:::[Official]World Cup South Africa 2010 Thread:::

[carlos tevez]

Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl

I also pointed out (using some facts) that Zidane did not have that great of a tournament in 2006. He played in their first two matches which they drew. The 3rd match he was suspended and they won. He played great against Spain and Brazil (we can all agree on this), but did not really dictate the tempo of either one of the semi or final matches (this is a matter of opinion). Could France have gotten to the finals without him? No. Did Zidane dominate the tournament? I dont think so because he did not have any impact in the first round, played great in 2 KO-round matches but did not really stand out in France's final 2 matches.

I like how you want to have it both ways by discrediting his 1998 performance by saying that he wasn't even named the best player in that tournament, yet how he didn't have "that great of a tournament in 2006" even though he was named the player of that tournament.. So if he didn't have "that great of a tournament", then every other player in the 2006 World Cup must've played like they belonged on a Luxembourg 3rd division team. In the 4 second round matches, there was only one goal (against Spain) that Zidane didn't either score or assist on. And they still would've won 2-1 without that goal. Not to mention that we're witnessing the echo of the impact Zidane had on the France team these very days, as the France team are about to implode. Not to mention their horrible performance in Euro 2008.
Do you really think Zidane was the player of the tournament in 2006? IMO it was Cannavaro. He played all 7 matches, I think Italy conceded just 1 goal from open play and they ended up winning the whole thing. Cannavaro had a solid tournament from start to finish. Zidane was not a factor at all in the group stage and played well in the 2nd round. Ultimately I feel Zidane won player of the tournament largely in part to his good display in the 2nd round but also due in part to it being his swan song.

Also, the positive impact Zidane had on France is undeniable. However, when are France and Zidane supporters going to realize that every player eventually retires. 5-10+ years from now if France fail to perform well are we going to say "France cant do it without Zidane, they need Zidane, they aren't the same without Zidane" etc.? Fans need to move on because Zidane certainly has. This crop of French players is more than capable of performing well however as we all know, the main problems lie with the French federation, Domenech and the primadonna players. Remember that France struggled after Platini retired until Zidane emerged. France have struggled since Zidane's retirement however given their history, there is a likelihood that new players will emerge in the coming years that'll influence France's success much like Platini and Zidane. Lets not act like it's impossible for France to do well in the future without Zidane. I'm sure Brazilians felt they were screwed when Pele announced his retirement...Dutch fans were terrified when Cruiyff hung it up, etc etc

Finally, I'm not sure you can convincingly argue that Zidane is the best player ever. Certainly not in terms of skill. If we're going to weigh his achievements (personal and team awards) against fellow greats, we will find others who have similar achievements.

 

[platinumfunk]

Originally Posted by PersiaFly

Might seem pointless now, but that goal could come in handy in a tie-break.

Who knows what happens in that NK/Por game though. Wouldn't be surprised with any result. CIV has to hope for a tie in that game, and then for Brazil to come out and handle Portugal. Then they get through with a win over NK. If Portugal beats NK, CIV is basically out.

thats not true at all... if portugal beat civ... then assuming brazil beats portugal... all civ has to do is beat NK and itll come down to goal differential.
chill with the erroneous statements about group outlooks

 

[xtapolapacetl]

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl

I also pointed out (using some facts) that Zidane did not have that great of a tournament in 2006. He played in their first two matches which they drew. The 3rd match he was suspended and they won. He played great against Spain and Brazil (we can all agree on this), but did not really dictate the tempo of either one of the semi or final matches (this is a matter of opinion). Could France have gotten to the finals without him? No. Did Zidane dominate the tournament? I dont think so because he did not have any impact in the first round, played great in 2 KO-round matches but did not really stand out in France's final 2 matches.

I like how you want to have it both ways by discrediting his 1998 performance by saying that he wasn't even named the best player in that tournament, yet how he didn't have "that great of a tournament in 2006" even though he was named the player of that tournament.. So if he didn't have "that great of a tournament", then every other player in the 2006 World Cup must've played like they belonged on a Luxembourg 3rd division team. In the 4 second round matches, there was only one goal (against Spain) that Zidane didn't either score or assist on. And they still would've won 2-1 without that goal. Not to mention that we're witnessing the echo of the impact Zidane had on the France team these very days, as the France team are about to implode. Not to mention their horrible performance in Euro 2008.

Do you really think Zidane was the player of the tournament in 2006? IMO it was Cannavaro. He played all 7 matches, I think Italy conceded just 1 goal from open play and they ended up winning the whole thing. Cannavaro had a solid tournament from start to finish. Zidane was not a factor at all in the group stage and played well in the 2nd round. Ultimately I feel Zidane won player of the tournament largely in part to his good display in the 2nd round but also due in part to it being his swan song.

Also, the positive impact Zidane had on France is undeniable. However, when are France and Zidane supporters going to realize that every player eventually retires. 5-10+ years from now if France fail to perform well are we going to say "France cant do it without Zidane, they need Zidane, they aren't the same without Zidane" etc.? Fans need to move on because Zidane certainly has. This crop of French players is more than capable of performing well however as we all know, the main problems lie with the French federation, Domenech and the primadonna players. Remember that France struggled after Platini retired until Zidane emerged. France have struggled since Zidane's retirement however given their history, there is a likelihood that new players will emerge in the coming years that'll influence France's success much like Platini and Zidane. Lets not act like it's impossible for France to do well in the future without Zidane. I'm sure Brazilians felt they were screwed when Pele announced his retirement...Dutch fans were terrified when Cruiyff hung it up, etc etc

Finally, I'm not sure you can convincingly argue that Zidane is the best player ever. Certainly not in terms of skill. If we're going to weigh his achievements (personal and team awards) against fellow greats, we will find others who have similar achievements.




No, Zidane won the 2006 player of the tournament because those who voted saw how valuable he was to the French team, and that they were more likely to be a failure without Zidane than Italy were to be without Cannavaro. And he also won it because he pretty much single handedly knocked out the 2006 Brazil team, a team that had been the biggest "sure thing" favorites to win a World Cup of all time.

France struggled after Platini, but they were never as good under Platini as they were under Zidane. Argentina however had just won the 1978 World Cup, one World Cup before Maradona started his WC career in 1982. And unlike France without Zidane in 2002 and 2010, they didn't suck after Maradona since they made the quarter finals in 1998. And maybe we should wait to evaluate that mysterious player who will lead France to a new period of glory until he actually arrives. For now, the current France team that is very similar to the France 2006 team sucks. No team has ever had an extreme differential between success and failure without a single player as 1998-2010 France had with and without Zidane. Argentina won in 1978 without Maradona. Brazil won in 1962 without Pele. The Dutch made it to the 1978 final without Cruyff.

 

[AZwildcats]

USA better beast on Algeria

 

[persiafly]

Originally Posted by PlatinumFunk

Originally Posted by PersiaFly

Might seem pointless now, but that goal could come in handy in a tie-break.

Who knows what happens in that NK/Por game though. Wouldn't be surprised with any result. CIV has to hope for a tie in that game, and then for Brazil to come out and handle Portugal. Then they get through with a win over NK. If Portugal beats NK, CIV is basically out.

thats not true at all... if portugal beat civ... then assuming brazil beats portugal... all civ has to do is beat NK and itll come down to goal differential.
chill with the erroneous statements about group outlooks

 This is the herd mentality here on NT, once someone is being attacked on one side, people pile on. Same thing happened in '06 when I was saying the US deserved those cards against Italy. 
So stay with me here. 

Right now, Ivory Coast has a -2 GD. Even if Portugal beats NK by a single goal, 1-0, then Ivory Coast has a 3-goal gap to make up in its last game. It will *obviously* come down to goal difference, my statement was meant to assert that Ivory Coast wouldn't be capable of making up that goal difference.

Given what we've seen in the group, Ivory Coast doesn't seem capable of making up that 3 goal gap in its final match, because of its own offensive futility and because of North Korea's defense. More importantly, if Portugal beats North Korea, it will only need a draw against Brazil to advance, and we've seen this scenario hundreds of times, and games in which both teams can advance with a draw almost always end with a draw. So yes, if Portugal beats North Korea tomorrow, Ivory Coast is *basically* out. Notice I put "basically" in there.

But bring on the hate, I love it. 

 

[carlos tevez]

France struggled after Platini, but they were never as goodunder Platini as they were under Zidane. Argentina however had just wonthe 1978 World Cup, one World Cup before Maradona started his WC careerin 1982. And unlike France without Zidane in 2002 and 2010, they didn'tsuck after Maradona since they made the quarter finals in 1998. Andmaybe we should wait to evaluate that mysterious player who will leadFrance to a new period of glory until he actually arrives. For now, thecurrent France team that is very similar to the France 2006 team sucks.No team has ever had an extreme differential between success andfailure without a single player as 1998-2010 France had with andwithout Zidane. Argentina won in 1978 without Maradona. Brazil won in1962 without Pele. The Dutch made it to the 1978 final without Cruyff.

This France team is not very similar to the 2006 team. In 2006 they also had Henry in his prime, two of the best holding midfielders of their time (Makelele and Vieira), an excellent defence and Malouda and Ribery played well that tournament. They have a talented team now but no chemistry and the clueless Domenech has ruined the team. Not only is a player of Zidane's quality missing, but they dont have a striker as good as Henry (in 2006), they dont have central midfielders as good as Mak and Vieira (they're starting with Abou Diaby for Christ's sake

), they are using Abidal as a CB, they're using William Gallas who just came off a serious injury and has lost a step or two. This team is not as good as the one in 2006. If you take out Zidane from 06 that French team would still be better than the current team. My point is that yes, France miss Zidane but this team overall is not as good as the team 4 years ago. France's appearance in the finals is due in large part to Zidane but also to the rest of the team...that was a very good team that was able to overcome Domenech's poor decisons.

Argentina have historically been better than France so its no surprise they've been able to get some respectable results since Maradona's retirement. Could it be that Argentina have traditionally produced better players than France? I mean, just because Zidane is the most important player in France's history does not make him the best player ever (which this discussion is ultimately about).

If you want to discuss who meant more to his team's success then you could argue in favor of Zidane. However, the discussion is about who the best player is ever in terms of skill, dominance, achievements, recognition, etc. You and Persia seem to think that Zidane is the best ever because of his influence on France but that does not make him the best ever.

Let me ask you this again since you might've missed the question when I asked it earlier...do you think Argentina would've won the 1986 WC without Maradona? You have so many pundits (even English analysts) who say that Maradona won that tournament for his country. He also helped (although he wasnt dominant) Argentina make the 1990 finals. He was injured during the tourny but was still head and shoulders above most of the competition and he contributed to their run.

Can we put all the France vs. Argentina team results aside and analyze how these 2 men performed on the pitch? Zidane was nowhere near as skilled/dominant as Maradona was on the pitch. And we haven't even started discussing Pele yet...

 

[persiafly]

Tevez, I like how you get personal with the law school jab. You truly are a classless individual, and you seem oddly obsessed with what I do and what I say. Hopefully someone else is reading these redundant blabbing essays that you're putting out here, so they don't go to waste. We get it, Maradona played 1 on 11 in '86, Zidane just had average tournaments for France, and their wins were attributable to everything and everyone but him. I didn't need to go to law school to learn that when someone is obviously blinded by bias/stubbornness, there is no use in arguing with him.

Kaka should of tucked his elbow in and put his shoulder high and absorbed the contact.


RUN AWAY BEFORE THEY SEE THIS! HOW DARE YOU GO AGAINST POPULAR OPINION ON NT?

Keita's flop was ridiculous. I thought from the jump it would be a Yellow (I was watching it without sound.) cause Kaka COULD have avoided it, but he didnt come within five feet of dudes face.


DUDE WHAT ARE YOU THINKING, HAVEN'T YOU SEEN WHAT HAPPENS TO PEOPLE WITH OPINIONS THAT DON'T FALL IN LINE WITH THE MAJORITY IN THIS POST? EDIT NOW!!!

Herd mentality I tell ya. 

 

[carlos tevez]

Right now, Ivory Coast has a -2 GD. Even if Portugal beats NK by asingle goal, 1-0, then Ivory Coast has a 3-goal gap to make up in itslast game. It will *obviously* come down to goal difference, mystatement was meant to assert that Ivory Coast wouldn't be capable ofmaking up that goal difference.

Given whatwe've seen in the group, Ivory Coast doesn't seem capable of making upthat 3 goal gap in its final match, because of its own offensivefutility and because of North Korea's defense. More importantly, ifPortugal beats North Korea, it will only need a draw against Brazil toadvance, and we've seen this scenario hundreds of times, and games inwhich both teams can advance with a draw almost always end with a draw.So yes, if Portugal beats North Korea tomorrow, Ivory Coast is*basically* out. Notice I put "basically" in there.


In your scenario (that Portugal beat NK 1-0 tomorrow) we'd have the following table with 1 match to go:

Brazil 6 pts +3
Portugal 4 pts 1GF 0GA +1
CIV 1 pt 1GF 3GA -2

-If Brazil beat Portugal by 1-goal then CIV would need a 2-goal win over NK to advance (very possible)
-If Brazil beat Portugal by 2 or more goals than CIV would only need to beat NK by 1-goal to advance (very possible)
-If Brazil draw Portugal than CIV are out (very possible).

I think the Ivory Coast have a shot as long as Portugal dont beat NK by more than 2-goals tomorrow. I think Brazil will take it easy against Portugal but they'll still go for the win. Last time they met (2 yrs ago) Brazil scored 6-goals in a meaningless friendly

. They obviously dont take Portugal lightly.

 

[carlos tevez]

Tevez, I like how you get personal with the law school jab. You trulyare a classless individual, and you seem oddly obsessed with what I doand what I say. Hopefully someone else is reading these redundantblabbing essays that you're putting out here, so they don't go towaste. We get it, Maradona played 1 on 11 in '86, Zidane just hadaverage tournaments for France, and their wins were attributable toeverything and everyone but him. I didn't need to go to law school tolearn that when someone is obviously blinded by bias/stubbornness,there is no use in arguing with him.
Stop getting so emotional. Anytime someone disagrees with you, you turn it into a personal grudge. Dont flatter yourself, I dont give a @$** about you. I'm here to discuss the beautiful game, not because I am interested in you. You've been here for a while and I've noticed that you've gotten into many disputes in the past over similar things like this. Someone disagrees with your opinion, you get offended and then take it personally. Lighten up...

Kaka should of tucked his elbow in and put his shoulder high and absorbed the contact.

RUN AWAY BEFORE THEY SEE THIS! HOW DARE YOU GO AGAINST POPULAR OPINION ON NT?
I think 'marion' was being sarcastic with his comment and it flew over your head.

 

[persiafly]

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez


Right now, Ivory Coast has a -2 GD. Even if Portugal beats NK by asingle goal, 1-0, then Ivory Coast has a 3-goal gap to make up in itslast game. It will *obviously* come down to goal difference, mystatement was meant to assert that Ivory Coast wouldn't be capable ofmaking up that goal difference.

Given whatwe've seen in the group, Ivory Coast doesn't seem capable of making upthat 3 goal gap in its final match, because of its own offensivefutility and because of North Korea's defense. More importantly, ifPortugal beats North Korea, it will only need a draw against Brazil toadvance, and we've seen this scenario hundreds of times, and games inwhich both teams can advance with a draw almost always end with a draw.So yes, if Portugal beats North Korea tomorrow, Ivory Coast is*basically* out. Notice I put "basically" in there.

In your scenario (that Portugal beat NK 1-0 tomorrow) we'd have the following table with 1 match to go:

Brazil 6 pts +3
Portugal 4 pts 1GF 0GA +1
CIV 1 pt 1GF 3GA -2

-If Brazil beat Portugal by 1-goal then CIV would need a 2-goal win over NK to advance (very possible)
-If Brazil beat Portugal by 2 or more goals than CIV would only need to beat NK by 1-goal to advance (very possible)
-If Brazil draw Portugal than CIV are out (very possible).

I think the Ivory Coast have a shot as long as Portugal dont beat NK by more than 2-goals tomorrow. I think Brazil will take it easy against Portugal but they'll still go for the win. Last time they met (2 yrs ago) Brazil scored 6-goals in a meaningless friendly

. They obviously dont take Portugal lightly.

Do you understand the difference between possibility and probability? When my whole point is that it's improbable for the Ivory Coast to make up a 3-goal gap between itself and Portugal given all the factors involved, how does you pointing out that something is "very possible" answer that? 

My opinion: it's extremely improbable that Ivory Coast will make up 3 GD between itself and Portugal, because: 

-Ivory Coast offense is terrible.

-North Korea defense is good.

-Portugal will defend in numbers in hopes of a tie, and Brazil doesn't have motivation to push through that defense.

So someone explain to me how I'm making "erroneous statements" when I say Ivory Coast is basically out if Portugal beats North Korea? Or why it matters whether it's "very possible" that some set of events happen? 

But the herd doesn't take such things into consideration. The herd attacks, because that's what the herd does. 

 

[carlos tevez]

But given your scenario, it's not that improbable for the CIV to advance. Assuming Portugal win 1-0 tomorrow, it's not improbable at all for Brazil to beat Portugal by 2 and for the CIV to beat NK by 1.

 

[parada45]

These refs are ruining this world cup

 

[persiafly]

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Tevez, I like how you get personal with the law school jab. You trulyare a classless individual, and you seem oddly obsessed with what I doand what I say. Hopefully someone else is reading these redundantblabbing essays that you're putting out here, so they don't go towaste. We get it, Maradona played 1 on 11 in '86, Zidane just hadaverage tournaments for France, and their wins were attributable toeverything and everyone but him. I didn't need to go to law school tolearn that when someone is obviously blinded by bias/stubbornness,there is no use in arguing with him.

Stop getting so emotional. Anytime someone disagrees with you, you turn it into a personal grudge. Dont flatter yourself, I dont give a @$** about you. I'm here to discuss the beautiful game, not because I am interested in you. You've been here for a while and I've noticed that you've gotten into many disputes in the past over similar things like this. Someone disagrees with your opinion, you get offended and then take it personally. Lighten up...

Kaka should of tucked his elbow in and put his shoulder high and absorbed the contact.

RUN AWAY BEFORE THEY SEE THIS! HOW DARE YOU GO AGAINST POPULAR OPINION ON NT?
I think 'marion' was being sarcastic with his comment and it flew over your head.

Right, I turn it into a personal grudge, that's why I'm throwing jabs out about people's lives outside of NT, etc. right? I don't know who the @%!# you are or what the @%!# you do, yet you read my blog seemingly only to find things you disagree with, follow me around S&T to disagree with my opinions in every post, and bring up things that I said 6 months ago, and somehow remember that I go to law school although I haven't mentioned that on NT in a year or more. Who is holding a personal grudge here? Jump off my nuts son, it's not a good look for you. 

 

[rook]

Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl

Originally Posted by RoOk

Anyways...Fabianos goal may have bested Donavans from yesterday as the best goal of the WC. That was simply amazing

So Donovan's goal was better than Maicon's? It wasn't even better than the first goal of the tournament South Africa scored.

Did you see the moves he did to get the shot up? IMO there was no goal better than that this whole WC. Doesn't mean you have to agree with it but i honestly could care less

 

[maddenfan04]

Come on guys its the World Cup, come together here.

 

[carlos tevez]

Originally Posted by PersiaFly

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Tevez, I like how you get personal with the law school jab. You trulyare a classless individual, and you seem oddly obsessed with what I doand what I say. Hopefully someone else is reading these redundantblabbing essays that you're putting out here, so they don't go towaste. We get it, Maradona played 1 on 11 in '86, Zidane just hadaverage tournaments for France, and their wins were attributable toeverything and everyone but him. I didn't need to go to law school tolearn that when someone is obviously blinded by bias/stubbornness,there is no use in arguing with him.

Stop getting so emotional. Anytime someone disagrees with you, you turn it into a personal grudge. Dont flatter yourself, I dont give a @$** about you. I'm here to discuss the beautiful game, not because I am interested in you. You've been here for a while and I've noticed that you've gotten into many disputes in the past over similar things like this. Someone disagrees with your opinion, you get offended and then take it personally. Lighten up...

Kaka should of tucked his elbow in and put his shoulder high and absorbed the contact.

RUN AWAY BEFORE THEY SEE THIS! HOW DARE YOU GO AGAINST POPULAR OPINION ON NT?
I think 'marion' was being sarcastic with his comment and it flew over your head.

Right, I turn it into a personal grudge, that's why I'm throwing jabs out about people's lives outside of NT, etc. right? I don't know who the @%!# you are or what the @%!# you do, yet you read my blog seemingly only to find things you disagree with, follow me around S&T to disagree with my opinions in every post, and bring up things that I said 6 months ago, and somehow remember that I go to law school although I haven't mentioned that on NT in a year or more. Who is holding a personal grudge here? Jump off my nuts son, it's not a good look for you. 

Yes, I care about you deeply and I know everything about you including your social security number. You better get a restraining order against me otherwise you may find me hiding in your backyard one day hoping to catch a glimpse of you.




















I'm being sarcastic.

 

[persiafly]

Originally Posted by MaddenFan04

Come on guys its the World Cup, come together here.

For real. But I'm done here, just trying to enjoy the WC but can't put out an opinion here without five people attacking it and even bringing my personal life into it. 
Peace to the real 

, to the others enjoy agreeing with the rest of the herd. 

Blog will still be updated after each game with group scenarios. Hopefully they won't be "erroneous." 

 

[big j 33]

I don't have a personal interest in either side of the argument, but PersiaFly, you seem to be making a bigger deal about things than they are... talking about "the herd" and "bring on the hate, I love it"... I really don't see where you're getting off and it's pretty pompous from an outside perspective. Judging off the recent things I've seen at least, but this can be addressed to anyone on the board guilty of the same things.

Just because people are in disagreement, argue with you, or anything, doesn't make it you against the world on here, and for everyone on the board... petty arguments over semantics or other trivial things takes away from the discussion and from the thread. I won't even bother checking the thread if it's going to be filled with random bickering and pissing contests. We all are entitled to our opinions and I'm certainly not saying "just agree with everyone" because that's immature and a waste of the board, but if someone does disagree it doesn't mean "you're a part of the herd mentality and blah blah blah", it just means they disagree with you.

Discussions and arguments are a part of sports and are encouraged, but if the whole thread is arguing over a simple word choice or personal issues, then it's going to ruin the thread and flow of discussion about this awesome event and game that most of us just want to enjoy.

 

[bkmac]

Originally Posted by MaddenFan04

Come on guys its the World Cup, come together here.

I was

at Donovan's goal, for what it's worth. @+%$ shot straight up-down.

 

[carlos tevez]

You say people here have a herd mentality but then you get noticeably upset when someone offers a differing opinion (Kaka 'foul', Ivory Coast's chances, etc).

Heck, you're even upset about me politely correcting you a few weeks ago about Jon Obi Mikel's natural position.

We are here to discuss the sport and differences of opinion are normal on message boards. Stop being so emotional. You've routinely gotten into fights in the sports forum over the years and yet you always act like the victim and everyone hates you. If you cant handle different opinions then you shouldnt even be on a message board. The act is wearing thin...no one is forcing you to stay here.

P.S. I'm glad you realize the Pirlo comment you made was outrageous. The only reason I remember it is because during last year's Confederations Cup in which Pirlo played great against the U.S., you confidently declared that Pirlo was a top 5 player in the world. Many people here questioned the comment and disagreed with it and you got upset and pulled the same 'victim' act. A year later and you acknowledge it was an outrageous comment. Perhaps your emotions are getting the best of you today and in a few weeks time you'll look back at some of your comments here and realize how condescending you have been.

 

[carlos tevez]

Originally Posted by PersiaFly

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

I already explained it to you. Algeria defended in large numbers today, something I doubt England experienced in WCQ. The U.S., Algeria and Slovenia are better defensive teams than any of England's WCQ opponents (except for Ukraine). England racked up goals against the likes of Andorra, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Yes, they did crush Croatia twice but when you look at England's results over the last 12-years, those 2 results against Croatia seem to be anomalies. How often do England score that many goals in a match against good teams? The only other time I can remember was against Germany in 2002 WCQ.

As I said earlier, you need to have players that can single-handedly make the difference and change the outcomes of stale, tight, defensive matches. England have Rooney but they dont have guys who can supply him with the ball.

BTW, does anyone know where Frank Lampard is? British authorities are on the lookout for him.

Again, no one said England was on par with Spain and Brazil in terms of creativity, and no one said they have some long track record of scoring goals against good defenses. The point was that this particular England squad's inability to score against Algeria was more a result of their frame of mind and decision-making than an inherent problem with their players. The evidence was that they scored 34 goals in 10 qualifying games, 9 in two games against Croatia. Further evidence is that Algeria gave up 3 goals to Malawi in the ACN this year and 4 to Egypt. But all of a sudden Algeria is some defensive juggernaut that England doesn't have the talent to get through? 




Sorry, but I can't take people seriously when they latch on to an argument and refuse to hear otherwise, and take an arrogant and condescending attitude to top it all off, ("I already explained to you"

). And I love how you just throw out these statements like they're facts. The US and Algeria are better defensive teams than Croatia? That's a fact chief? Just because you insist over and over that something is true, doesn't make it so. And if you sprinkle some arrogance on top of it, you just look like a stubborn fool. 




EDIT: came across something funny in the prediction thread. 

 




So the guy who has been explaining to us all how England has, and has always had, an inherent lack of creativity that prevented it from beating Algeria, predicted that they'd go to the semis. 

And guess who predicted they'd bow out in the Round of 16?




That's the ironic part of all of this. You're trying to tell me about England's weaknesses, when I've been talking about those weaknesses all along. The point I was making was that they aren't quite this weak, but of course that went over your head. 

Just look at how condescending your being here. I was just offering a different opinion and you make it personal. Not once was I rude to you, post laughing faces, criticize you, insulted you in the posts prior to your reply.

You on the other hand post this gem after I disagreed with your assessment of England being arrogant (I said that England were lacking talent and with limited talent its hard to break down defensive-minded teams):

Sorry, butI can't take people seriously when they latch on to an argument andrefuse to hear otherwise, and take an arrogant and condescendingattitude to top it all off, ("I already explained to you"

).And I love how you just throw out these statements like they're facts.The US and Algeria are better defensive teams than Croatia? That's afact chief? Just because you insist over and over that something istrue, doesn't make it so. And if you sprinkle some arrogance on top ofit, you just look like a stubborn fool.


-Croatia conceded 13 goals in 10 WCQ matches.


-Algeria conceded 8 goals in 12 WCQ matches.

-US conceded 13 goals in 10 WCQ matches

-Another thing I'd like to point out (even though its not really relevant to this particular discussion) is that Slovenia conceded just 4 goals in 10 WCQ matches.

So was my comment that the U.S. and Algeria being better defensive teams than Croatia that outrageous? Perhaps I should've made my wording clearer and said "The U.S. and Algeria are more defensive-minded than Croatia". Did my different opinion warrant personal insults? I offer a different perspective on England's struggles and you decide to resort to personal insults and laugh at my WC predictions. But then you complain about others doing the same thing. Maybe I'm just crazy...

 

[marionthebarberian]

Originally Posted by bkmac

Originally Posted by MaddenFan04

Come on guys its the World Cup, come together here.

I was

at Donovan's goal, for what it's worth. @%!+ shot straight up-down.

the goalie was scared for his life.

 

[noskey]

^

Dude was just waiting for the impact.

 

[niketalker23]

Carlos and Persia, can you dudes stop? You guys are ruining this thread. Argue through PMs, but don't fill up the thread with all that crap..

 

[brownin187]

e-hooliganism up in here
and niketalker23 that sig is hilarious.