World cup predictions rant

tom pr

Well-known member
i still think we can play with all three in the middle - if they stick to their jobs - gerrard at the back - lamps up front - beckahm on the right
that's the problem though - gerrard is never disciplined enough when asked to play as the defensive part of the midfield - he's constantly striving to play like he does for liverpool; running the show, shooting or playing a killer ball at every opportunity..and he can't get away with doing that when hes alongside lampard who's doing the exact same thing (and rightfully so, he's england's top scorer over the last year surely?)

beckham was far more mature and disciplined than gerrard when asked to play the defensive part of the midfield, but his passing game suffered, as he was constantly overlooking gerrard and lampard to try long balls out to owen and wright-phillips, neither of whom are going to win you many knock downs high up the pitch.

if gerrard can't grow up and stick to the defensive role he's been allocated (perhaps he needs an international coach with a stronger personality to sort that part of his game out, but its pointless to discuss as sven is going nowhere), i'd honestly play king. we looked far more organised in the poland game with him playing there, and it meant lampard had to track back a lot less, and thus could concentrate on attacking.

think i would like to see how well wright-philipps for chelsea but like the idea of his pace on the left, always find joe cole a bit of a show pony, would have said play ashley cole in midfield and bridge in left defence but what's happened to bridge?
disagree - have a season ticket at stamford bridge and cole has been our best player all year - he's stronger, harder working and more disciplined than he's ever been. wright-phillips, for all his pace and crossing/shooting ability has been a bit disappointing when hes played - he's a real wee fighter though, which i like. ;)
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
k-punk said:
Greatest moment in world history: Italy 3 - Brazil 2 in 82....

Between 70 and 94 They Who Must Be Admired never looked like winning, despite commentators creaming over them every time they managed to kick a ball straight ('look at the skiiiiiiiilllllllll, the Latin rythmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm'). they were possibly the most boring team to win a world cup in 94 (like, imagine Germany if they actually won instead of coming runner-up). They were poor in 98, and justly beaten in the final by a French side with vastly more flair, invention and talent. And Derek's right, they were very average last time. Of all the overrated Brazillians, Ronaldo is probably numero uno...
What utter rubbish. For the most part. 1982's Brazil was a sublime team (along with the France team of that era), for my money better than the Pele-helmed vintage... and as for 1998's French winners having flair, invention and talent?!?! Aside from Zidane, they were the most piss-poor excuse for a World Cup winning team I've ever seen, squeezing past Paraguay (in extra time), Italy (on penalties after a 0-0) and the titans of Croatia to reach the final.

Granted, the Brazil of 2002 were pretty ordinary too apart from Rivaldo (the big cheat), but anyone who denies that watching Zico, Socrates, Ronaldinho and the like is anything but a privilege really is being anti-canonical for the sake of it.

But I agree with all who pinpoint this year as England's true chance for glory. With Owen and Rooney (surely the world's most watchable, and thus best, player behind Ronaldinho) as the dream strike force, and an embarassment of riches in central defence and central midfield, all we have to make sure is that the team ignores Sven's rubbish tactics and we can overcome our curse of being shit and negative for the second half of any match that really matters. A habit which of course was wonderfully overturned in that match vs Argentina.

Except that one didn't matter.
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
Oh, and all the Crouch-bashing is ridiculous, as people on here have said. He's been pretty good every time I've seen him play for England; certainly outplaying many of the bigger names recently.
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
k-punk said:
Greatest moment in world history: Italy 3 - Brazil 2 in 82....

Between 70 and 94 They Who Must Be Admired never looked like winning, despite commentators creaming over them every time they managed to kick a ball straight ('look at the skiiiiiiiilllllllll, the Latin rythmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm'). they were possibly the most boring team to win a world cup in 94 (like, imagine Germany if they actually won instead of coming runner-up). They were poor in 98, and justly beaten in the final by a French side with vastly more flair, invention and talent. And Derek's right, they were very average last time. Of all the overrated Brazillians, Ronaldo is probably numero uno...
baboon2004 said:
What utter rubbish.

Not UTTER rubbish, even by your own account - you agree about 2002, say nothing about 94 (wisely); in fact the only thing you seem to disagree about is 98.

For the most part. 1982's Brazil was a sublime team (along with the France team of that era), for my money better than the Pele-helmed vintage...

Didn't deny that they were a good side. Made it all the sweeter when they were beaten by a better one.

and as for 1998's French winners having flair, invention and talent?!?!

what I said is that they had vastly more than the Brazil side of 98, which was certainly true...


Aside from Zidane, they were the most piss-poor excuse for a World Cup winning team I've ever seen, squeezing past Paraguay (in extra time), Italy (on penalties after a 0-0) and the titans of Croatia to reach the final.

Well, at least they did get through to the final, which they won, unlike the mighty Brazil team of 82. 'Asise from Zidane' is a big 'aside from', he was FAR better than anything Brazil had to offer; they also had flying full backs, Petit and Vieira were also outstanding.

Granted, the Brazil of 2002 were pretty ordinary too apart from Rivaldo (the big cheat), but anyone who denies that watching Zico, Socrates, Ronaldinho and the like is anything but a privilege really is being anti-canonical for the sake of it.

The Brazil of 2002 were majestic compared to the Brazil of 94. Sorry, I've never seen it with Brazil; yes they have had some good sides, but they have to do far less to impress people than any other team in the world.
 

redcrescent

Well-known member
Talked to a Portuguese football nut in Lisbon yesterday and he had a theory I'd like to float here. This fellow said that, regardless of whom they field, Brazil would not win in 2006 because there's an established pattern that has held since Brazil's victory in Sweden '58. Ever since then, when the World Cup has been held outside Europe, no European team has won, and when the World Cup has been held in Europe, only European teams have won. I went through it mentally:

1962 host Chile, winners Brazil
1966 England, England
1970 Mexico, Brazil
1974 Germany, Germany
1978 Argentina, Argentina
1982 Spain, Italy
1986 Mexico, Argentina
1990 Italy, Germany
1994 USA, Brazil
1998 France, France
2002 Korea/Japan, Brazil
2006 Germany, ?

Obviously people (especially me) spend far too much time (and money, fuck!) on football and fill the space between football games talking nonsense about football. So inevitably you start imagining things. Anyway.

Unlikely as it is, I hope Mexico or one of the African teams makes it (in the absence of my admired Nigeria, my money's on the Ivory Coast). I also hope Spain, that eternal underachiever, make a respectable exit this time. Please not Germany, as we're neighbors and we wouldn't hear the end of it -- Austria are so bad they can only play in a competition if they host it.

England certainly have the potential to win. I'd like to see Owen come back in good shape, in my mind a truly top-class striker (so sad to see Real Madrid let go of him so quickly), but for me England's real strength is the back four, especially the formidable John Terry.
The goalkeeper position is a wholly different affair. Not a decent man in sight.

It'll probably be Brazil, though.

Btw, I find the Budweiser sponsorship of the tournament scandalous. How the Germans allowed this is a mystery to me, at least they could've gotten the really good stuff from the Czech Republic.
 

redcrescent

Well-known member
mind_philip said:
The Germans will be under-rated by many, but they have several young players like Lahm and Schweinsteiger who could perform given the right home support and the stewardship of an on-form Ballack.
Not to forget Lukas Podolski up front, a notch above Klose, Kuranyi and Asamoah I think.
The Germans have done a lot of good work in the absence of qualification matches. They have some good young defenders in addition to Lahm, like Hinkel, Friedrich or Mertesacker. Bernd Schneider was incredible in midfield in 2002, but he may be too old this time. Still good off the bench though.
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
Excepting 1998, the last time Germany didn't qualify for a final held in Europe was 1958.
 

mind_philip

saw the light
For me, there wasn't much to choose between the Zidane of '98 and the Rivaldo of '98. Until the final, it would have been difficult to suggest that ZZ was having a great tournament.

Likewise, I'm not really feeling the hatred of Brazil '94, this was a team led by Romario after all, and if there's been a more potent striker than him in the last two decades, I'd love you to tell me who it is...
 

jenks

thread death
mind_philip said:
For me, there wasn't much to choose between the Zidane of '98 and the Rivaldo of '98. Until the final, it would have been difficult to suggest that ZZ was having a great tournament.

Likewise, I'm not really feeling the hatred of Brazil '94, this was a team led by Romario after all, and if there's been a more potent striker than him in the last two decades, I'd love you to tell me who it is...

didn't zz spend part of the tournament suspended? seem to remember a stamping incident against the saudis

toto scillaci and kempes both were as potent in the tournaments they dominated and ronaldo put away 8 in the last. but overall probably agree romario is as pretty damn potent a striker as any over the last thirty years
 

don_quixote

Trent End
england to definitely make the semi final if not the final now.

not even going to bother cheering england victories if allardyce is made manager. i hate him with a passion.
 

jenks

thread death
don_quixote said:
england to definitely make the semi final if not the final now.

not even going to bother cheering england victories if allardyce is made manager. i hate him with a passion.

it's just not going to happen - allardyce is a kind of mike basset like figure in my eyes. he has given the game nothing more than stringing 5 across the middle and that english 'quality' of graft

can't see any english manager doing the job - curbs? pearce? mclaren? none of em have done anything remarkable on the larger stage
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
redcrescent said:
Guus Hiddink? What about it?

Him or Scolari, yeh. Otherwise we're back to the bad old days.... a minimal requirement must be EITHER some experience of managing an international side OR some success in the Champions League OR winning a championship. Winning something, anything (apart from promotion), actually...
 

don_quixote

Trent End
well i was chatting to my dad about it, and these english managers have an option - alec mcgleish (sp?) is going to get sacked from the rangers job. if any of them, ANY OF THEM, want any credibility they should go for that job and reestablish rangers as THE force in scotland. theyll get financial backing, will be able to overturn celtic who have a gordon strachan who doesnt really impress me as manager, and then go on and achieve in europe.

that's what martin o'neill did and look at the esteem he's held in now.

perhaps then they can come back an demand the top jobs in the premiership, which will still go to the most talented foreign managers because the top clubs dont want to take a risk with someone who hasnt won championships.
 

redcrescent

Well-known member
If it was up to me I'd give Hiddink the gig. A top class coach, for sure. Not so convinced Scolari could adapt to coaching a non-Brazilian or non-Portuguese team (though he's done good work wherever he's gone).

Btw, England group for Euro 2008:

England
Croatia
Russia
Israel
Estonia
Macedonia
Andorra

Looks doable, I'd say.
 

withnail

Active member
Watch out for Australia, they have a coach in Guus Hiddink who has taken both South Korea and Netherlands to the semi finals (I think) in the last 2 world cups. I know nothing about socc ... errr football, but the pundits here do go on about his tactical brilliance and his ability to get the best out of his team. The Football Federation here is offering him loads of dosh to entice him to stay after the world cup.
 
ok, this is how things are going to happen:

england will not be able to beat sweden in the group phase and consequently end up in second place, which means they'll face germany in the first knock-out game. and i'm afraid that will be the end of their campaign. ;)
germany have a realistic chance to get through to the final, but not because...
redcrescent said:
they have some good young defenders.
the defence is definitely the weakest part of the current team (although mertesacker plays astonishingly solid for his age - forget about friedrich btw!), the quality of midfield (ballack, borowski, frings, deisler, schweinsteiger...) and attack (klose - if he comes back from injury, podolski, neuville, asamoah, kuranyi...) will be decisive.
final four prediction: germany, brazil, sweden and switzerland (trust me, they'll be the big surprise - anyone seen the play-offs against turkey?)
teams to watch: ivory coast, ukraine

it's a shame, though, that turkey didn't qualify - a knock-out clash against germany would have surely been an exciting event (especially here in berlin). i'll also miss denmark - have always enjoyed their world cup campaigns.
 

jenks

thread death
I thought I would resurrect this thread to see how ildly optimistic (wrong) most of us were about how we thought it'd all turn out.

I'd almost bought that whole 'watch out for Ukraine' schtick. Still fancy Ghana to provide a genuine upset though
 

Freakaholic

not just an addiction
Diggedy Derek said:
Yeah, totally agree. Brazil aren't even that good really. They were pretty average when they won the last world cup I reckon- Ronaldinho was average, Ronaldo was fat and scored a couple of tap ins, Rivaldo was probably their best forward. Personally, I'd rather Italy or Argentina won than Brazil.

I don't think England will win either, though, I don't think England are tough enough.


my god..... could anyone be more right on, in december last year, even?

and i really thought, the whole tourney, that Argentina looked like the favorites. I billed the Germany Argentina game as the REAL final.

Never saw Italy / France coming, esp. not after the first round. But they do like like 2 of the strongest 4 teams.
 
Top