- 28,226
- 3,086
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2009
And then this...
PersiaFly, you arent looking too deep into this. It is not easy to get inside the box in this sport. It takes good technical ability to routinely get the ball inside the box and to create scoring opportunities. England are not taking long shots because they are cocky...they are taking long shots because they do not have the technical ability to break down the staunch Algerian defence, get inside the box and get quality shots on net. This is not a new problem...it's been a problem for them for decades.
You ever wonder why Brazilians are so gifted? Why Germans are such disciplined and smart players? Why Koreans are extremely energetic? Why Italians are such great defenders? It's because that's how they are nurtured. English players are taught from a young age to play a direct and team oriented game. They are usually organized and tactically disciplined but where they fall short is when the circumstances of the game force a player to have an individual moment of brilliance that gets the team the win. Exhibit A is right in front of your TV/computer screen right now.
In response, this I asked why England was able to score 9 goals in two matches against a Croatian team that most consider among the top 15-20 in the world if they are so inherently uncreative. My point was simply that, despite its lack of creativity (which I'm well aware of, have written about on my blog, and which led me to predict they'd be ousted in the Round of 16), England should be able to beat a weak team like Algeria if it was in the right frame of mind. This is where your inability to consider differing opinions or admit that you're wrong comes in. Instead of conceding the point, you come up with this:
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?
Who brought up England's record over the last 12 years? The entire time the discussion was about THIS England squad, and you had to reach back 12 years to make a point because you are unable to concede a point. No one said England had a long record of smashing good teams by 10 goals, all I said was that they had enough scoring talent and creativity to beat Algeria. What do 12 years of results have to do with that, when qualification results sufficiently prove the point? Well, if qualification results work against your argument, then you have to reach back 12 years to make a point, because you don't have the ability to concede.
This was especially funny to me because you had just predicted England to go to the semifinals of this very World Cup. If you're so aware of their inherent shortcomings, why did you think they'd make it to the semifinals of the World Cup? The fact that you ignored this point completely is another sign of your inability to concede a point or admit you're wrong. You just brush aside arguments that don't work for you.
C: England, US
Your prediction for the group.^ Why did you think this would happen if you're so certain that England lacks the creative ability to beat Algeria? My guess is that you don't really think that, but you jumped in to disagree without thinking too much, then your stubbornness prevented you from admitting the point. If I had come up to you before the tournament and said, "Hey Tevez, do you think England will beat Algeria?" You would have said yes. But you pretend otherwise now so that you can disagree, even though your own predictions go against you.
Which led you to say this, when I pointed out that Algeria was a rather weak defensive team that had conceded 3 goals to Malawi and 4 to Egypt, and there was no reason to believe that England was incapable of beating them given the number of goals England had scored in qualifying:
-Croatia conceded 13 goals in 10 WCQ matches.
-Algeria conceded 8 goals in 12 WCQ matches.
-US conceded 13 goals in 10 WCQ matches
This just put it over the top for me.
Did you really just compare qualification results in UEFA with those in Africa and CONCACAF? Would someone with your level of soccer knowledge really do this? There is no way Carlos Tevez would actually make this sort of comparison, right? Unless he's just too stubborn to admit that he's wrong, and will literally go to laughable lengths to prove a point.
Coming across this confirmed my suspicions:
One of the biggest disadvantages the US NT has is something that is completely out of their control...geography. Due to their location, they're forced to play against very weak opponents in CONCACRAP. The program would benefit greatly if they could play more matches against solid European/Africa/South American opponents however it's extremely difficult to do so in this day and age due to American players being scattered all over the place, the MLS and International club seasons happening at different times, WCQ and other tournies going on, etc. Getting American players to play club soccer in Europe simply isn't enough, the US team needs to consistently get these players together against some real competition.
So when it helps your argument in explaining why the US isn't as good as it could be, you point out how weak CONCACAF is, and how the competition is inferior to EUROPE. Then, when it helps your argument in stating that Algeria is a better defensive team than Croatia, you compare results across CONCACAF, Africa, and Europe, as if the competition levels are really comparable.
This, my friend, is why I don't take you seriously. You leap out of your seat to disagree whenever I state an opinion, then will literally make any available argument to help your case, regardless of whether or not it goes against your prior stated opinions, or whether it actually makes sense.
Now here's a prediction for you. Your response to this will be one of the following.
A) Completely ignore the post.
B) Make a sarcastic comment about how long it took me to put this together.
C) Pick out a few random statements in the post and find a way to disagree with them, rather than addressing the point as a whole.
That's your MO.
So, NT, those of you have read this, I hope you understand why I am annoyed by this constant disagreement. It's not really good-faith soccer discussion, it's someone attaching themselves to you like a leach and disagreeing with everything you say in some childish attempt to assert their supremacy on an internet message board.
looks like he is ignoring it and taking the L. "
"
CarlosTevez is the biggest buffoon on NT
Attention Tevez:
![0]](/styles/default/xenforo/NTemojis/alien.gif "Alien 0]")
