well. There was nothing wrong with the card. As far as I (and my housemate who was watching with me) saw it, the free kick was given for an innocuous foul (yes, a foul, but not bookable) and then Castro, who had the ball at the time, kicked it away. Now, that's a bookable offence, and he was duly booked.

It really frustrated us that no-one in the backroom of the BBC (or ITV, I can't remember which) commentary booth came up to the commentators and pointed out the reality of the matter, when they mentioned it about half a dozen times in the rest of the match.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 26, 2006)

OakwoodDM said:
			
		

> Actually, that's the mistake the commentators made as well. There was nothing wrong with the card. As far as I (and my housemate who was watching with me) saw it, the free kick was given for an innocuous foul (yes, a foul, but not bookable) and then Castro, who had the ball at the time, kicked it away. Now, that's a bookable offence, and he was duly booked.
> 
> It really frustrated us that no-one in the backroom of the BBC (or ITV, I can't remember which) commentary booth came up to the commentators and pointed out the reality of the matter, when they mentioned it about half a dozen times in the rest of the match.



 Precisely.


----------



## Crothian (Jun 26, 2006)

Wow, what a way for Australia to lose in the 95th minute!!


----------



## LostSoul (Jun 26, 2006)

Oh man, that was disappointing. 

Another previous World Cup winner goes through.


----------



## Jupp (Jun 26, 2006)

I want to give a big shoutout to the Socceroos. They would have earned to go to the quarter finals. Congrats to a great team. You wrote history by coming this far 

Since I went to Oz for 5 weeks early this year I am a big fan of the country *g*


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jun 26, 2006)

LostSoul said:
			
		

> Oh man, that was disappointing.




Another match decided on some quite shocking refereeing.  Materazzi should never have been sent off and it was never a penalty.  The referees seem to have gone quite mad.


----------



## jonesy (Jun 26, 2006)

That was an excellent dive by Grosso. World class. It was so good that there really was no way for the referee to see that it was a dive from the angle he was at. That's really the kind of dive people should use as an example to point out the need for the referees to use video checks in unclear cases.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 26, 2006)

I'm all for red carding easy divers, personally.

In all the years I played, I never took a dive.

(OK, I was a Fullback and Goalie, so it wasn't really a part of my game...)


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 26, 2006)

I don't think it was a dive, but I do think it was a clean tackle.

Italy did play rather sloppy.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jun 27, 2006)

During the last 20 minutes, I decided, bugger it, time for some national spirit. I have so little of it this was a rare moment for me. There were a couple of times in that game that I thought "bloody hell - we're actually going to beat them", particularly after the Italians lost a man to the red card. And then, in the closing seconds...gone.
Everyone's right. It was a bad call by the referee, and shouldn't have been a penalty. But I'm skeptical that it actually made a difference. If the call had been played on, the game would have gone to extra time, and there's no way to be sure who, if anyone, would have scored. Given the 0-0 score and the world-class defending from both teams, I'm not sure the game wouldn't have gone to penalties, and if that had happened, I'm fairly sure Italy would have won. I'm not going to say I'm "shattered" by the loss, and I'm not surprised, but I'm a tad disappointed such an obvious play on was called as a penalty.


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Jun 27, 2006)

What a crappy way to go out.  I would have preferred that the Italian player had scored from direct play rather that it being called a penalty.  At least that way we wouldn't have been left thinking what if.  I can deal with being beaten by a better team.  We were robbed of a chance to win the game in extra time by another bad referee decision.    

There is no way that it should have been a penalty.  Yes, Lucas Neill slid way too early but he was down on the ground.  The Italian player decided to go through Lucas Neill and somehow managed to "trip".  The real shame was that he (Lucas Neill) had been our best player during the World Cup and was one of the defenders of the tournament so far.

Having said that I also think that the red card given to Italy should have only been a yellow.  And we should have been able to score when we had a 1 man advantage for most of the second half.  Either way it doesn't really matter now though.

The fact that the penalty came in the last 15 seconds off the game just makes it even harder to take.  We were only seconds away from 30 minutes of extra time.  We had only made 1 sub to Italy's 3 so we would have been able to add extra runners into the game.

Now we can only think of what might have been.     

Olaf the Stout


----------



## jonesy (Jun 27, 2006)

Olaf the Stout said:
			
		

> There is no way that it should have been a penalty.  Yes, Lucas Neill slid way too early but he was down on the ground.  The Italian player decided to go through Lucas Neill and somehow managed to "trip".



When I saw the replay from the behind-the-endzone view my first thought was "the only way Neill could have caused that would have been with telekinesis". I didn't think they really even touched.


----------



## OakwoodDM (Jun 27, 2006)

God Almighty, Ukraine vs Switzerland made England's play this world cup look exciting and thrilling!

Two teams going all out to not lose, and unsurprisingly it goes 2 hours with no goals. Heck, Switzerland couldn't even manage one in three attempts from the penalty spot!
Still, my preferred team of the two went through (I couldn't bear Italy vs Switzerland. The best defensive team in the competition against someone who plays to not lose? Ouch!).
Shevchenko knows most of the Italian defenders fairly well, so Italy vs Ukraine could be interesting provided the Ukraine play properly.


As for Italy vs Australia, it was foolish for Neil to go in like that (I assume he was expecting a cross or shot and attempting to block it) but it didn't deserve a penalty.
Australia deserved to at least take it to extra time, and I'd have liked their chances in a shootout. Italy are terrible at them...truly terrible.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jun 27, 2006)

Okay, I've finally woken up after the Swiss - Ukraine game.  Worst match of the world cup so far.  Even the penalty shoot out was the most boring I've ever seen.  It's actually making me drowsy just thinking about it   

Today's matches should be fun.  You gotta call Brazil over Ghana, especially with Essien being suspended for this match, but you never know... it would be the biggest shock of the world cup so far if they managed to knock Brazil out.

France and Spain is just too close to call.  On form, you'd have to say Spain, but they have a history of just throwing it away after having looked good in the group games.  France, on the other hand, just can't score goals.  Zidane looks well past his best and Henry looks totally out of sorts.  So, that'll be a 2-0 win to France with both Zidane and Henry scoring then


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 27, 2006)

Perhaps the ref noticed the Italian player tripping on the Aussie's Kirlian Aura?


----------



## MonsterMash (Jun 27, 2006)

Some predictions for today

Brazil 1 : 2 Ghana - the upset we've all been waiting for and a chance for the Black Stars to shine.

Spain 3 : 1 France - a fading French team gets demolished by one of the few teams to hit form in this tournament.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jun 27, 2006)

MonsterMash said:
			
		

> Some predictions for todayBrazil 1 : 2 Ghana - the upset we've all been waiting for and a chance for the Black Stars to shine.




Nice thinking, MonsterMash, but without Essien, I think they're going to get beat - probably 2-1 to Brazil IMO.  It would certainly be great if Ghana did knock them out though


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Jun 27, 2006)

Oh crud, Brazil- Ghana is today.  For some reason I was thinking it was tomorrow when I'll have some time off from work.  I was really looking forward to seeing this match.  I think it could be a really exciting to watch.  Oh well, I'll just have to see the highlights tonight.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 27, 2006)

I'm getting my picks in just before Brazil and Ghana kick off.

I think Ghana might do better than some people imagine even without Essian.  He's a great player but Ghana have other stars and one player can never make that much different.  I still predict Brazil to win.  3-1, but perhaps a game that will look closer than that.  Ronaldo will break Muller's recored.

Spain - France.  I find it interesting that a number of pundits I've read predict that France will finally find some wind after being so lethargic for so long.  I find it difficult to resistthis thinking, even though form indicates thsi should be a Spain whitewash.  I predict 0-0 after 90 minutes.  Can't say what will happen then, though France might eek out a game winner or win on penalties.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 27, 2006)

Spud said:
			
		

> Theres the thing though, Englands only threat was the free kicks but if we dropped the show pony we would have lennon on in place of him a real threat on the right and still have threat from dead ball with Gerard and Lampard.. No one in a football team is worth aplace just for their ability with the dead ball (and the one thing i will grant you is beckam is half decent at that, but this was the firsty goal in four years so only half decent)






			
				red moon games said:
			
		

> I agree. I thought his contribution was poor today, up until the goal of course. Personally, I'd drop Lampard (he's been very poor), revert to 4-4-2 with Gerard and Carrick in central midfield and give Lennon a crack on the right, with Rooney and Crouch up front. Sven won't do it, though.



I dunno, I certainly can't blame Sven for sticking with the guy whose free kick won both of England's 1-0 victories.  England might be able to get good kicks out of Gerrard, but Beckham has a different class IMO.  In a sport where 50 % or more of goals are scored off of set pieces it makes sense to have your best set piece man.  Particularly in the knockout stages, where tight matches are to be expected.

Plus, while Beckham's contribution's are limited,  he certainly does more than free kicks.  Off of the top of my head Peter Croach's goal against Trinidad was from a superb Beckham cross, and against Equador Beckham made an excellent 50-60 yard pass that almost connected with Rooney.

I know little about Carrick and Lennon but they seem to have virtually no experience at this level of competiion and I find it a bit optomistic to think that using either of them in lieu of starting Beckmam will greatly energize England's offence.  In these matches you've got to rely on your veterans.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 27, 2006)

*Halftime Brazil 2 Ghana 0*

Halftime whisle just blew and things are going about as I expected.  Ronaldo has broken Muller's WC scoring record.  Ghana have had some wonderful opportunities and look better than the scoreline indicates.  But Brazil's class is carrying them through, and probably gave htem the benefit of an offsides no-call on Adriano's goal.


----------



## LostSoul (Jun 27, 2006)

So far, Brazil-Ghana has been a great match.  Bad luck for Ghana.

Though I thought that second goal was offside.   But I always said, "It's not what actually happened, but how the ref calls it."


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 27, 2006)

LostSoul said:
			
		

> So far, Brazil-Ghana has been a great match.  Bad luck for Ghana.
> 
> Though I thought that second goal was offside.   But I always said, "It's not what actually happened, but how the ref calls it."




Yeah, Adriano's goal was a bad offsides no-call.  He was running ahead of the defense all the way down the field.  Should have been easy to spot.  Interesting that the fans where overwhelmingly booing Brazil because that goal was allowwed.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 27, 2006)

3-0 and Brazil won, even though it played reeeeally badly. Ghana was crowding the midfield, so instead of trying to cut through the midfield, Brazil should've used the sidelines to get to Ghana's goal. But for that, Brazil had to have actual PLAYERS, not the granpas "I play because of my name, even though I'm too tired to do anything but brag about my records" Cafu and Roberto Carlos.

Juninho Pernambucano's entry gave the team more speed, but the fact is that the team that defeated Japan was far more representative of the Brazilian school of football than the team that began against Croatia, Australia and Ghana.

Yeah, we Brazilian are di**s. We win by 3-0 and still say the team sucked. Them's the breaks...


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 27, 2006)

Hats off to Ghana!

But for some good play by Brazil's goalie, there could have been a very different result...

Of course, had it not been for the play of their goalie, the other Brazilians might have woken up and played _seriously..._

I'm going to go waaaaaaaaaaaaaay out on a limb and say I'll expect to see Ghana again in 4 years, especially if they develop their defense up to the same level as their offense.  You simply can't play an offsides trap like that against a team that good and not expect to see some breakaways.

Imagine being Ghana's goalie, facing the "best player in the world" one on one...


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 27, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Yeah, we Brazilian are di**s. We win by 3-0 and still say the team sucked. Them's the breaks...




Well, many non-Brazilians are probably writing about how 'badly' Brazil played today.  It'll keep going right up to Brazil holding the trophy.

Interesting to see that Brazil got booed a lot by the crowd.  I think it's in part because Ghana had become a particular underdog fan-favorite.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 27, 2006)

*Spain-France pregame*

Kick-off in ten min.

I'm quite intrigued by this match up.  I initially wrote it off as an easy win for Spain but maybe this could be Spain's first real test.  Here's hoping for a great match.

I still think Spain will put a lot of pressure on Barthez, who might make a blunder to concede a goal.  I actually like Barthez but after seeing him at Man Utd I saw how he's occasionally erratic.  On the other hand with Zidane there's always a decent chance at a Zidane goal from a free kick, and Theirry Henry should make several threatening runs.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 27, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Well, many non-Brazilians are probably writing about how 'badly' Brazil played today.  It'll keep going right up to Brazil holding the trophy.
> 
> Interesting to see that Brazil got booed a lot by the crowd.  I think it's in part because Ghana had become a particular underdog fan-favorite.



 That would change if Brazil has actually played like, y'know, Brazil. For that we need to replace Cafu and Roberto Carlos for Cicinho and Gilberto, replace Emerson with Juninho Pernambucano and Adriano for Robinho. If the teams starts to move about and play what we call football-art, people will start to root for them, like they did for the awesome 1982 team (who lost to the very boring Italy).

I'm torn over Spain-France. I'm part Spanish, but a part of me wants to face France again and slap them about for the 1998 final.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 27, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> I'm quite intrigued by this match up.  I initially wrote it off as an easy win for Spain but maybe this could be Spain's first real test.  Here's hoping for a great match.



I'm still not sure why you thought this would be an easy win for Spain. France is one of the top 10 teams in the world. It's not an easy win for anyone.

Sure, Spain's been playing well, but France didn't get to be ranked so high (and consistently) for nothing.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 27, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> I'm still not sure why you thought this would be an easy win for Spain. France is one of the top 10 teams in the world. It's not an easy win for anyone.
> 
> Sure, Spain's been playing well, but France didn't get to be ranked so high (and consistently) for nothing.



 Though, I didn't expect 3-1.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 27, 2006)

I think France had the advantage over Spain because the game was scheduled so close in time to siesta...the Spainiards were groggy.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 27, 2006)

Dannyalcatraz said:
			
		

> I think France had the advantage over Spain because the game was scheduled so close in time to siesta...the Spainiards were groggy.



 Nah, the match was at 9PM local time, siesta is noon-to-2PM. La Furia just fell back to its usual Cup behaviour...


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 27, 2006)

Dang- forgot the time zone differential...

Too many after dinner drinks, perhaps?


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Jun 27, 2006)

It's good to see that Spain didn't get everyone's hopes up that they might actually perform on the big stage for once.  The round of 16 would be around about when they usually fall in a crashing heap.

Too bad we couldn't see the Switzerland vs. Italy match up.  That would have been a guaranteed 120 minute game and the insomniacs could have taped it for those times when they really need to get to sleep!    

Olaf the Stout


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 28, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> I'm still not sure why you thought this would be an easy win for Spain. France is one of the top 10 teams in the world. It's not an easy win for anyone.
> 
> Sure, Spain's been playing well, but France didn't get to be ranked so high (and consistently) for nothing.



 As far as I remember the USA is ranked rather high...

Anyway, I wasn't expecting France to play so well because of their poor performance in the last world cup and in the qualifying for this world cup (they only just qualified and their group wasn't that strong) and less than impressive performance in Euro2004, where basically they played well only for about 5 minutes versus England.  So far their form in this WC hadn't been all that impressive, while Spain was looking very good.  Plus France were relying on an aging core of veterans.

I guess I fell into a common trap of thinking thsi was finally Spain's year...

Anyway, I think a lot of people didint' expect France to play this well, nor for Zidane to play so well (one Frenchwoman at my office was worried because she thought France played better without him)


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 28, 2006)

*Quarterfinal predictions*

Well, I haven't exactly done well with my predictions up to now.  Anyway, on with my picks...

Germany--Argentina: How to pick this one? Two former champs who met in a final once. Both playing amazingly well so far. They've scored fantastic goals and showed some brilliant form. Argentina are the more talented, but with Germany playing so well I'll give them the edge with their fans willing them on.

England--Portugal. I'll say this--England have had the most fortunate path to the quarters, or semis perhaps, of any team in the tournament. They've not faced particularly tough opposition so far. Now they get a weakened Portugal side. At full strength I'd favor Scolari's side. But without Deco and Costinho (and maybe Christiano Ronaldo) it's a major mountain to climb. I think it will be tight and the Portuguese will rise to the occasion and overcome some of their problems.  Scolari's a genius and will get the most out of his men, particularly with so much time to prepare, but England will squeak through.

Italy--Ukraine. Pretty simple really. Italy have been one of the underappreciated performers of this WC. THey topped one of the toughest groups, beating the Czech Rep and Ghana handily. Against Australia they played tight, weathered the storm of a dismissal, and were never going to lose with their defence suffocating Australia's attack. Italy go through.

Brazil--France. Oh, what a match-up. Two teams full of aging superstars--a virtual who's who of football of the last ten years, and many of whom played against each other in that '98 final. This will be a tough match but I think this match-up actually favor's Brazil this time. It's not in the Stade de France. Also, Brazil is vulnerable with their aging players like Cafu and Roberto Carlos but it will take a younger team than France to expose that. So I'll stick with Brazil.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jun 28, 2006)

I think Germany can beat Argentina. My final prediction of a German win over Brazil in the final is still, at present, holding up. For the quarter-finals, I predict Germany will beat Argentina, Portugal will kill England in the closing minutes after a long 0-0 period, Brazil will beat France but not by much, and Italy will beat Ukraine. In that particular match my support will be for the yellow dudes led by Shevchenko, but I know I'm picking the wrong horse. Italy and Portugal will face off for 3rd place, and Italy will win it.

I'm just saying, is all.

PS: Australia's out. I've come to terms with this, even if the rest of the country can't.


----------



## jonesy (Jun 28, 2006)

It's not fun being a Spain supporter when they always fall apart like that. Oh well, at least England is still in the games.

My crystal ball has shown me that:
Germany 1 - Argentina 4, the Germans will be stunned.
England 2 - Portugal 2, England wins in a penalty shootout.
Italy 1 - Ukraine 0, Italy hasn't really been playing, but Ukraine still won't stand a chance.
Brazil 2 - France 1, France is back, but it won't be enough.


----------



## OakwoodDM (Jun 28, 2006)

This is tricky to call. My heart says one thing, my head another. Anyway, here goes...

Argentina 3 - 1 Germany. Much like France last night, the third goal will be a late one while Germany are searching for an equaliser.

England 1 - 2 Portugal. My heart says revenge for 2004, but this is a prediction, not what I want to happen.

Italy 1 - 0 Ukraine. Again, against my heart. I like the Ukraine, and I don't like Italy, but if they go 1 up, there's not much you can do to break down their 11 man defence.

Brazil 2 - 0 France. Brazil may have looked ropey in 75% of their games, but they've won them, and kept a clean sheet. Difficult to back France when Henry never shows his Arsenal form for them and Zizou's had his running for the tournament against Spain.



If it were my heart speaking, the semis would be Germany vs Ukraine and England vs France, with a Germany vs England final. We beat them at our house 40 years ago, let's see what happens in their backyard.


----------



## hong (Jun 28, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Yeah, we Brazilian are di**s. We win by 3-0 and still say the team sucked. Them's the breaks...




The ambition of other teams is to get to the point where they can win 3-0 and their fans still say they sucked.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 29, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> As far as I remember the USA is ranked rather high...



As far as I remember, the Czech Republic is ranked rather high...

It's also about consistency. And, you have to look back more than a week or a month of play to see trends.


			
				johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Anyway, I wasn't expecting France to play so well because of their poor performance in the last world cup



I don't remember how far they got last World Cup, but I thought it was past the round of 16. Do you remember how far they got?


			
				johnsemlak said:
			
		

> and in the qualifying for this world cup (they only just qualified and their group wasn't that strong) and less than impressive performance in Euro2004, where basically they played well only for about 5 minutes versus England.  So far their form in this WC hadn't been all that impressive, while Spain was looking very good.  Plus France were relying on an aging core of veterans.



I'd argue that Spain's group was much easier than France's group, though. And, aging cores of veterans have played well a number of times this World Cup... at least, it's hard to argue with Ronaldo's three goals, many when surrounded by pressure.

I'm not sure about the world cup qualifiers and past games, but according to a website I checked (if you have your own that you think is more accurate, please link me) in the past two years, France has lost a total of two games. June 25, 2004, and March 1, 2006.
(though, June 25, 2004, is technically just over 2 years ago now). That's at least pretty impressive. Even everyone's beloved Brazil can't say that.

I don't like France over Spain, but you can't ignore France's accomplishments.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 29, 2006)

I'm going to have to predict...

Argentina over Germany. Both quality teams, and I'd like to see Germany going to the final game, but if only the fates could have allowed this match-up to occur two rounds later... Anyway, I want Germany to win, but I suspect Argentina to steamroll.

Portugal over England. They're just a complete package, and have been playing pretty well. Beckham's place kicks are fun to watch, though!

Italy over Ukraine. I'm always worried about Italy because they have low scoring games. An upset is easy. Ukraine's played tough, but I'm too much of an Italy fan to predict their loss to anyone. Except for maybe next round. 

France over Brazil. I think this will be the upset of the tournament. Except, of course, the Czech Republic not making it to round 2. But, y'know. I've been predicting Brazil to not make it to the final game, so if they don't get stopped here who's going to do it?


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jun 29, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> I don't remember how far they got last World Cup, but I thought it was past the round of 16. Do you remember how far they got?




France got knocked out after the first round in the last world cup, winless and goaless.  The goal they scored against South Korea was their first in the World Cup finals since the last they scored against Brazil in the final of the 1998 World Cup.

Weird, huh?

For the record, here are their 2002 results:

France 0 Senegal 1
France 0 Uruguay 0
Denmark 2 France 0


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 29, 2006)

Wow! My memory's older than I remember.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jun 29, 2006)

Okay, my quarter-final predictions are:

Argentina v Germany: I'm really looking forward to this one and I think it will be a tight.  I'd say 1-1 with Argentina to progress through a penalty shoot out.

England v Portugal: Scolari has twice out-foxed Eriksson and there's every chance he'll do so again.  However, Deco is a fantastic player and they will miss his creativity.  Also, although I fully expect Ronaldo to play, I'm not sure he'll be 100% fit.  I also think England will be desperate to put one over Scolari.  So, an optimistic 2-1 win for England.  Wouldn't surpirsed if this was another that went to penalties, though.

Italy v Ukraine:  Italy all the way. 1-0 and into the semis.

Brazil v France: Another great match up.  Neither team has exactly played that well, but I expect Brazil (and Ronaldo in particular) to be out for revenge for their 1998 defeat to France.  2-0 to Brazil.

Of course, my predictions have not exactly been on the button, but there you go


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 29, 2006)

Red Moon Games said:
			
		

> 2-0 to Brazil.
> 
> Of course, my predictions have not exactly been on the button, but there you go



That's good for me.


----------



## Sidekick (Jun 29, 2006)

STARP_Social_Officer said:
			
		

> PS: Australia's out. I've come to terms with this, even if the rest of the country can't.




I was totally outraged by that loss. Sure Italy are a great team,. but c'mon that was a totally unfair and unsporting penalty to award. If that penalty was awarded 10 or 5 minutes from full-time & italy won. I wouldn't have minded, but to give a game winning penalty in the very last second of the match was cynical beyond all beleeif. Its as if the ref coldn't be bothered with the next 30 mins or had dinner waiting for him at home. jeez.

That Australia lost? I'm not too bothered as I expected it. But the way in which the Italians won? Severly pissed off...

And now to my 1/4er final preditions.

Germany v Argentina: This one is all up for grabs. If Argentina play like they did against Serbia/Montenegro and Germany play like they id against Sweden then it's all on for a great game. I can't pick it, but I'll be cheering for the hosts as I have a german flatmate, I like Ballack and Podolski has the coolest name ever (Podolski shoots'ski, scores'ski & its 1-Nilski!!!).

England v Portugal: hmm seeing as I live in Engerland I'll be supporting the boys in white. Should be close and hopefullly a good game.

Italy v Ukraine: If Italy can't win this, then the dont' deserve to win the world cup. They should outclass the Ukrainians in every area of the game (possibly bar main striker as Shevchenko is a legend).

France v Brazil: Hmm I feel an upset coming on. Too close to call. Whomever lifts their game the highest will win. If Brazil bring it - they should win 2 or 3 to 1. If France win, hmmmm I'm picking 2-1. But Ideally as a neutral It's time for some good gut-wrenching Penalty shoot outs (after 1-1 of course).

Bring it on I say!!!


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jun 29, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Wow! My memory's older than I remember.




I have a fantastic memory.  I call it Wiki


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 30, 2006)

> The ambition of other teams is to get to the point where they can win 3-0 and their fans still say they sucked




But for the Goalie and 1 or 2 other players, Brazil DID suck against Ghana.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 30, 2006)

For almost six months we've been hearing about the Magical Square, made up of Ronaldo, Adriano, Ronaldinho Gaúcho and Kaká. Which turned out to be a dud (at least as proposed). The true magic was in the defensive triangle of Dida (amazing defenses), Juan (very sober) and Lúcio (played a perfect Cup so far -- he's aiming at being voted the best fullback of the Cup, and so far has not done ONE SINGLE FAULT!).

The coach, Parreira, says that playing beautifully doesn't win championships, and people remember the champions, not those who played beautifully. He seems to be forgetting the Netherlands in '74, or Brazil in '82, two teams that are talked about to this day.

There are at least three players in the team who are playing on name alone, and need to be replaced ASAP. Or else Brazil won't make it past France or Portugal/England.


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Jun 30, 2006)

Sidekick said:
			
		

> I was totally outraged by that loss. Sure Italy are a great team,. but c'mon that was a totally unfair and unsporting penalty to award. If that penalty was awarded 10 or 5 minutes from full-time & italy won. I wouldn't have minded, but to give a game winning penalty in the very last second of the match was cynical beyond all beleeif. Its as if the ref coldn't be bothered with the next 30 mins or had dinner waiting for him at home. jeez.
> 
> That Australia lost? I'm not too bothered as I expected it. But the way in which the Italians won? Severly pissed off...
> 
> <snip>




The fact that Italy won due to a penalty that wasn't there is half of the reason I am so upset about the result.  The other half of the reason is that because it happened in the last few seconds of extra time we didn't get a chance to have even one last ditch effort to score in reply.  Sure we should have scored beforehand with all the possession and a 1 man advantage but that doesn't make the result any easier to take.

Personally I would have preferred if Grosso(?) had scored from that play instead of diving for the penalty.  At least we would have lost to a better team and not a bad referee decision.

On the other hand, the Italian player shouldn't have been red carded for his tackle either.

Olaf the Stout


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 30, 2006)

Red Moon Games said:
			
		

> Argentina v Germany: I'm really looking forward to this one and I think it will be a tight.  I'd say 1-1 with Argentina to progress through a penalty shoot out.



Way to predict the shootout, though wrong result.

Wow, what a game.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jun 30, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Way to predict the shootout...




Yay!



			
				Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> ...though wrong result.




d'oh!

But what was all that at the end about?  It was disgraceful behavior by some of the Argentinians.  Some looked like they were throwing punches.

As for the match, I thought Argentina threw it away.  The manager made some really strange substitutions which killed their momentum and handed the initiative to Germany.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jun 30, 2006)

Red Moon Games said:
			
		

> Yay!
> 
> d'oh!





A shootout is a gutsy prediction, though. I was thinking it, then shied away from the prediction.


			
				Red Moon Games said:
			
		

> But what was all that at the end about?  It was disgraceful behavior by some of the Argentinians.  Some looked like they were throwing punches.
> 
> As for the match, I thought Argentina threw it away.  The manager made some really strange substitutions which killed their momentum and handed the initiative to Germany.



Yeah, I don't like the Argentinian players very much. Not related to their soccer skill, though.

And, of course Argentina should have won. Why do you think we both predicted they'd win? 

A lot of the goals are coming toward the end of the games.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 30, 2006)

Argentinians are sore losers, that's the reason for the reaction in the end (plus the referee favored Germany a bit here and there).

The thing is, Argentina was a better team than Germany (who only has focus and the crowd as qualities, not skill or technique). But when Argentina was winning, their coach, Jose Pekerman, made reeeeally bad substitutions.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jul 1, 2006)

All I can say is that my prediction is still intact. Bring on Brazil!


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 1, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> As far as I remember, the Czech Republic is ranked rather high...
> 
> It's also about consistency. And, you have to look back more than a week or a month of play to see trends.
> I don't remember how far they got last World Cup, but I thought it was past the round of 16. Do you remember how far they got?
> ...



No not bad, but they had a few lackluster draws to unimpressive opponents, such as Isreal.  They also were fourth in their group until the last match and were certainly in grave danger of missing the Cup entirely (admittedly, they won their last match comfortably and topped their group, so perhaps I'm being harsh).  Frances's complete lack of performance in 2002--no wins or goals-- has posted above.   All that plus their form displayed in the group stage let me to conclude Spain was strong favorite in that match.  I think a lot of pundits said that as well.

Hey, I admit I've underestimated Les Bleus.  I'm rooting for them vs Brazil--we'll see.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 1, 2006)

Italy beat Ukraine 3-0, probably ending the only WC ever for Andrey Shevchenko.  Shevchenko got very few chances unfortunately but had some dazzling display.

Italy got great play from Buffon, and I think my claim that he's the best keeper in the tourney is looking reasonable.  This was the best match for a keeper IMO since Petr Cech's string of saves in a loosing effort to Ghana in the first round.  Otherwise, this WC has relatively few standout performances by keepers.

Incidentlally, this match was actually a showdown between two of the WC's best keepers--Buffon and Ukraine's Olexander Shovkovsky.  Shovkovsky has quietly had a brillient career for Dynamo Kyiv and really ought to get some offers from some rich European teams after getting some good exposure, though vs Italy he could have maybe saved one of the goals.


----------



## Iron Captain (Jul 1, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> The thing is, Argentina was a better team than Germany (who only has focus and the crowd as qualities, not skill or technique).




Nah Germany doesn't have any skill or technique.


----------



## Jupp (Jul 1, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> The thing is, Argentina was a better team than Germany (who only has focus and the crowd as qualities, not skill or technique).




*g* Yeah, you don't need skill or technique to win against Argentina /irony mode off


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 1, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> There are currently fourthree undefeated teams:
> Germany, Portugal, Brazil, and Spain. That speaks very highly for these teams.



Interesting stat. So, if Brazil wins, three of the final four teams will have been undefeated in the tournament?

... Nah, I rather France win.  They did knock out Spain, after all.

Anyone happen to know the most shoot-out finishes in a WC tournament?


----------



## jonesy (Jul 1, 2006)

France woke up late, but they're looking mighty strong right about now. Brazil is out.

Hindsight is always wonderful, but I keep thinking that Ronaldinho and Adriano shouldn't have been given any play time the way they ultimately performed.



			
				jonesy said:
			
		

> It's not fun being a Spain supporter when they always fall apart like that. Oh well, at least England is still in the games.



Ugh. Well, at least Portugal is still around.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 1, 2006)

wow.

just wow.

Brazil's player handed over that match like it was a W.O. Roberto Carlos stood still while Henry proceeded to score France's goal, none of the players did more than drag their weight around and it took 75 minutes to have Bartez make a single defense.

The coach took waaaay too long make substitutions, and some players had no business being in the team (namely Cafu, Roberto Carlos and, surprisingly, Kaká and Ronaldinho Gaúcho). Ultimately, Brazil suffered from its coach apathy.

So now it's PORTUGAL ALL THE WAY!!!!


----------



## Iron Captain (Jul 1, 2006)

Damn England is out and Brazil played really badly. Then at 70 minutes they suddenly realized they actually had to put some effort into it. Too little too late. 
France played very well I thought.

So my prediction for the finals? Germany VS France. Though to be honest I am pretty nervous about Germany's game against Italy. 
But I think France will beat Portugal especially if France plays as well as they did today and Portugal plays as "well" as they did against England (11 on 10 and you can't score in 45 minutes?).


----------



## Klaus (Jul 2, 2006)

A quick correction (and pardon me while I'm venting): Brazil didn't suddenly realize that they had to win. The goddamn coach waited until the last 10 minutes to put in players that actually WANTED to play, and removed at least one of the dead weight (Cafu). The team reflected their coach's apathy.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jul 2, 2006)

STARP_Social_Officer said:
			
		

> All I can say is that my prediction is still intact. Bring on Brazil!




Well. Er...spoke too soon I guess.
France won? Wow! I mean...wow! Nobody beats Brazil. Except France, of course, who beat them in 1998. Oh, well. I now predict a Germany vs France final. Brazil being knocked out is actually good for Germany, France and Portugal, because it means whichever one makes it to the final doesn't have to face the Samba Soccer Superstars.
Deutschland,  Deutschland, Uber Alles!


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 2, 2006)

DAMN!

...good and bad.

Good, because I was hoping to see France move on...but bad, because England is out. Sigh. TORN!

Here's hoping for Germany v. France for the final. Go Germany!


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 2, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Interesting stat. So, if Brazil wins, three of the final four teams will have been undefeated in the tournament?




Italy is still undefeated, though they have one draw.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 2, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Italy is still undefeated, though they have one draw.



 Yes, that list was of teams with no loses and no draws. I think I was unclear before.

In short, perfect records thus far.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 2, 2006)

STARP_Social_Officer said:
			
		

> Well. Er...spoke too soon I guess.
> France won? Wow! I mean...wow! Nobody beats Brazil. Except France, of course, who beat them in 1998.



And Argentina. And Mexico. And Ecuador.

I don't know why everyone thinks Brazil is the perfect team or never loses.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 2, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Ultimately, Brazil suffered from its coach apathy.



And, you know, from an excellent team playing excellent soccer.


			
				Iron Captain said:
			
		

> France played very well I thought.



That's an understatement, in my opinion. Zidane was _brilliant_.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 2, 2006)

I guarantee you that if it is a Germany vs. France final, every American who likes to ridicule soccer and/or France will attempt to be witty and bring up WW2.



> I don't know why everyone thinks Brazil is the perfect team or never loses.




Brazil has an excellent publicity department.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 2, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> I don't know why everyone thinks Brazil is the perfect team or never loses.




And you were telling me about team's accomplishment's that one cannot ignore .  Brazil had appeared in 3 straight WC final matches, winning two of them.  Talk about consistancy.

So, in short, they almost never lose.  It's close to never losing, but not quite.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 2, 2006)

*Reaction to France-Brazil match*

Oh La La!




That about sums it up.  I've posted many times I didn't think France had chances this year with their age and the poor performances in the group stage, not to mention in previous competitions.  But wow, Les Bleus managed to raise their game to the level of competition, and their star players played fantastically.  

WOWOWOWOW.

Very entertaining match, probably made more so by the French crowed I was watching the match with.

I do agree with Klaus that the Brazilian manager was outcoached--oh do they wish they had Scolori back.  The subs came way late to have a meaningful impact.  EDIT--and what was with taking Kaka off with over 10 min to go?

Can France win twice more and repeat their '98?  Dunno.

I'd say any team can come away with it now.  I know they're not fancied by a lot of people, but I'm going to go with Italy now.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 2, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> No not bad, but they had a few lackluster draws to unimpressive opponents, such as Isreal.



I'd just like to mention that Brazil has drawn against Bolivia and Japan in the past year. Not exactly stellar teams, to say the least.


			
				johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Frances's complete lack of performance in 2002--no wins or goals-- has posted above.



... And I'd like to mention that Czech Republic (ranked 2 in the world, I'm sure you remember) suffered embarrassing loses, not making it to the second round (though, the US team this year might be a better comparison).

My point is that good teams don't always play well. They just have a _tendency_ to play well. Which brings us to Spain


			
				johnsemlak said:
			
		

> All that plus their form displayed in the group stage let me to conclude Spain was strong favorite in that match.



Which is a very good point, I'd like to say. In my opinion, the most relevant point. Spain was a very good team, that was also playing very well. "In form" as some soccer people say, and it's certainly true. Basketball fans (and in other sports) might call this a "streak." A streak is typically when you win a number of games in a row and is characterized by very good or better-than-average play.

And, Spain was certainly playing very well. I, personally, put less stock in this than most. Maybe I should pay attention to it more, but I'm not a big fan of streaks. You never know when they're going to start and you never know when they're going to end. "Easy come, easy go." After all, if "being in form" was so easy to attain and hold on to, why wouldn't all the best teams always be in form? There's a definite randomness to it, and I never rely on it.

So, while I agree Spain was playing very well, and had they kept it up (and France had continued playing at the level they were), Spain could have easily won the game.

But, I think France's "average quality" is better than Spain's "average quality" and if soccer pundits don't agree with me, well FIFA rankings usually do. There are a lot of weird soccer pundits that say a lot of weird things for weird reasons anyway. Maybe it's because all the ones in the US suck, but you have to take what they say with many grains of salt.

Sorry for the rant, I just think that's where we differ the most in opinion so I figured I'd put my piece out there and let it go... because, well, it's kind of a moot point now.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 2, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> And you were telling me about team's accomplishment's that one cannot ignore .  Brazil had appeared in 3 straight WC final matches, winning two of them.  Talk about consistancy.
> 
> So, in short, they almost never lose.  It's close to never losing, but not quite.



 Okay, that's a good point. But, I think Brazil has been on the decline since their previous title. There are definite chinks in the armor, and France was the first really good team they faced. Everyone knew it'd be a good game, and if you want to talk about never losing, France has fewer loses in the past two years than Brazil does.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 2, 2006)

Dannyalcatraz said:
			
		

> Brazil has an excellent publicity department.



Well, having some of the highest paid players in the world doesn't hurt either.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 2, 2006)

Going back to ENG-POR, I thought it was an incredibly negative football match with Portugal's constant antics and diving, and then Rooney's red card on the other side.  Portugal played incredibly lame after Rooney went off--they were tentative and when their shots came they seemed to be weak.  

Portugal aren't going to be given much chance to advance further after that performance, but with Deco back they should be more imaginative, and you've got to give any team coached by Scolari a chance.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 2, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Going back to ENG-POR, I thought it was an incredibly negative football match with Portugal's constant antics and diving, and then Rooney's red card on the other side.  Portugal played incredibly lame after Rooney went off--they were tentative and when their shots came they seemed to be weak.



I was kind of surprised, myself, that England had twice the number of penalties Portugal did.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 2, 2006)

Time to start talking serious about who's going to win it.  Only four teams left (duh!)

I've checked several bookies and they all favor Germany.  Most have France as a tight second choice but one had Italy in that position.  All have Portugal as a 6/1 or 7/1 outsider.

I would say the competion is extremely open amongst the four remaining teams and its really hard to choose a clear favorite.  Any team can win it IMO without it being a huge shock.  I don't gamble (other than office pools) but figuratively my money is on Italy.  Hard to explain why.  However, it's hard to argue that with Germany being the host and playing extremely well that they're the bookies' favorite.

However, I'd say the best value pick by far is Portugal, where you can get 7/1 odds.  They might not be the favorite but I woudn't say them winning would be a shock of any kind.  

My picks right now--possibly to be revised:

Italy over Germany
France over Portugal
Italy over France


----------



## drothgery (Jul 2, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> And, Spain was certainly playing very well. I, personally, put less stock in this than most. Maybe I should pay attention to it more, but I'm not a big fan of streaks. You never know when they're going to start and you never know when they're going to end. "Easy come, easy go." After all, if "being in form" was so easy to attain and hold on to, why wouldn't all the best teams always be in form? There's a definite randomness to it, and I never rely on it.




Neither am I, but there aren't really enough games played in the Cup to get a solid handle on any team's "average".

I think the problem is that soccer is sufficiently random that unless there's a _huge_ gap in talent levels or extremely lopsided officiating, the better team wins a game less than half the time (it's probably about 45% best team wins, 25% draw, 30% worse team wins). So a single-elimination tournament is a terrible format to try and figure out the best national team in the world. 

Baseball, at least at the major league level, has much the same problem (except there are no draws, so the better team wins a little more than half the time); they get around it by playing a 162 game regular season and having best of seven playoffs. But you can't do that in soccer, because best of seven playoff series are only practical if you can play at least every other day.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 2, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> Okay, that's a good point. But, I think Brazil has been on the decline since their previous title. There are definite chinks in the armor, and France was the first really good team they faced. Everyone knew it'd be a good game, and if you want to talk about never losing, France has fewer loses in the past two years than Brazil does.



 The chinks in Brazil's armor were its unwillingness to retire older players. Brazil has the fastest new player turnout in the world (due to the fact that it's a continental-sized country with football as its only major sport), and for some eldritch reason there were players who were in the 1994 (!!!!) team. After the team played so much better against Japan, the coach should have bit the bullet and tried that team again against Ghana, to see if it was a fluke or if the younger players were actually better than the old timers. 

Zidane played like a maestro, and the Brazilian coach, aware that he was going to face Zidane, took no precautions to cancel him out. France, otoh, knew Brazil had to sideline plays and crowded the midfield, cancelling the static Brazilian players.

A lesson to be learn: big-name stars do not a team make.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 2, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> The chinks in Brazil's armor were its unwillingness to retire older players.
> 
> A lesson to be learn: big-name stars do not a team make.




The thing is, there was much of the same discussion in France about Zidane--I met multiple french supporters who said France played better without him.  Then Zidane delivers two of the best games of his career vs Spain and vs Brazil.

I certainly would think Brazil ought to have a young player who can replace the 36-year old Cafu, but I have to say I thought Cafu's fitness has been impressive--he seems to be up and running deep into the matches, as far as I recall.  Plus the savvy, experience, and leadership he brings to the team.  That must have been a difficult decision for the coach.

Problem is, I think that Brazil didn't just keep one old savvy player--practicly half the team was in that category.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 2, 2006)

> A lesson to be learn: big-name stars do not a team make.




As we Americans have noted with the recent performance of our NBA pros playing Olympic Basketball...


----------



## Klaus (Jul 2, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> The thing is, there was much of the same discussion in France about Zidane--I met multiple french supporters who said France played better without him.  Then Zidane delivers two of the best games of his career vs Spain and vs Brazil.
> 
> I certainly would think Brazil ought to have a young player who can replace the 36-year old Cafu, but I have to say I thought Cafu's fitness has been impressive--he seems to be up and running deep into the matches, as far as I recall.  Plus the savvy, experience, and leadership he brings to the team.  That must have been a difficult decision for the coach.
> 
> Problem is, I think that Brazil didn't just keep one old savvy player--practicly half the team was in that category.



 What physical fitness? He barely ran during the entire Cup, and the main attribute of a side player (sorry, don't know the actual English term for the position) is speed. In France match, Cafu was playing in the midfield, forcing Zé Roberto (a true warrior) to fill that void.

What savvy and experience? He constantly got blindsided by opponents, forcing the defenders Juan and Lúcio to work overtime to cover for him.

What leadership? All he could think of was which record he would break in this or that match, how he'd be the first captain to lift the Cup twice, etc. The team was fragmented, and barely spoke to each other during the matches.

The players had to become a team, under a single leader. Without a decisive leadership among them, the coach should have filled up that position (something Scolari did well in 2002). But Parreira was too placid, too apathic to take charge.


----------



## jaerdaph (Jul 2, 2006)

Well, Brazil needed a little lesson in humility. Actually, it's probably more accurate to say it was my Brazilian neighbors here in Astoria who needed that lesson. Every time Brazil one a game, they would take to the streets with an inpromptu parade (as if they had already won the World Cup), and have loud parties to three in the morning shouting "BRASIL! BRASIL!" over and over again. Let's just say a whole bunch of us had some good natured fun last night driving around shouting "VIVE LA FRANCE!" and waving French flags by all the Brazillian bars and shops, blasting Xavier Cougart's "Brazil" over the speakers. 

It was all in good fun though - we love our Brazilian neighbors here in Astoria, who are all very nice and a lot of fun to hang out with.


----------



## Morrus (Jul 3, 2006)

Re. England vs. Portugal...

Without Rooney, Owen or Beckham, Sven should have just saved everyone the bother and given up.  What was on that pitch was not the England team.  Not a single striker was involved in the English penalty shootout phase.  I knew we were lost, and so did the commentators.

I admire the remaining English players for mangaging to hold off a full team when at 10 men, without any of their star players.  They did a good job.

Sven was the weak link in the English side.  He's gone now.

As for Beckham resigning... I don't agree.  The role of the English Captain (and this is different for other teams, but not all) is to be the "face" of the team.  He was better at that then Sven was.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 3, 2006)

I don't know if its just coincidence or a lot of practice playing a man down, but every game I've seen England play a man short, they've won or tied, with the exception of this last match.

Perhaps they need to play a little cleaner football, but its clear to me (at least) that you can't count them out when they're playing short one.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 3, 2006)

In the penalty shootout I think a little too much has been made of the English strikers failing; the Portuguese keeper, Ricardo, saved three of the penalties.  He also got a bt lucky guessing where the English strikers would shoot.  The portuguese strikers actually missed the goal completely twice--The English goalie Robinson didn't make a single save.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 3, 2006)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Neither am I, but there aren't really enough games played in the Cup to get a solid handle on any team's "average".



That's why you look at games before, but around the time of the World Cup. Teams play international games relatively often.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 3, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> In the penalty shootout I think a little too much has been made of the English strikers failing; the Portuguese keeper, Ricardo, saved three of the penalties.  He also got a bt lucky guessing where the English strikers would shoot.  The portuguese strikers actually missed the goal completely twice--The English goalie Robinson didn't make a single save.



 And to think Ricardo used to be ostracized in Portugal, and it took Scolari's stubborness to place him as the main goalie.


----------



## Jupp (Jul 3, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> And to think Ricardo used to be ostracized in Portugal, and it took Scolari's stubborness to place him as the main goalie.




Wasn't Ricardo the goalkeeper that scored a penalty in the Euro 2004 against England?


----------



## drothgery (Jul 3, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> That's why you look at games before, but around the time of the World Cup. Teams play international games relatively often.




... but the rosters usually change a lot between everything but the last handful of pre-Cup friendlies (or even non-"must win" qualifiers) and the actual tournament, so they're not a great model either.

I'd suggest that the 8 pools->16 team single-elimination tournament model is really problematic. I think I'd go back to 16 teams in the Cup (even if it might very well keep us Yanks at home), do two 8 team pools, and then two rounds of best-of-3. And ditch the silly third place game.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 3, 2006)

Dannyalcatraz said:
			
		

> I don't know if its just coincidence or a lot of practice playing a man down, but every game I've seen England play a man short, they've won or tied, with the exception of this last match.
> 
> Perhaps they need to play a little cleaner football, but its clear to me (at least) that you can't count them out when they're playing short one.




Portugal were poor and if England had been prepared to take a risk or two at half time, I think they would have won it.  I was hoping to see Crouch come on for Lampard (who had a terrible world cup) and Lennon come on for Beckham, reverting to 4-4-2.  Rooney could have then dropped back into the hole and England could have gone on the offensive.  It was very noticable that from the moment England reverted to 4-5-1, Joe Cole almost vanished from the games.

Oh well.  Eriksson would not take the chance and the rest is history.  Of course, they may well have lost anyway, but we'll never know.

As for cleaner football - they pump too many long balls to the strikers, who all too often lose it and then they find themselves under attack.  It's why they all too often find it difficult to hold onto 1-0 leads at the end of important games.  Rather than keep the ball and just pass it around at the back, they just constantly give it away and in the end pay the price for it.

Edit: Just my opinion, of course


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 3, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> In the penalty shootout I think a little too much has been made of the English strikers failing; the Portuguese keeper, Ricardo, saved three of the penalties.  He also got a bt lucky guessing where the English strikers would shoot.  The portuguese strikers actually missed the goal completely twice--The English goalie Robinson didn't make a single save.




Ricardo was remarkable.  There really isn't anything anyone can do about that and you just have to applaud his efforts, lucky or otherwise.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 3, 2006)

Jupp said:
			
		

> Wasn't Ricardo the goalkeeper that scored a penalty in the Euro 2004 against England?




Yep.  And if I remember correctly, it was the winner too!  He's been quite a thorn in England's side.


----------



## Morrus (Jul 3, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> In the penalty shootout I think a little too much has been made of the English strikers failing; the Portuguese keeper, Ricardo, saved three of the penalties.  He also got a bt lucky guessing where the English strikers would shoot.  The portuguese strikers actually missed the goal completely twice--The English goalie Robinson didn't make a single save.




None of the English penalty takers were strikers.  Owen was injured and sent home, Rooney had been sent off, Beckham was injured (but he's not a striker anyway, although certainly one of England's penalty takers), Walcott didn't play, which only leaves Crouch as England's entire striker repertoire - who, presumably, isn't a good penalty taker.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 3, 2006)

Okay, here are my predictions for the semi-finals.  Given that I managed only 1 out of 4 for the quarters, don't go placing your bets just yet...   

Italy v Germany - another tight one.  I believe the Italians are a little rattled at some comments made about Italians in general in a German newspaper, so that should add a little spice.  The Germans are also without Frings.  Dare I say it? The Italians to beat the hosts 1-0?

France v Portugal - lets hope that portugal are better than they were against England.  With Deco back in the side, that's more than likely, but Zidane was awesome and if he keeps playing like that I don't think the Portuguesse will be able to stop them.  2-1 to France.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 3, 2006)

Morrus said:
			
		

> None of the English penalty takers were strikers. Owen was injured and sent home, Rooney had been sent off, Beckham was injured (but he's not a striker anyway, although certainly one of England's penalty takers), Walcott didn't play, which only leaves Crouch as England's entire striker repertoire - who, presumably, isn't a good penalty taker.



Oh yeah, England definitely didn't have their top strikers there.  I'm just saying it's not the only factor.  There is skill in taking penalties and blocking them, but luck is also a huge factor.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 3, 2006)

Red Moon Games said:
			
		

> Okay, here are my predictions for the semi-finals.  Given that I managed only 1 out of 4 for the quarters, don't go placing your bets just yet...
> 
> Italy v Germany - another tight one.  I believe the Italians are a little rattled at some comments made about Italians in general in a German newspaper, so that should add a little spice.  The Germans are also without Frings.  Dare I say it? The Italians to beat the hosts 1-0?
> 
> France v Portugal - lets hope that portugal are better than they were against England.  With Deco back in the side, that's more than likely, but Zidane was awesome and if he keeps playing like that I don't think the Portuguesse will be able to stop them.  2-1 to France.



 One thing is for sure: Scolari, unlike Brazil's Parreira, *will* set aside a player to shadow Zidane the entire match, or at least a rotating system to nullify him. Parreira, Cafu and a couple of others in the Brazilian Team said that Zidane required no special attention.

Sh'yeah, right...


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 3, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> One thing is for sure: Scolari, unlike Brazil's Parreira, *will* set aside a player to shadow Zidane the entire match, or at least a rotating system to nullify him. Parreira, Cafu and a couple of others in the Brazilian Team said that Zidane required no special attention.
> 
> Sh'yeah, right...




Yes, that's a very good point    I highly rate Scolari, despite some strange subs in the England game, so you're probably correct in what you say.  Still think France will win, though...


----------



## Ruavel (Jul 4, 2006)

Morrus said:
			
		

> Sven was the weak link in the English side.  He's gone now.



I just hope that Steve McClaren has learned from someone other than Eriksson, and learns from the former head's mistakes. I'd love to see England rebuild and climb the rankings again... as long as they're not too far ahead of Australia.  



			
				Morrus said:
			
		

> As for Beckham resigning... I don't agree.  The role of the English Captain (and this is different for other teams, but not all) is to be the "face" of the team.  He was better at that then Sven was.



So true.  He's like Kewell for the Socceroos. He's been a talisman, a source of confidence and drive for the team.  I'm not sure who could fill that role from the regular squad members, if there is anyone at all...


----------



## OakwoodDM (Jul 4, 2006)

To be honest, Beckham going off was the best thing that could have happened to England. With Lennon on the pitch, we looked like the better team, and bizarrely enough, continued to look the most likely to score even when down to ten men. The fact is that most teams don't like someone running at their left back and taking them on, especially at pace. (Interestingly, England are probably happier with people running at their left back than their right back. Ashley Cole's a much better defensive player than Gary Neville) It would have been even better if Sean Wright Phillips had actually had some games last season and gone, because he has lennon's pace combined with trickery, a good cross and a touch of the striker's instinct.

As for penalties, you have to say that while, yes, Ricardo guessed right all 4 times, the three that were saved were poorly struck, 2 of whom you'd expect to score 99 times out of 100 from the spot, and one who was brought on specifically to take a penalty. Sometimes I think it's mental strength. If we had more of that, we would have won that shootout.

Finally, about the red card. I have no idea what was going on there. The ref had given the free kick, showing no intention of even booking Rooney, then he's surrounded by portuguese players, Rooney pushes Ronaldo away, saying something, and the ref immediately calls him over and sends him off. Normally, I'd say, fair enough, maybe a touch harsh, but within the rules. The odd bit comes from the fact that Sven asked the ref in his dressing room after the game what the red card was for, and he claimed it was for the stamp.
In my mind this suggests that one of two things happened. Either he sent Rooney off for the push and what he said, and then either he saw a replay or talked to the other officials and decided to say it was for the stamp instead because it was more believable, or he changed his mind about whether or not to card Rooney because of the Portuguese reaction.

Either way, the stamp was accidental and didn't deserve a red, and would never have happened if the ref had given any of the 3 or 4 fouls committed on Rooney in the seconds leading up to it...

I'm glad Eriksson's gone now, maybe McLaren can show some of the tactical and man management nous he must have picked up from being Sir Alex Ferguson's number two during the Man Utd glory years.



Edit: Also, on a personal note, it seems my heart's a better predictor than my head. My heart had 3 correct results, whereas my head had just the 2.


----------



## MonsterMash (Jul 4, 2006)

Well a prediction for today.

Unless Germany get an early goal I expect Italy to be very cagy and defensive looking to score on the break, Germany will miss having Frings unavailable and a lot depends on the service they can manage to Klose and Podolski. 

Germany 1 : 0 Italy


----------



## Spud (Jul 4, 2006)

OakwoodDM said:
			
		

> I'm glad Eriksson's gone now, maybe McLaren can show some of the tactical and man management nous he must have picked up from being Sir Alex Ferguson's number two during the Man Utd glory years.




Having watched Middlesbore when theyve played us I wouldnt hold up much hope for that. Having said that I wish him all the luck and he has my support. 

Well till he picks Beckham in his first game..

As for SWP, us here at Man City would be more than willing to have him back to ensure he plays more games, for the good of England of course   

Im hoping for a Italian win tonight and Portugal to go through tommorow, as at least id win some money then!


----------



## Jupp (Jul 4, 2006)

MonsterMash said:
			
		

> Well a prediction for today.
> 
> Unless Germany get an early goal I expect Italy to be very cagy and defensive looking to score on the break, Germany will miss having Frings unavailable and a lot depends on the service they can manage to Klose and Podolski.
> 
> Germany 1 : 0 Italy




The nice thing about the Germans is that almost all the players do play on about the same level of quality. They do not have superstars or once-in-a-century-players in their team. Having said that I am not too sure that the absence of Frings will hurt the the team as much as some may think...

Edit: If one looks at the history of the games Germany-Italy on World Cups or Euros I have the hope that we might see another great game between the two teams. Aside from the test game some months ago all the games between them ended up as real classics.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 4, 2006)

*My prediction for Germany Italy*

The German attack has looked brilliant so far in this tournament but their defence has looked vulnerable at times, though it was fairly impressive vs the highly regarded Argentines.  I predict however that the Italian _Catenaccio_ will hold the germans back, and if they break through, Buffon, the world's best keeper will be there.  This is a much stronger defence than Germany has faced.  Italy will struggle to score themselves, but I think they'll find a way, though I could easily see this one going 0-0 and to penalties.  The home crowed will obviously boost the Germans but the Italians have been most impressive to me at weathering adversity.

Germany 0 : 1 Italy


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 4, 2006)

I'm having a tough time predicting today's game.

I want Italy to win, but I think Germany is a better team.

Anyway, here's an interesting article on the World Cup website:
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/06/en/060702/1/8ici.html


----------



## Klaus (Jul 4, 2006)

Didn't watch the game, buuut...

Italy 1 x 0 Germany in the extra time.

The Germans will be needing them beers tonight...


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 4, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Didn't watch the game, buuut...
> 
> Italy 1 x 0 Germany in the extra time.
> 
> The Germans will be needing them beers tonight...




Finished 2-0 and it was great game.  Italy were the better side and deserved their win IMO.


----------



## barsoomcore (Jul 4, 2006)

That was the best game I've seen all tournament. Still dunno if the Italians can beat the French team I saw dissecting Brazil so effectively, but you never know which team's going to show up to play this tournament...


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jul 4, 2006)

What can I say but "D'oh!"?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 5, 2006)

That game simply rocked!

Full-field action, great saves & missed opportunities...

And (quality) goals to win the game so late in overtime that they were nearly Golden!


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Jul 5, 2006)

Well at least the Italy win makes Australia's loss look even better!    

I didn't see any of the match in regular time but I saw almost all of the extra time.  Unfortunately I had to leave for work just before the end but I did hear the last few minutes of extra time (including both goals) on my car radio.

From what I saw of extra time it was great to watch, real end to end stuff with both teams charging forward to counter attack when possession was turned over.

Olaf the Stout


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 5, 2006)

drothgery said:
			
		

> ... but the rosters usually change a lot between everything but the last handful of pre-Cup friendlies (or even non-"must win" qualifiers) and the actual tournament, so they're not a great model either.



Like I said, good teams have a tendency to play well.

I didn't put qualifiers for a reason. It's regardless of roster changes, which are often not major anyway (particularly for the big teams). Brazil, Argentina, France, Germany, etc--they have good national teams that win most of their games year-round, year after year. That's why they're ranked highly in FIFA and that's why we know they're good teams.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 5, 2006)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> That was the best game I've seen all tournament. Still dunno if the Italians can beat the French team I saw dissecting Brazil so effectively, but you never know which team's going to show up to play this tournament...



 It was a great game, despite it being low-scoring.

People think high-scroing games are more exciting? I don't think so. And, that article I posted didn't disappoint!


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 5, 2006)

Olaf the Stout said:
			
		

> I didn't see any of the match in regular time but I saw almost all of the extra time.  Unfortunately I had to leave for work just before the end but I did hear the last few minutes of extra time (including both goals) on my car radio.
> 
> From what I saw of extra time it was great to watch, real end to end stuff with both teams charging forward to counter attack when possession was turned over.



Definitely. The two goals came in the last _two minutes_! I'm still amazed.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 5, 2006)

Jupp said:
			
		

> The nice thing about the Germans is that almost all the players do play on about the same level of quality. They do not have superstars or once-in-a-century-players in their team.



Maybe you should've told that to Klose, the current top scorer of the tournament by two goals (with 5), despite a 0-2 loss in the semi-finals. 

Italy, on the other hand, doesn't have anyone with more than 2 goals this tournament.


----------



## elmuthalleth (Jul 5, 2006)

Italy will win the world championship !!! 
We have the best team in the world 

_FORZA AZZURRI !!!!!!!!!!!_ 


Germany was only the shadow of a team ,. 
Their supporters whistled our national anthem , and every decision contrar y for Germany by the referee was whistled .
Their newspapers insulted us calling the Italians " parasites " and "macaroni " ...

They deserved the defeat


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 5, 2006)

elmuthalleth said:
			
		

> Italy will win the world championship !!!
> We have the best team in the world
> 
> _FORZA AZZURRI !!!!!!!!!!!_
> ...



 Dude, be fair.  Germany's had a great result in this tournament.  I'd say they're far from 'shadow' of a team, rather a team of the future, full of young players who will get better.  They'll bea real threat in the next Euro Championship, which will be in neighboring Switzerland, no?

Germany's been a great host and have thrown a great tournament, from what I read.  Ugly, jingoistic football support is (unfortunately) part of most major football nations' culture, certainly not only Germany.

Oh, and what a great game.  I thought the first half was pretty boring actually, but the match certainly heated up and the ending was fantastic.  The best team won, as well, and the result was fair.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 5, 2006)

Prediction for tonight.

Hard to call.  Portugal were poor vs England but will have two key players back.  France are playing really special football right now but a worry with some of their older players has to be that they might run out of steam.

It's hard to imagine that if France play the type of football that allowed them to beat Brazil that they'll fail to overcome Portugal, but France has not beaten (or played) a Scolari-coached team, and he is one of the proven masterminds of the game.

If it goes to penalties it will be very tense, both teams have great keepers but I'd give hte edge to France there--It's hard to imagine tbe likes of Zidane (if he's on the pitch still), Henry, Wiltord, Trezeguet, Viera, etc missing penalties.

Gotta have a prediction.  France by one goal.  Say, 1-0.


----------



## Ruavel (Jul 5, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> France by one goal.  Say, 1-0.



I'm calling same goal difference but a 2-1 win to France.  I think Portgal can push a goal though the French defense, but I think Zizou, Henry & Ribery (damn that kid's good) will get the extra goal needed to win the game...



Allez les bleus...!!!


----------



## Klaus (Jul 5, 2006)

VAI PORTUGAL!!!

Here's hoping for a 2-1 in favor of Portugal. France played really well against Brazil because, frankly (heh), they were playing alone in the field.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 5, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> VAI PORTUGAL!!!
> 
> Here's hoping for a 2-1 in favor of Portugal. France played really well against Brazil because, frankly (heh), they were playing alone in the field.



 It's a bit of a shame we didn't get a Portugal-Brazil match, which would have been very interesesting, particularly wiht Scolari coaching Portugal.  Have those two teams ever met in the World Cup?


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 5, 2006)

France, 2-1.

But just because I have to pick.


----------



## barsoomcore (Jul 5, 2006)

Here we are at the half and that darn Zizou continues to play the tournament of a lifetime.  Hoping the Portugese can get one of those close misses into the net next half!


----------



## Klaus (Jul 5, 2006)

GODDAMMIT!!!!

France 1-0 Portugal (penalty kick by Zidane).

It was amazing to see how the Portuguese fought to the very last second. Even the goalie Ricardo tried to score in the last couple of minutes.

Oh, well... FORZA AZZURRA!!!!


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jul 6, 2006)

First World Cup final since 1990 Brazil haven't been part of. I'm just saying is all.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 6, 2006)

fell asleep after the French goal (the games start at 11 pm here).  The penalty awarded to France was probably fair, but it wasn't that clear-cut, and Henry seemed to exaggerate it.  It's a real shame that was the game's only goal.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 6, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> fell asleep after the French goal (the games start at 11 pm here).  The penalty awarded to France was probably fair, but it wasn't that clear-cut, and Henry seemed to exaggerate it.  It's a real shame that was the game's only goal.



 And the referee didn't give a penalty to Portugal, for a foul on Cristiano Ronaldo.

Man, did Scolari get worked up by the refereeing. Went up to the ref after the match and put a finger to his face yelling "you're a shame!!!".

The match was really good, with both teams actively seeking to score (Portugal more so, but with less efficiency), and the sight of Ricardo (Portugal's goalie) joining the offensive was worth the entire game. And his pass almost became a goal for Portugal!


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 6, 2006)

I, too, loved seeing the Portugese goalie coming up to join the attack.  I've only seen it twice before on the world stage, and in one of those, an opposing player caught the goalie napping and launched a lazy floating skyball over his head on goal- the goalie didn't quite get to it in time.

I also reiterate my postition that diving should merit a red card, not that I saw any dives in that game...


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 6, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> And the referee didn't give a penalty to Portugal, for a foul on Cristiano Ronaldo.




Portugal are a dirty team.  There was no penalty awarded because it was no penalty.  Several players - and Ronaldo in particular - did everything they could to con the referee into giving unwarranted fouls and penalties and they should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.  I'm glad they're out for that very reason.  A very mediocre team who prefer to rely on cheating than using their undoubted talent.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 6, 2006)

Red Moon Games said:
			
		

> Portugal are a dirty team.  There was no penalty awarded because it was no penalty.  Several players - and Ronaldo in particular - did everything they could to con the referee into giving unwarranted fouls and penalties and they should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.  I'm glad they're out for that very reason.  A very mediocre team who prefer to rely on cheating than using their undoubted talent.



 One of the skills a footballer has to learn is a certain level of streetsmarts, to pace the match, to unnerve the other team just the right bit to force them into making an error. This is taken to such an extreme level on Argentina x Brazil matches that these matches have acquired a warlike aura of sorts (because both teams tend to be very good at that streetsmarts thing).

The Portuguese did indeed try one too many times to force the referee into marking a penalty kick, but in one occasion the penalty did exist (the French player's left had pushed Cristiano Ronaldo as he dove to headbutt the ball).


----------



## barsoomcore (Jul 6, 2006)

Red Moon Games said:
			
		

> Portugal are a dirty team.



Fee, Fie, Fo, Fun, I smell the blood of an English fan...


----------



## Morrus (Jul 6, 2006)

Red Moon Games said:
			
		

> Portugal are a dirty team.  There was no penalty awarded because it was no penalty.  Several players - and Ronaldo in particular - did everything they could to con the referee into giving unwarranted fouls and penalties and they should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.  I'm glad they're out for that very reason.  A very mediocre team who prefer to rely on cheating than using their undoubted talent.




Agreed.  Hearing about the Portugese of all people complaining about the refereeing is so delightfully ironic!


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 6, 2006)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> Fee, Fie, Fo, Fun, I smell the blood of an English fan...




 

Here's their recent disciplinary record at major championships:

*2000 European Championship -* Abel Xavier banned for nine months after manhandling a referee; Nuno Gomes banned for eight months after manhandling a referee; Paulo Bento banned for six months after manhandling a referee.  1 red card for the tournament.
*2002 World Cup* - Joao Pinto suspended for three months for punching a referee.  2 red cards for the tournament.
*2006 World Cup*- 2 red cards for the tournament.

Now, by any stretch of the imagination, that is a dirty team.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 6, 2006)

Red Moon Games said:
			
		

> Here's their recent disciplinary record at major championships:
> 
> *2000 European Championship -* Abel Xavier banned for nine months after manhandling a referee; Nuno Gomes banned for eight months after manhandling a referee; Paulo Bento banned for six months after manhandling a referee.  1 red card for the tournament.
> *2002 World Cup* - Joao Pinto suspended for three months for punching a referee.  2 red cards for the tournament.
> ...



 You boys are so spoiled.  Come down and watch the Brazilian Football Championships sometime. That's far from the worst I've seen...

Down here we say that the best type of win is from an offside position, with the hand, while the referee sits on the head of the goalie.

"Brazil: Country of Football" indeed.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 6, 2006)

Red Moon Games said:
			
		

> Here's their recent disciplinary record at major championships:
> 
> *2000 European Championship -* Abel Xavier banned for nine months after manhandling a referee; Nuno Gomes banned for eight months after manhandling a referee; Paulo Bento banned for six months after manhandling a referee.  1 red card for the tournament.
> *2002 World Cup* - Joao Pinto suspended for three months for punching a referee.  2 red cards for the tournament.
> ...



 Can't argue with 2000/2002 but 2 red cards in the 2006 World Cup is hardly a 'dirty team'.  I can easily think of several teams that have had 2 red cards.  Heck, one player nearly received 2 red cards in one game .

Their diving antics have been horrible at times but diving is endemic in football now, and lots of (all?) teams do it.

Overall I think Scolari has got them to be a bit more focused on the match.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 6, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Can't argue with 2000/2002 but 2 red cards in the 2006 World Cup is hardly a 'dirty team'.  I can easily think of several teams that have had 2 red cards.  Heck, one player nearly received 2 red cards in one game .
> 
> Their diving antics have been horrible at times but diving is endemic in football now, and lots of (all?) teams do it.
> 
> Overall I think Scolari has got them to be a bit more focused on the match.



 But still haven't fully removed their tendency to *not* shoot for the goal. It doesn;t help that the only dedicated kicker in Portugal was Pauletta, with Cristiano Ronaldo and Figo being midfielders who occasionally shoot at the goal.

What Scolari did miraculously was give Portugal (the country) a sense of pride for their national team. He's called "Father of the Flag" there because he began celebrating wins by waving the Portuguese flag (like we often do in Brazil), and people began to cherish their flag more.

Plus he discovered one heck of a goalie.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jul 7, 2006)

OK. New prediction. I'm going to get SOMETHING right if it kills me.

1. France
2. Italy
3. Germany
4. Portugal


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 8, 2006)

*Final predictions*

My predictions certainly haven't been relieable enough to use for betting purposes but here it goes.

FWIW Italy is a very slight bookies' favorite, at 5/6.

*3rd/4th place match*

This match is usually won by the team capable of mustering enough pride and effort for the match, after the heartbreaking loss in the semifinals.  Also having a lot to do with it is the perceived significance that a third place finish for the two competeting teams (e.g. in 1998 it was between Croatia adn Holland, and for little Croatia, which was in only its first WC IIRC, it meant for more for them than for Holland, which had appeared in several finals earlier; Croatia won).  THese matches also tend to be higher scoring since so much less is on the line.

I think Germany will return to its high-scoring tendencies of earlier inthe tournement.  

Germany 3:2 Portugal.

*Final*

Early in the tournament I didn't think much of France's chances but they've made a believer out of me.  Italy is a team that I predicted could win this tourmament from the beginning.  Natually, it's a tough one to call.

I think France will win simply because I think that the old guard of the French team--Zidane, Thuran, Barthez, Viera, Henry, and Trezeguet, have a motivation few others have had--a chance to win a 2nd World Cup title.  Each of these players could cenemt a special place in football history with a win, and Zidane espcially.  With a victory, surely he overtakes Platini as France's most famous ever football player; and possibly, the earlier Pele-Maradona discussion of the World's best football player will become Pele-Maradona-Zidane disucssions.

France will have a tough time overcoming Italy's defence, but Italy hasn't been a scoring machine and will face a similar contest vs France, and they'll have to be wary of the threats posed by Henry and Zizou.  I think Italy will face a tougher midfield battle from France with Zidane, Viera, and Makalele than Germany posed.  I think the immense experience and class of the French team, several who have played and won a WC final, will be invaluable vs the Italians.

France certainly have worries.  Barthez has been shaky at times.  Several of France's older players might run out of steam. 

It will be extremly tight, very possibly 0-0 after 120 min and decided on penalties.  Perhaps, though, France will decided it earlier on a free kick from Zidane, or a rush forward from Henry.  Or less desirably from a penalty earned by Henry.  Perhaps Barthez will miscue and give the Italians a chance to win.  But if it goes to penalties, I give the edge to France, because Barthez is good at that, and France's penalty takers should be able to blast them in reliably.

France 0:0 Italy, France win on penalties.

I can't wait!


----------



## barsoomcore (Jul 8, 2006)

Good summary, Semlak. I'll say this: for Italy to win, they have to UP their game. I think they can do that, but I think they have to rise even above the heights they reached for Germany.

For France to win, they have to MAINTAIN their game. If they play like they did against Brazil, I don't see much opportunity for Italy.

Advantage: France.

But my heart wants Italy. I hope I'm wrong.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jul 9, 2006)

STARP_Social_Officer said:
			
		

> OK. New prediction. I'm going to get SOMETHING right if it kills me.
> 3. Germany
> 4. Portugal




He shoots, he scores! One match to go. Way I see it, I have a 50% chance of getting it right. Viva La France!


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 9, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Italy hasn't been a scoring machine



I said this last week, to a friend, because I don't think of Italy as a high scoring team. They certainly have a convincing defense, right?

And he looked at me, surprised. "Three goals against Ukraine, two against Ghana and the Czech Republic." No 6-0 wins, but still a good scoring record.

Certainly, not a _low_ scoring team.

I ended up calling the Germany-Portugal game, including the score. Which rarely happens with me. I expect France to win, but I can't betray Italy. I'm going to call Italy to win, 2-1.


			
				johnsemlak said:
			
		

> With a victory, surely he overtakes Platini as France's most famous ever football player; and possibly, the earlier Pele-Maradona discussion of the World's best football player will become Pele-Maradona-Zidane disucssions.



Why don't you think Ronaldo would be in there? Though, I suppose, Ronaldo can't hold a light to his countryman Pele.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 9, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> *3rd/4th place match*



Something occured to me the other day, though I could be wrong about this.

Someone had mentioned earlier that the format of the tournament is silly--that there should be more games (ie, best of 2, 3, etc) in each round and to do away with the third place match.

The big disadvantage of this that I can see is that it messes with the goal scorer of the tournament. Like, as it is now, the top four teams have the best chance of having a player be the top scorer of the tournament (and to claim that coveted prize), since they play the most games. If it were a best of n, then any other team would have absolutely no chance to get this. (as it is now, tied for second includes Argentine and Brazilian players) If you did away with the third place game, that'd mean the top scorer would most likely be from the top two teams. The setup, now, allows for a larger number of teams to at least have a chance for this.

Then it occured to me that the loser of the third-place game kind of gets shafted.

To my knowledge, international rankings are based on number of wins and loses. A team that loses in the semi-finals and then loses the third-place game (ie, Portugal, technically fourth place) suffers two loses, but a team that loses in the quarter-finals (ie, Brazil) only suffers one loss. That puts an advantage in international rankings to the quarter-final losers over the fourth place team.

Not that there's necessarily a _huge_ difference, and not that it matters a _lot_, but it's certainly an odd quirk that the fourth place team would have that happen.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 9, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Germany 3:2 Portugal.




Hey, pretty good call   

I didn't get a chance to drop by and post my prediction for that match, so I thought I'd get one in  for the final, which I'm really looking forward to.

2-1 to Italy.  France to score first.

Here's hoping for a classic game


----------



## Klaus (Jul 9, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> With a victory, surely he overtakes Platini as France's most famous ever football player; and possibly, the earlier Pele-Maradona discussion of the World's best football player will become Pele-Maradona-Zidane disucssions.




Those Pelé-Maradona discussions happen only beacuse the public at large never heard of Garrincha, who almost single-handedly won the 1962 World Cup for Brazil. I wish there was a YouTube link for anything on Garrincha. His footwork was a wonder to behold.

Below Pelé and Garrincha, there's a second-tier of football legends where I'd include Maradona, Romário, Ronaldo and Zidane.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 9, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Garrincha




Arguably the greatest player of all time, though completely overshadowed.  Sadly, died an alcoholic and destitute and destined never to get the accolades he was due.  IIRC, didn't he have deformed legs or something like that?


----------



## Klaus (Jul 9, 2006)

He was called "angel with crooked legs", yes.

And lookee lookee what I found:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search=garrincha&search_type=search_videos&search=Search


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 9, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Below Pelé and Garrincha, there's a second-tier of football legends where I'd include Maradona, Romário, Ronaldo and Zidane.



I suppose that's a very Brazilian answer. 

Saying that there's a definite tier between Pele and Maradona is quite a stretch.


----------



## Crothian (Jul 9, 2006)

Wow, now it goes to a shoot out


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 9, 2006)

Italy wins! Awesome!

WOOOOOOO!


----------



## Klaus (Jul 9, 2006)

FORZA AZZURRA!!!

I *was* rooting for Zidane to end his career on a high note (i.e., as a World Champion). But his stroke of dumbassness made me change my mind.

ITALIA! ITALIA!


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 9, 2006)

Congratulations to Italy  

But what was Zindane thinking?  Madness.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 9, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> I *was* rooting for Zidane to end his career on a high note (i.e., as a World Champion). But his stroke of dumbassness made me change my mind.




But what a terrible way to retire from football.  After all the great things he has achieved, it is such a sad way to bow out.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 9, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> I suppose that's a very Brazilian answer.
> 
> Saying that there's a definite tier between Pele and Maradona is quite a stretch.



 Not only is there a tier, but it's not a small one.

Maradona was a good scorer, but he's in the same league as Romário, Ronaldo, Tostão, Rivelino, Carlos Alberto, Beckembauer, Zidane, Sócrates, Zico, Falcão...

Above all these are Pelé first, and then Garrincha.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 9, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> FORZA AZZURRA!!!
> 
> I *was* rooting for Zidane to end his career on a high note (i.e., as a World Champion). But his stroke of dumbassness made me change my mind.
> 
> ITALIA! ITALIA!



 Just about agreed totally.  That was incredibly stupid by Zidane.  It's no excuse but it looks like the Italian player might have said something that really provoked him.

And I was hoping Zidane would cement his status as among the very best--this mistake will have a huge impact on his legacy.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 9, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> I suppose that's a very Brazilian answer.
> 
> Saying that there's a definite tier between Pele and Maradona is quite a stretch.



 I'll agree with Klaus here.  Pele is a tier above Maradona, though public opinion doens't always reflect this.  Maradona's career was absolutely brilliant for a period but shortened by drug use and fitness problems.  Absolutely great, but below Pele.  In AD&D terms, Pele's a Greater God, and Maradon'a a mere Lesser God.   Still far better than a level 5 magic user though.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 10, 2006)

Grrr! I'm still so disappointed in the French.  They clearly had the advantage after halftime, yet they never sent enough attackers forward to score.  Had they done so, they surely would have won.

One particularly defining moment was when a French forward won the ball from an Italian near the corner, passed to a French player--Ribery I think; the Frenchmen got the ball to the goal box and centered it, and there were no French players anywhere near the goal to take what would have been a fantastic scoring opportunity.

Gotta give credit to the Italians though--They've had a great tournament.  Only two goals conceded--one a penalty kick and the other an own goal.


----------



## GlassJaw (Jul 10, 2006)

What a lame way to end the World Cup.  France was _clearly _the better team but it goes down to the god-awful penalty kicks to end it.  What a useless tie-breaking system.  Watching the goalies try to defend against them is brutal.  It's almost pointless.  You might as well use a coin-flip to decide the winner.

On top of that, the game will be remembered for that Zidane fool.  What an absolute disgraceful act that was.

I'll take my American sports like baseball and football over today's mess any day.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 10, 2006)

GlassJaw said:
			
		

> What a lame way to end the World Cup.  France was _clearly _the better team but it goes down to the god-awful penalty kicks to end it.



Did you watch the same game I did? Italy was clearly the better team in the first half, France played better in the second half.

The overtimes, I thought, were back-and-forth.

Playing overtimes until one team scores, I think, is a much sillier way to end it. Then, it's not about skill at all, it's about which team is less exhausted after playing for hours.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jul 10, 2006)

I predicted 3rd and 4th place. After my ninth prediction. Other than that everything I predicted was incorrect. Oh well. My career as a soccer predictor falls by the wayside. I will, however, survive. Excuse me while I go headbutt something...


----------



## Klaus (Jul 10, 2006)

According to italian reporters, Materazzo (the player headbutted by Zidane, who provoked the penalty kick for France and scored for Italy -- busy man) said really bad things about Zidane's sister and told Zidane to -- erm... -- go love himself, IYKWIMAITYD. How foolish of Zidane to fall for that. Materazzo was clearly trying to mess up with Zidane's focus, but hit the jackpot when Zidane totally lost it.

Trivia Time:

1970 - Brazil wins their 3rd title.

1994 - Brazil finally wins its 4th title, 24 years later.

1982 - Italy wins their 3rd title.

2006 - Italy finally wins its 4th title, 24 years later.



Fun conspiracy theory:
Ever since the World Cup began (Uruguay 1930), South-Americans and Europeans have taken turns as winners. Never has a continent distanced itself from the other. This Cup maintains that tradition. If the conspiracy is correct, a South-American team will win South Africa 2010, and an European will win the 2014 Cup (odds point at being set in Brazil).


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Jul 10, 2006)

I found the penalty shootout to decide the winner of the World Cup a bit of a lousy way to end things.  I think for the final they should replay the match if the scores are tied after extra time.  Either that or just keep playing until there is a winner.

It's not as if there is another match played next week that would get in the way of a replay.  If the score is a draw the second time around then I don't know what you would do.  I just think that there should have been a more fitting ending to it all.

As for GlassJaw's comments about the headbutt, I can remember seeing more than a handful of baseball all-in brawls.  People in glass houses and all that.    

Having said that I find the diving for free-kicks and penalties and pantomiming of injuries in soccer to be the most disgraceful part of the sport.  You would think that they play on stilts with the frequency that players seem to fall over.

Olaf the Stout


----------



## drothgery (Jul 10, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Fun conspiracy theory:
> Ever since the World Cup began (Uruguay 1930), South-Americans and Europeans have taken turns as winners. Never has a continent distanced itself from the other. This Cup maintains that tradition. If the conspiracy is correct, a South-American team will win South Africa 2010, and an European will win the 2014 Cup (odds point at being set in Brazil).




Y'know, sooner or later the Asians, Africans, Australians, or we North Americans will throw a wrench into this pattern.


----------



## Ruavel (Jul 10, 2006)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Y'know, sooner or later the Asians, Africans, Australians, or we North Americans will throw a wrench into this pattern.



That'd be nice, but my guess is it's going to be later rather than sooner...


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 10, 2006)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Y'know, sooner or later the Asians, Africans, Australians, or we North Americans will throw a wrench into this pattern.



 Hahaha... oh, you're serious?


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 10, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Fun conspiracy theory:
> Ever since the World Cup began (Uruguay 1930), South-Americans and Europeans have taken turns as winners. Never has a continent distanced itself from the other. This Cup maintains that tradition. If the conspiracy is correct, a South-American team will win South Africa 2010, and an European will win the 2014 Cup (odds point at being set in Brazil).




A European team has never won a WC held outside of Europe, so, well, there's that.  I'd say Brazil will have a tremendous chance at winning in their home country in 2014, unless the team that year is terriible by Brazil standards. 

I wonder how well African teams will do in 2010?


----------



## Ruavel (Jul 10, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> I wonder how will African teams will do in 2010?



Hopefully they can get more than one team past the first stage...  would be nice to see Asia do the same as well, actually...


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 10, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> A European team has never won a WC held outside of Europe, so, well, there's that.



Oh, that creates a conspiracy conflict in 2014.


----------



## STARP_Social_Officer (Jul 10, 2006)

If France had won, they would have 2 victories, with Brazil's 5, Germany's 3, Italy's 3, Argentina's 2, Uruguay's 2 and England's 1. That would have left England the only country to have won the world cup once. How weird is that? Makes you think. Sounds like a conspiracy to me. Those pesky Russians are at it again. Why isn't bacon as crispy as it used to be...


----------



## barsoomcore (Jul 10, 2006)

I'm still in shock over Zidane's insanity. WHAT happened to him? Of all people, of all games... What a terrible way to end a great career.

Barthes proves again that putting him in net was maybe not the best move ever.

Italy was spectacular. Even when they were unable to get any offence going, or even control the midfield, they gave up almost no good chances on net. Buffon only had to make one tough save, that header by Zidane.

Well, that and the penalty kicks he missed. 

But Cannavaro runs a MEAN defence. Never panicking, never NOT knowing what's going on. Very impressive.

Did anyone else notice that the Italian offence died the moment they took Totti off the field? I think that was a mistake. He wasn't very visible, but I think he was key in the first half of the game, just being solid and keeping the play forward.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 10, 2006)

This match was a snapshot of the entire World Cup, with a really low skill level and the second-lowest score average since Italy 1990 (and boy, what a drag *that* Cup was).

Nearly all teams, as soon as they managed to get 1-0 on the socre, retreated to defend that meager advantage. Too much defensiveness, not enough seeking of the goal (which is, shockingly, the whole goal of the game). No wonder FIFA wil be holding a forum to alter some football rules (like the offside and possibly even the goal size) to increase the offensiveness of the game.




Now that the Cup has come to a close, I'd like to thanks everyone who contributed to this thread. It was great sharing ideas with you all for the past month, and hopefully we will do this again in 4 years.

Cheers!


----------



## Ruavel (Jul 10, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Now that the Cup has come to a close, I'd like to thanks everyone who contributed to this thread.



Likewise... 

Hope I didn't annoy anyone by being OVERLY opinionated... 

now I just wish they'd hurry up and name the Golden Ball recipient...


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 10, 2006)

Ruavel said:
			
		

> now I just wish they'd hurry up and name the Golden Ball recipient...



I thought it just automatically goes to the top scorer--Klose.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 10, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> This match was a snapshot of the entire World Cup...
> 
> Nearly all teams, as soon as they managed to get 1-0 on the socre, retreated to defend that meager advantage. Too much defensiveness, not enough seeking of the goal



Maybe I'm missing your point, but France only had a lead for... what, ten minutes? Most of the game, both sides were seeking scores.


			
				Klaus said:
			
		

> Now that the Cup has come to a close, I'd like to thanks everyone who contributed to this thread. It was great sharing ideas with you all for the past month, and hopefully we will do this again in 4 years.



Seconded. I certainly learned a lot!


----------



## Ruavel (Jul 10, 2006)

Jdvn1 said:
			
		

> I thought it just automatically goes to the top scorer--Klose.



That's the Golden Shoe.

The Golden Ball is basically the Most Valuable Player of the entire tournament.


----------



## OakwoodDM (Jul 10, 2006)

That's something that's puzzled me over the last week. It always used to be the golden boot, since, well, the players wear football boots. When did they change it to shoe? Or was it always shoe in FIFA parlance and the british press/commentators/whoever else have only just recently decided to take up the same wording?

As for the idea of a replay, the problem with that is that we're now getting perilously close to the start of the next season, with qualifying rounds for the Champion's League presumably only a week or two away from starting, and the first Premiership match no more than 6 weeks away (I don't know the schedule of other countries, so I'm just talking about what I know). The players will want a rest, especially people like Steven Gerrard, who started with Liverpool in the first qualifying round of the Champion's League last July and only finished his season on the 1st of July this year...


----------



## MonsterMash (Jul 10, 2006)

Well once again the World Cup Final was not what we'd hope it'd be. I had Italy in my office sweepstakes so I didn't miss out by them winning, but I would have liked to see a bit moreaction, though there was some excellent defending by both teams. Zidane has just left me amazed as football players have always gone in for goading opposing players and by the end of your career you should be able to hurt them by beating them not by fighting them.


----------



## Heathen72 (Jul 10, 2006)

Zidane's final farewell...


----------



## drothgery (Jul 10, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Nearly all teams, as soon as they managed to get 1-0 on the socre, retreated to defend that meager advantage. Too much defensiveness, not enough seeking of the goal (which is, shockingly, the whole goal of the game). No wonder FIFA wil be holding a forum to alter some football rules (like the offside and possibly even the goal size) to increase the offensiveness of the game.




How about allowing more substitutions? In other run-up-and down the field and try and put something in a goal games (like basketball and hockey), subs are essentially unlimitted. Italy might have been able to score once they got the man advantage in OT if they weren't totally worn out.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 10, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Now that the Cup has come to a close, I'd like to thanks everyone who contributed to this thread. It was great sharing ideas with you all for the past month, and hopefully we will do this again in 4 years.
> 
> Cheers!




What's this past tense stuff?  I ain't even close to finished discussing this!


----------



## hong (Jul 10, 2006)

spunkrat said:
			
		

> Zidane's final farewell...



 Ytmnd sure is having a ball (haw haw) with Zidane. 

http://zidanedeathstar.ytmnd.com/
http://zidaneowned.ytmnd.com/
http://zidanewantscandy.ytmnd.com/
http://francefighter.ytmnd.com/ (above)
http://zidanegetsowned.ytmnd.com/
http://endofzidane.ytmnd.com/
http://zidanesavesmaterazzi.ytmnd.com/
http://emca.ytmnd.com/
http://oulalazidane.ytmnd.com/
http://neszidane.ytmnd.com/
http://medievalzidane.ytmnd.com/


----------



## delericho (Jul 10, 2006)

Ruavel said:
			
		

> now I just wish they'd hurry up and name the Golden Ball recipient...




You're not going to believe this...

It's Zidane!


----------



## Klaus (Jul 10, 2006)

Despite the out-of-character finale, Zidane was indeed the best player in the whole Cup.


----------



## GlassJaw (Jul 10, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Nearly all teams, as soon as they managed to get 1-0 on the socre, retreated to defend that meager advantage. Too much defensiveness, not enough seeking of the goal (which is, shockingly, the whole goal of the game). No wonder FIFA wil be holding a forum to alter some football rules (like the offside and possibly even the goal size) to increase the offensiveness of the game.




I'm all for rules changes.  It's not just the lack of scoring that I don't like, it's the rules system that doesn't allow the better team to excel.  If I'm a coach and I get a lead or if I realize the other team is better than me, I'm going to play a "prevent" defense and take my chances with the stupid penalty kicks.

Because it's so difficult to score to begin with, defensive play is further rewarded.

They just get rid of offsides completely.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 10, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Despite the out-of-character finale, Zidane was indeed the best player in the whole Cup.




He's my sentimental favorite, but...

He missed one game in the 1st round due to suspension.  His play up until the Spain match was relatively unremarkable.  he committed one of the WC's worst fouls (OK the vote was held before that incident)  He let his team down at a crucial stage (again, and incident not considered by the panel))

For a full WC performance that made a consistant difference to his team's results, I vote for Fabio Cannavaro

(Fabio is a very interesing name for a defensive player... I wonder if he employs Fabian tactics...)


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 10, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Nearly all teams, as soon as they managed to get 1-0 on the socre, retreated to defend that meager advantage. Too much defensiveness, not enough seeking of the goal (which is, shockingly, the whole goal of the game). No wonder FIFA wil be holding a forum to alter some football rules (like the offside and possibly even the goal size) to increase the offensiveness of the game.
> 
> Cheers!




Hey Klaus

What do people generally say in Brazil about the need to improve scoring, and reduce matches decided by PKs, in soccer and what suggestions to people make?  I read a lot of British press and I generally find people there conservative about any rules changes in matches.  I certainly think changes should be weighed considerably but I'd like to see perhaps some more substitutions allowed (maybe 1-2 in extra time), and perhaps increase the goal size slightly.  THe best argument I've read in favor of that is that Goalkeepers are now a lot bigger at the top level than in the 1800s.  

I'm not sure exactly how the offsides rule could be altered, though it's worht looking at.  My feeling is that whatever changes are made, defences will adapt and continue to play conservatively, even more so if necessary. 

That's the key, I think.  They main issue is that teams in the big, high-pressure WC matchs have an extremely defensive and conservative mindset.  They're always very wary of conceding, and if they get a lead they become even more cautious.  I'm not sure rules tinkering with offsides or even the goal size will alter that.


----------



## Keith Robinson (Jul 10, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> I vote for Fabio Cannavaro




Me too     I thought he was the most outstanding player of this world cup.  And given how defensive it was in general, I think it would have been a more apt result.

I don't think it was the best world cup, if I'm honest.  I thought the group stages were good, but that it dropped off significantly after that - though there were still one or two good games.

Still, I thoroughly enjoyed it and am looking forward to South Africa 2010.

Thanks to everyone for sharing their thoughts and maybe we'll meet up again in 4 years time!


----------



## Spud (Jul 10, 2006)

Pretty poor world cup, off the top of my head can only think of 3 good games. 

Trouble with tinkering with the rules, i wouldnt trust the idiots at FIFA (and im looking at you in particular Sepp Blater) to get it right. Apart from that I cant see anything in particular that would work, the offside rule has had so many changes I lose track off what its upto. Bigger goals is usually mentioned, cant say i like the idea think the goalkeepers have enough problems with those stupid lightweight balls as it is. 

Still the new season is upon us, not sure how im going to cope for the whole 10 days before our first preseason match..


----------



## Klaus (Jul 10, 2006)

johnsemlak said:
			
		

> Hey Klaus
> 
> What do people generally say in Brazil about the need to improve scoring, and reduce matches decided by PKs, in soccer and what suggestions to people make?  I read a lot of British press and I generally find people there conservative about any rules changes in matches.  I certainly think changes should be weighed considerably but I'd like to see perhaps some more substitutions allowed (maybe 1-2 in extra time), and perhaps increase the goal size slightly.  THe best argument I've read in favor of that is that Goalkeepers are now a lot bigger at the top level than in the 1800s.
> 
> ...



 No opinions are being voiced yet, but the sports press is very critical of FIFA for not instituting changes faster in the game.

I'd vote for no offside if the attacking player is less tha halfway into the defending team's side, four substitutions in a match (plus a goalie substitution) and a referee in the TV central to be consulted in more serious instances (as in, consult before assigning a PK). Just off the top of my head.

I'd also vote for a Cup with fewer teams, where every team plays against every other, and the 8 teams with more points move on to the eliminating match quarterfinals.


----------



## delericho (Jul 11, 2006)

I think they should do the following:

1) Put offside back the way it was - a player is offside if, at the moment the ball is played, there are fewer than two opposing players between him and the goal. You cannot be offside in your own half of the pitch, and cannot be offside if the ball is played backwards.

Anything else just makes the rule far to complex - it's the Attack of Opportunity rule of football.

2) Allow five substitutions in the game.

3) Adopt the use of TV evidence, probably in the hands of the 4th, 5th and 6th officials, who should be in direct communication with the referee.

4) Go back to using a proper ball. This new lightweight thing did not prove to be the wonder-ball it was touted as.

5) Don't try to institute lots of disciplinary rulings for the World Cup only - all applicable leagues need to use the same disciplinary rules as the World Cup for the full year before the cup, so players can get used to them, and we don't have so many cards handed out.

6) Diving should see the player involved banned for the remainer of the tournament.

7) I'm wondering whether a Red Card should see a player removed from the game for 10 minutes or so, rather than for the rest of the game, or perhaps requires that that player immediately be substituted. As it is, a red card can destroy a game as the team affected switches to a 9-0-0 formation and plays for penalties.

And that's about it.

I, too, am looking forward to 2010. With a lot of luck, Scotland might even qualify. I suspect we won't for Euro 2008 - our qualifying group has both Italy and France in it!


----------



## OakwoodDM (Jul 11, 2006)

What might make things interesting is the Rugby rule - a yellow card equals a 10 minute sin binning. It might make people more reticent about things like diving (not that it's ever punished) and time wasting, and open things up.

The problem with TV evidence is FIFA. Despite the fact that pretty much every other sport in the world uses TV replays for key decisions (I know for a fact that Rugby, Cricket, American Football and, as of recently, Field Hockey do...), FIFA are determined to think that they aren't accurate enough, or would slow the game down unnecessarily. Of course, the players who go down and insist they're injured and need the game to be stopped only to stand up and run around fine once it is don't slow it down at all...

As for Scotland, good luck, I hope you qualify, and I hope you get a fourth game this time round. Hey, Australia qualified for the second round, why can't Scotland? Especially since you got rid of Vogts...


----------



## Sidekick (Jul 11, 2006)

I don't think there needs to be a major rules change. They seem to fit fine at the moment. It's simply the current incarantion of what is seen as 'better tactics'. The 4-5-1 system is lame, but at the very least it can be easily changed to a 4-3-3 system.

Maybe they shoudl up the sustitutions allowed, but over all rolling subs would be a very bad idea IMHO.

Hmm the comparison to Rugby brings up something that my flatties & I always talk about. 

-> The lack of respect and deference to the Referee in Football.

If FIFA would grow some Cohones and get the refs to stamp down in foul langauge, professional fouling, diving etc and actually start handing out cards, after the first few abandonments due to red-carding the respective FA's would get the idea, as woudl the players.

In rugby if you tell the ref he's a d'head. You're in the sinbin. Talk back to them and they march your team back 10 meter's, giving the opposition the equivalent of a free-kick even further into your territory - now that is something to be feared.

In general, something needs to be done to clean up football, especially the diving and the pantomining. It really is quite silly.

Personally I hope that Sir Alex forces C. Ronaldo to stay at  Man U and then he'll realise that being a poro sport earns you no friends and no true allies.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 11, 2006)

delericho said:
			
		

> I think they should do the following:
> 
> 1) Put offside back the way it was - a player is offside if, at the moment the ball is played, there are fewer than two opposing players between him and the goal. You cannot be offside in your own half of the pitch, and cannot be offside if the ball is played backwards.
> 
> Anything else just makes the rule far to complex - it's the Attack of Opportunity rule of football.



 How is the offside rule different now?  

I agree it's the AoO of football.  Changing it should be done carefully.  In particular, you've got to think how defeneces will adapt to it.  That goes with any rules tinkering.


> 2) Allow five substitutions in the game.



Agreed.  Perhaps one more plus a keeper specific substitution, so that teams don't have to save a sub in case their keeper gets injured.



> 3) Adopt the use of TV evidence, probably in the hands of the 4th, 5th and 6th officials, who should be in direct communication with the referee.



  Agreed.  If they have direct communication with the main ref, it doesn't ahve to interrupt play that much.


> 4) Go back to using a proper ball. This new lightweight thing did not prove to be the wonder-ball it was touted as.



Yeah.  THey only rational for that ball seems to be an advert for Adidas (sp?)



> 5) Don't try to institute lots of disciplinary rulings for the World Cup only - all applicable leagues need to use the same disciplinary rules as the World Cup for the full year before the cup, so players can get used to them, and we don't have so many cards handed out.



 right on



> 6) Diving should see the player involved banned for the remainer of the tournament.



  I agree with the sentiment but if that was taken to its logical conclusion practically all players in this tournament would have been banned.



> 7) I'm wondering whether a Red Card should see a player removed from the game for 10 minutes or so, rather than for the rest of the game, or perhaps requires that that player immediately be substituted. As it is, a red card can destroy a game as the team affected switches to a 9-0-0 formation and plays for penalties.



Something to be considered.


----------



## delericho (Jul 11, 2006)

Sidekick said:
			
		

> Personally I hope that Sir Alex forces C. Ronaldo to stay at  Man U and then he'll realise that being a poro sport earns you no friends and no true allies.




Alex Ferguson will do as he always does - he'll do whatever is in the best interest in Manchester United. If that means Ronaldo stays, he'll stay; if it means he goes, he'll go.

I do find this reaction to Ronaldo interesting, though. Wayne Rooney stamped on the crotch of an opponent, and shortly thereafter pushed Ronaldo, both in very close proximity to the referee. The first is probably a red card by itself; the second would be a soft red, but could be a red. Together? He had to go.

However, it wasn't that that put you out. Ironically, after Rooney went, England proceeded to put in their best performance of the tournament, and were somewhat unlucky not to grab the goal that would have put them through.

No, what put England out was Sven's truly lousy management. First, he took only four strikers, which was always a bad idea. Then, he took four strikers where Wayne Rooney was injured, Michael Owen was just back from injury and Theo Walcott had never played for his club, never mind his country. That's just madness.

His next mistake was failing to put on Theo Walcott against Sweden once Michael Owen was injured. There was no real pressure on that game; England could afford to lose, and Theo Walcott needed the experience. Having not played him then, Sven became unable to play him at any later time in the tournament.

Mistake three was playing Rooney as a lone striker. This obviously didn't work, and the frustration Rooney felt probably contributed to his sending off.

Fourth, he didn't drop Beckham and Lampard when they failed to perform. On paper, they were probably the best players for the roles, it's true, but they weren't doing the job.

Fifth, like so many of the managers at the tournament, he was far too defensive-minded. 4-5-1 is a dull formation to play. Better to go 4-4-2, and put your opponents to the sword.

And sixth was his obvious disinterest in the games as they progressed. Every time I saw Sven, he was just sitting there. There was no attempt to motivate the team, no shouting instructions to the players, and barely any reaction when England did score.

So, you should be glad he's gone.

For what it's worth, for the last match, I think I would have played a 4-4-2 formation with the same players, except I'd have dropped Beckham and Lampard, and played Lennon and Crouch instead.


----------



## OakwoodDM (Jul 13, 2006)

I still think sending him off for the stamp was harsh, when as far as I can see, he didn't know there was a player there. I think most of the Ronaldo hatred comes not from him rushing up to the referee, but from the bit as Rooney was walking off, when he was clearly shown on the coverage winking to the bench, in a "job done" kind of way.

Plus, not many non-united fans liked him beforehand...

I agree that Sven lost us the chance, though. Goodness only knows what prompted him to take only 4 strikers, in those circumstances, and I can only assume that he saw Walcott in training and wrote him off as a gamble that failed to pay off. I understand why he played 4-5-1. We need someone in the midfield to break up opponent play before they get to our defence. Most teams have someone like this. However, if we want to play Gerrard and Lampard to their full potential, it can't be either of them (as shown in the early games when Gerrard played that role and hardly got forward, except in the Trinidad game after we'd scored the first goal), which means we need a 5th midfielder. However, with Beckham and Joe Cole as wingers, we need wingbacks, so we need 4 at the back. That leaves one up front, with, in theory, Gerrard and Lampard racing forward to support him. Now, in hindsight, we know that didn't work (although Crouch did an impressive job of it when he came on...).

In my opinion, he should have dropped Beckham, because Lennon looked like a far better option on the right (and Wright Phillips would have been even better), and Lampard, because he had an awful tournament. In other words, for the Portugal game, I would have played:

Robinson; Neville, Terry, Carragher, A Cole; Lennon, Gerrard, Hargreaves, J Cole; Rooney, Crouch.

Of course, I would have rather had people like Defoe, Darren Bent or Andy Johnson available to me, but I picked from the squad...


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 13, 2006)

The thing that gets me about all the Sven criticism is that if Beckham, Owen, and Rooney had been at or near 100% fitness for the WC, England probably woulld have played better and Sven would be praised.  He should be blamed for not having a Plan B, but in the end, I'm not sure he could have had an adequate plan.


----------



## OakwoodDM (Jul 17, 2006)

The problem, in some part, is that Sven only had six places to pick, because, regardless of form, Rio Ferdinand, David Beckham, Frank Lampard, Michael Owen and Wayne Rooney were in his team if fit. Which means they had to be in the squad. What most of the criticism is about (other than his complete inability to make the team play better if they had a ropey first half, but that's been the case for a while) is the fact that he took 4 strikers, when conventional wisdom says you need 5, and when one of them still has a broken foot, one has barely reached fitness again after a long time out, and one of them has barely played professional football. When Peter Crouch is your most reliable striker, you start to worry. I suspect people wouldn't be so harsh on him if he'd done one of the following:

1. Take a fifth striker. Darren Bent had a cracking season and deserved a place.
2. Play Walcott. Ok, he's your wild card. Now show us what he can do.

Sadly he did neither, and you ended with a situation where even if we'd made the semi final, we'd have been forced to play Crouch up front on his own. I wouldn't like his chances. Against the Portuguese centre backs he looked solid, and better than he had all tournament. Against Thuram and colleagues, he'd have had a hard time.

As for Walcott, by taking him and not playing him, Sven's done more harm than good to the guy. He's 17. He wouldn't have expected a call up. But by taking him and then not even putting him in for the Sweden game, which was as close to a dead rubber as you're going to get in the world cup, when Owen got injured and Crouch was supposedly dropped to avoid a yellow card ban, you're telling him you've seen him in training and he's not good enough. That's got to hurt.


----------

