[cherdano]

Hannie, on Jun 20 2006, 01:41 PM, said:

OK, perhaps my statement that the elbow was not as bad as the tackle was far off, I intented it as somewhat controversial.

I don't know which one is more dangerous for the opponent. However, the difference for me is that the elbow check had no purpose other than hitting and hurting his opponent, whereas the sliding tackle might have been a very bad and uncontrolled but honest attempt at a tackle.

[jdonn]

That was a great game. Both teams should be commended.

[joshs]

I guess it because I am from the US, but I didn't think the US tackle was close to worth a red card either. There were at least 5 tackles that game that were comparable and most didn't even get yellow cards. Now maybe, the refs should be calling the games tighter and ejecting more players (to protect players from injuries) but it certainly changes the game to be playing shorthanded, so this has to be done consistantly in all the matches....

As to the game, it was interesting to me that years ago the US had no skill players. Now they have quite a few players who can beat there opponent with the ball in the midfield. Just no one who can shoot straight...

[the saint]

joshs, on Jun 20 2006, 07:45 PM, said:

I guess it because I am from the US, but I didn't think the US tackle was close to worth a red card either. There were at least 5 tackles that game that were comparable and most didn't even get yellow cards. Now maybe, the refs should be calling the games tighter and ejecting more players (to protect players from injuries) but it certainly changes the game to be playing shorthanded, so this has to be done consistantly in all the matches....

As to the game, it was interesting to me that years ago the US had no skill players. Now they have quite a few players who can beat there opponent with the ball in the midfield. Just no one who can shoot straight...

To be honest, I still don't think the US have really got any 'skill' players...

Having said that, neither have England!! Yep, we were sh1te again tonight. Which I am ecstatic about. Joe Cole was pretty good and scored a top goal before setting Stevie G up at the end, but the rest were pretty pants it has to be said. Owen looks out for the rest of the event, Rooney still isn't fully fit and Sven doesn't trust Walcott - so why on earth did he select him then?

The stage is now set for our traditional one good performance in the Round of 16 thus raising expetations unfeasibly high before a gallant yet controversial exit in the quarter-finals. Four more years of pain and heartache await!!!

[han]

Let me disagree again: Cole's goal was very nice looking, but incredibly lucky. I'm not claiming that I could ever score from that distance of course, it is amazing that he can control the bal so well when shooting with such power. But no way can he put the ball exactly in the top corner of the goal, he needs to be very lucky.

However, the second goal was superb soccer from Cole in my opinion. Absolutely perfect. And a nice aimed header from Gerrard too.

[whereagles]

Shots from afar are always lucky shots. They have a chance to go in, so the trick is to create opportunities to try for them

[Codo]

Walddk, on Jun 19 2006, 08:29 PM, said:

cherdano, on Jun 19 2006, 01:15 PM, said:

Walddk, on Jun 19 2006, 01:10 PM, said:

It's no big deal as far as Germany is concerned anyway. They will be knocked out after the group stage. That will save the rest of us from the boring football Germany has delivered since the 70's.

Did you watch the games?

Both of Germany's so far, but I think I will stop now. It's waste of time really. You need to be a German if you think Germany has a good team, let alone a chance to advance much further. Home advantage is far from being enough.

Roland

I doubt that you have seen any game, but if, you surely did not understand them- or at least your opinion is quite different from the experts who gave their comments.

"Boring?" There had been 10 goal in 3 german games. Maybe Argentina will deliver so many, but who else is so entertaining?


If you dislike the german games, what did you prefer? The english, the french, the barzilians, the netherlands, the italians, the czechs? Did one of these big countries showed two good games?

Most commentators so far believe, that Argentina is the best squad in the first days. Spain had a splendid match against ukraine, but many problems with Tunesia, so they are the second best up to now.
But behind them, there are many competitors on nearly equal level and our team is one of them.
It surely is possible to loose against the Swedes, but I think we will make it and watch a great quarter final against Argentina.
We may loose this, but maybe....

[the saint]

Hannie, on Jun 21 2006, 10:00 AM, said:

Let me disagree again: Cole's goal was very nice looking, but incredibly lucky. I'm not claiming that I could ever score from that distance of course, it is amazing that he can control the bal so well when shooting with such power. But no way can he put the ball exactly in the top corner of the goal, he needs to be very lucky.

However, the second goal was superb soccer from Cole in my opinion. Absolutely perfect. And a nice aimed header from Gerrard too.

Its funnier then how the more skilful players are luckier then...

[jdonn]

Lucky maybe in the sense that he will only make that shot 1/40 times for example, whereas a slightly less skillful player would make it 1/60? I would consider that skill not luck I saw that goal and thought it was an amazing shot. I didn't see the second goal though I watched the first half and thought Cole was playing the best I had seen anyone play in this tournament.

[the saint]

jdonn, on Jun 21 2006, 05:01 PM, said:

Lucky maybe in the sense that he will only make that shot 1/40 times for example, whereas a slightly less skillful player would make it 1/60? I would consider that skill not luck I saw that goal and thought it was an amazing shot. I didn't see the second goal though I watched the first half and thought Cole was playing the best I had seen anyone play in this tournament.

Cole was a hotly tipped Wunderkind about 5-6 years ago when he was coming through the ranks at West Ham, but he hadn't really delivered - before Rooney arrived it was thought he might be the saviour of English football. These past couple of seasons at Chelsea under Mourinho, he has really flourished and become more consistent and added an end product to his trickery.

For the record, I think he would make that closer to 1/10

[Walddk]

Codo, on Jun 21 2006, 04:17 PM, said:

It surely is possible to loose against the Swedes, but I think we will make it and watch a great quarter final against Argentina.

You are a Germany supporter, I am not; nothing strange about that since you are German. I honestly think that Sweden has a better team than Germany, not least demonstrated against England last night.

However, no matter who wins, that team is unlikely to get past Argentina one round later.

Roland

[arrows]

Final: Germany vs Argentina

[Free]

Why put the Netherlands and Italy together? They both have a shot, but probably won't make it. Same goes for England, Germany and Spain. I'm also quite disappointed in Sweden at the moment.

My favorites:
1. Argentina
2. Brazil
3. could be anyone

Since Belgium isn't competing, my choice is not biased

[arrows]

Quote

Final: Germany vs Argentina

It's impossible now, they will probably meet in the quarter final.

[cherdano]

Can someone explain me why everyone is getting crazy about Argentina?? Yes, I only watched the games vs Ivory Coast and Netherlands

Seriously, is one good game enough to become the favorite in everybody's eyes?

[the saint]

cherdano, on Jun 21 2006, 09:19 PM, said:

Can someone explain me why everyone is getting crazy about Argentina?? Yes, I only watched the games vs Ivory Coast and Netherlands

Seriously, is one good game enough to become the favorite in everybody's eyes?

They have absurd strength in depth. On their bench they have players of the ilk of Messi, Tevez, Cruz, Aimar... They left out of their squad altogether players like Javier Zanetti, Kily Gonzalez and several others who would walk into almost any team in the competition.

[Gerardo]

Arend: It has potential, and in the match you didn't see showed it. Rival was weak too, that helped.
Some others have potential too, but didn't show so far.

But no team has won a match before playing it.

Saint: I'd prefer Zanetti to be in the squad.

[Free]

cherdano, on Jun 21 2006, 10:19 PM, said:

Can someone explain me why everyone is getting crazy about Argentina?? Yes, I only watched the games vs Ivory Coast and Netherlands

Seriously, is one good game enough to become the favorite in everybody's eyes?

They have very good players, and most important, they play as a team. Almost every player can dribble, some even against multiple opponents. They have a great offense as well as a great midfield+defense, which is quite rare at the worldcup imo. Most teams are just decent in both cases or good in only 1.

Brazil has lots of talent (maybe more than Argentina), especially in their frontline, but they're a bit too arrogant to start training seriously. They don't control the midfield like Argentina, and their defense isn't as solid as well. They need their flank defenders to come and help the attack since their midfield plays in the center. Not to forget that Ronaldinho plays a bit too much on his own at the moment. However, we haven't seen Brazil on it's best, I just hope they keep Ronaldo off the field.

I think Brazil will wake up soon and deliver some pretty nice football, but when they'd meet Argentina they'll lose it all on the midfield and their defense. I think...

[han]

Before the world cup started I told several people that Germany will win. All the signs were favorable: they play at home, luck was already on their side (look at the draw!) and (not least important) they have the largest number of Germans playing on their team, and in soccer, Germans are known for only one thing: they tend to win. Look at the last world cup. The Germans were awful, weren't they? And yet they made it to the finals (and played quite well in it too).

It is true that the Germans don't play the most exotic soccer, but I don't think that they play boring either. They have made a large number of goals, and some of them were very nice (I particularly liked the second goals against Ecuador). Ballack seems to be one of the few stars who is playing with his heart. Compare this to Beckham, Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Figo, Zidane..

Cherdano tells me that the German defense is weak, but I didn't see it against Ecuador. How many chances to score did Ecuador get?

Of course I hope that the Netherlands will win, not Germany, but I think their chances are much higher.

[han]

cherdano, on Jun 21 2006, 04:19 PM, said:

Can someone explain me why everyone is getting crazy about Argentina?? Yes, I only watched the games vs Ivory Coast and Netherlands

Seriously, is one good game enough to become the favorite in everybody's eyes?

Argentina seems very strong, don't forget that both Argentina and Holland were playing with many subs. And Argentina didn't need to win to become first in the group. Holland did, but didn't create any good chances to score.

I rate Argentina, Brazil, Spain and (yes) Germany as the favorites to win it.