First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next  Last
World Cup-Giant Killing Fever
47235 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Boston
Offline
Posted 6/13/10
Go Brazil, Spain , or Agentina BIG FIFA FAN
34815 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / Pluto
Offline
Posted 6/13/10
i cheerz for Chile and Argentina =D
68868 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
53 / M / Northeast Ohio, USA
Offline
Posted 6/13/10

Lexxuk wrote:

Sort of, in the centre they have Gerrard and Lampard, both world class players. ...


And both of them world class mid-fielders who like to be the one moving forward, not world class midfielders who naturally fall into a holding role. Thus 18 shots to 12, but the yanks taking over possession in the middle of the park and holding it much more frequently than would happen when one midfield completely outclasses another.


The quality of the England team is fantastic, ....


The quality of the English players is tremendous. Its the quality of the team that is suspect. Of course, there's always lots of the bloody pommie press telling y'all every four years that this is the year England goes all the way, but this time at least as far as talent goes, its not quite hype.

But its a lot easier for the bloody pommie press to focus on the star power of the line-up and overlook the quality of the team as a unit. You've got the talent on the team to be in the final game. Only question is whether you've got the team to get there.

As far as Latin powers, England definitely wants to win Group D. The odds put Argentina in the 1D bracket, Brazil in the 2D bracket, and y'all want to have the most games possible to get your midfield playing as a team before you have to play Brazil.
Posted 6/13/10
I am happy with whoever wins as long as its not France
Posted 6/13/10
Well, at least England didn't win yesterday. We tied. :]
Lexxuk 
55207 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 6/13/10
Pommie is Australian for British, I'm British but not English, I'm Welsh which means sporting wise we have a huge rivalry with England especially when it comes to Rugby (but that's because we're so much better than the English at Rugby). Gerard and Lampard can hold the ball, they can attack and defend, Rooney is a natural in the centre and can attack as well as defend, he's not playing his favourite role which would see Gerard behind him feeding Rooney.

The USA didn't dominate any part of the pitch, midfield was held very good by England, their defence was good only allowing one or two real chances for the US to score, the goal they did score was a fluke, an accident by the keeper that shouldn't have gone in, the US were unable to really cope with Englands forwards. Dominating the midfield means you get possession, England held 54%, if the US were controlling the midfield in any way the possession would be nearer 50% each, up to 52% but England totally outclassed the US.

Now though the US has a major problem, they *have* to win both their matches (one) against Algeria who managed to beat the best Africa has to offer so could throw up a surprise for the US and eek out a draw. Maths wise England are going to qualify, there is no quality in their group that can beat England it actually would be a Giant Killing,

Brazil, I'd rather England face Argentina. Brazil always have the ability to surprise any team, their defence is better at attacking than a lot of other countries. Argentina is always a special match and historically very tight (hand of God) and Fabio would be able to bring out tactics that would put England through to the next round. I don't think Argentina are going to win their group though, they struggled too much against Nigeria but until we see Brazil play we'll not know how they are going.

However, England are not in Group D so won't play either Brazil or Argentina after qualification, they will play either Germany, or Australia, maybe Serbia, England must win or face Germany but it could go down on goal difference if the US win both their matches, so the question is, who can score more goals, England or the US?
3691 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M / South Carolina
Offline
Posted 6/13/10
Go United States! For The WIN! Woot Woot!
68868 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
53 / M / Northeast Ohio, USA
Offline
Posted 6/13/10

Lexxuk wrote:

Pommie is Australian for British, etc.


Thanks for the lecture, I lived in Newcastle, New South Wales for ten years, I bloody well know what pommie means. And its far more English than British - an Englishman is far more likely than a Scot to be called a pommie bastard.


I'm British but not English, I'm Welsh which means ...


... I would of course not call you a bloody pom, I am calling the London tabloids the pommie press. And I have seen a game or two of Union, through as an yank of course I have a strong Rugby League bias ... plus living in working class Newie when the Knights made their championship run, how could I not get into League?

But while I might sniff at pommie Union as being like the Wallabies, a game for well to do businessmen and public school old boys to watch, as far as I understand in Wales its more like the Kiwi's, the national game.


... Gerard and Lampard can hold the ball, they can attack and defend, Rooney is a natural in the centre and can attack as well as defend, he's not playing his favourite role which would see Gerard behind him feeding Rooney.


Exactly: one of them will not be playing their favorite role. How well they Gerard and Lampard mesh will go a long way toward determining how far England go.


The USA didn't dominate any part of the pitch, midfield was held very good by England, their defence was good only allowing one or two real chances for the US to score, the goal they did score was a fluke, ...


England had more real chances, but the US had more than two. You were watching as a one-eyed supporter: if England meets a team that can counter out of the midfield, they'll be under serious pressure.


Now though the US has a major problem, they *have* to win both their matches ...


Actually, no. If England wins out, a draw against Slovenian and a bigger win against Algeria, or any win against Slovenia and a draw against Algeria, and the US goes through. The US only gets into situations that it has to win out if England fails to do so.


Maths wise England are going to qualify, there is no quality in their group that can beat England it actually would be a Giant Killing,
Yes, you are right, it would be a quite lovely upset.


Brazil, I'd rather England face Argentina.


With good reason - despite the history, its a better match up for England.

But I'd already shifted my attention to Group D and the game this arvo. If there is no upset in either C or G and the seeds win their groups, England is in Brazil's half of the bracket.
5 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M
Offline
Posted 6/13/10
Mexico!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Lexxuk 
55207 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 6/13/10

Exactly: one of them will not be playing their favorite role. How well they Gerard and Lampard mesh will go a long way toward determining how far England go


Rooney is not playing the role that Ferguson put him into last season where he scored a ton of goals, Gerard and Lampard were pretty darn good in their roles yesterday with Rooney being a bit on the quiet side. Fabio will eventually switch from a flat 4-4-2 probably to 4 3 2 1 else the midfield will get over-whelmed by greater teams, with that Gerard can slip in behind Rooney and free him up.


England had more real chances, but the US had more than two. You were watching as a one-eyed supporter: if England meets a team that can counter out of the midfield, they'll be under serious pressure.


They hard hardly any chances and towards the end of the match did that old favourite pass time "time wasting", they even tried to bring on a sub for the last few seconds to waste more time, that is not the behaviour of a team which has a desire to win, it's the behaviour of a poor team who's only objective is not to lose. England played well yesterday but could play a *lot* better, you can tell the difference in the two teams by the level of happiness at the result, England players/fans are bitterly disappointed in a 1-1 draw, US players/fans are over the moon at getting a 1-1 draw.


Actually, no. If England wins out, a draw against Slovenian and a bigger win against Algeria, or any win against Slovenia and a draw against Algeria, and the US goes through. The US only gets into situations that it has to win out if England fails to do so.


If England beat Algeria/Slovenia that puts them at 7 points, the US *has* to beat Slovenia, Slovenia are on 3 points, a draw against the US (which they could play for) would put them on 4 points, the US on 2 points meaning the US *have* to win against Algeria to qualify, Algeria though are a very strong team who could snatch a win from the US, that *wont* be a shock result, not with the quality that Algeria can possess. The only team in that group which is an almost certainty to qualify is England.


With good reason - despite the history, its a better match up for England.

But I'd already shifted my attention to Group D and the game this arvo. If there is no upset in either C or G and the seeds win their groups, England is in Brazil's half of the bracket.


It's not history, it's the fact that Argentina doesn't have the tactical ability of the good teams, but it doesn't matter who goes through in their group, the important match (at least for England) is currently on now, Australia vs Germany, England won't want to face Germany so will aim to win the group by a large margin to (hopefully) play Australia.
68868 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
53 / M / Northeast Ohio, USA
Offline
Posted 6/13/10

Lexxuk wrote:

They hard hardly any chances ...


... as the English keeper in addition to the worst blunder also had the best save of the match, it couldn't have been hardly any.

You want to see a team with hardly any chances against a team creating repeated real chances, tune into the Ozzies. That really is the game you thought you were watching yesterday.


and towards the end of the match did that old favourite pass time "time wasting", they even tried to bring on a sub for the last few seconds to waste more time, that is not the behaviour of a team which has a desire to win ...


Yeah, easy for you to say when you're barracking for a seeded side. Its a lot more fund cheering for the underdogs, because when they win its sweeter than any win by a favourite can ever be.

Indeed, England had better pour on the goals and avoid conceding any, since there's no guarantee they can win the group with wins alone ... and they definitely do not want to hit Germany in the sweet 16.
9004 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 6/13/10

Denethal wrote:

I probably won't watch a single match of the FIFA cup, but I'll watch Giant Killing :)


Same here but anyways may the best team take the cup

26538 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / F / salinas, CA
Offline
Posted 6/13/10
poor australia germany beat them 4-0 i was like go australia go!!! anyways i go for korea, argentina, japan and chile
421 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M / Afterlife
Offline
Posted 6/13/10
SERBIA and NIPPON for the Win ...
126 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 6/13/10
this is actually my first being excited to watch Soccer, well I really do like soccer and I haven't been able to see a game on T.V. So woo! This is pretty awesome being able to watch it on T.V. for free..o____o but dang, can't believe USA tied with England muahahahah!
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.