The World Cup Thread *******

F

foret

Guest
tatarsky said:
Think this is a bit much. There's no denying that Ferdinand, Terry, Ashley Cole, Gerrard, Lampard and Rooney (and Becks back when he was any cop) can all be described as world class players, that would get in to pretty much any top European club team.

Player for player, there aren't many better sides in the tournament. That isn't media manipulated guff - it's almost an undeniable fact.
Click to expand...

some of those were oversold, but you're right

that nudnik hansen says that hardly any of the players in the teams remaning in the competition would get into an england side, that IS nonsense

individually they are probably behind only france, spain, argentina and brazil, but english players are inhibited by a technically poor footballing culture and a shit manager who lacked the will to do anything about it
 
IdleRich

IdleRich

IdleRich
"this 'deserved to win' stuff is infuriating, even in defeat the english sense of entitlement is undimmed this time founded on two fallacies - that they played well enough to win (an element of irreason there) - or that portugal had mediocre players and should have had the good grace to concede"
Click to expand...
They deserved to win because they were slightly the better team on the day that's all - not because of entitlement of empire or having better players on paper or anything else. There is no "irreason" in saying that England were better, I'm just describing what I saw. I agree that there is no point in jingoistic bias but it's equally worthless to say that Portugal outthought or outfought a poor England side when they simply didn't. I'm trying to describe it as fairly and disinterestedly as possible, what I find infutiating is a lack of ability to understand that.
 
F

foret

Guest
sure, i wasn't trying to smear you with imperialistic bias or what have you (i wasn't very clear) by saying they deseved to win

they still blatantly didn't deserve to win, as reflected by the fact that they dind't ;-)
 
B

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
foret said:
sure, i wasn't trying to smear you with imperialistic bias or what have you (i wasn't very clear) by saying they deseved to win

they still blatantly didn't deserve to win, as reflected by the fact that they dind't ;-)
Click to expand...

They didn't deserve to win because they created practically nothing, save one chance that Joe Cole missed. Neither did the Portuguese. The goalkeepers had little to worry about til penalties.
 
IdleRich

IdleRich

IdleRich
I seem to have got myself into the position of defending the England side when that's not what I was intending at all. I merely stated that they were slightly better than Portugal, having had marginally more and better chances and that saying so is not necessarily down to one-eyed bias, sorry if I was touchy there Foret. Overall England were rubbish and dull and I'm fed up of talking about them - I'd much rather talk about the glorious come-back my seven-a-side team made last night, 3-2 down with five minutes to go and after my equalizer gave us belief we pulled clear to win 5-3. The fact that they were down to six men after one or our players crunched their winger in no way impacted on the result and in any case it was their fault for not having a sub.
 
J

John Doe

Well-known member
IdleRich said:
I seem to have got myself into the position of defending the England side when that's not what I was intending at all. I merely stated that they were slightly better than Portugal, having had marginally more and better chances and that saying so is not necessarily down to one-eyed bias, sorry if I was touchy there Foret. Overall England were rubbish and dull and I'm fed up of talking about them - I'd much rather talk about the glorious come-back my seven-a-side team made last night, 3-2 down with five minutes to go and after my equalizer gave us belief we pulled clear to win 5-3. The fact that they were down to six men after one or our players crunched their winger in no way impacted on the result and in any case it was their fault for not having a sub.
Click to expand...

You're the man the FA's looking for IdleRich! Get McClaren out now and get yourself installed on a multi-million pound contract in Soho Square. :)
 
D

don_quixote

Trent End
disagree, was much much better than 2002.

the football was pretty poor in the final, but OH the drama with zidane. got better and better as the match went on and then possibly the most violent act i've ever seen on a football field.
 
N

Ness Rowlah

Norwegian Wood
No idea what Zidane was thinking. My personal guess is that
something racist was being said (Italy and Spain still decades
behind England on this) and The Indie speculates along the same lines .

Does not matter - in a World Cup
final any insult should just be forgotten until after the match.

What I will not forget is that FIFA seems to have sneaked in
video evidence through the backdoor for the very last game
of the tournament.

From The Guardian (and loads of others - search for video and Zidane on Google News)


Italy's coach Marcello Lippi last night insisted Marco Materazzi said nothing to provoke Zinédine Zidane into the extraordinary head-butt that led to the France captain's late dismissal. Lippi claimed the referee Horacio Elizondo had received help from an official on the sidelines for "a flagrant breach of Fifa's rules" before sending Zidane off. "You will realise it was not Materazzi who got the attention of the referee," said Lippi. "It was the fourth and fifth officials looking at the video at the edge of the pitch. We did not do anything. They saw it and they called the attention of the referee."
Click to expand...

Now I am all for video evidence to be used exactly as we did see today (as can been seen previously in this thread) - but

* did players and managers know of video usage before the game kicked off?
* did the officials on the pitch know that video was going to be used?
* if so - why was there no whistle from the 4th or 5th official?
* why wasn't it used for the penalty decision(s) or for the shots off the bar
downwards?
* was it used during the penalty shootout?
* does the current set of FIFA rules allow video to be used?
I doubt it - on the 20th Blatter ruled out video evidence ...

FIFA president Sepp Blatter on Monday ruled out the use of video evidence to deal with controversial refereeing decisions. The issue came out again recently after France claimed that Patrick Vieira had had a good goal ruled out when his 32nd minute effort seemingly crossed the line in the 1-1 draw with South Korea in their World Cup Group G in Leipzig on Sunday. "I don't think that stopping the match (to make a decision) to be the ideal solution," Blatter told French radio station RMC. However, Blatter favours the "smartball" which contains a micro-chip and was trialled at the world under-17 championship in Peru last year.
Click to expand...

Zidane going off was shocking, but introducing video evidence, without anyone but a few insiders knowing beforehand, is just as shocking to me. FIFA is still being run by a handful of idiots like Blatter, who can do whatever they want at a whim.
 
Last edited:
IdleRich

IdleRich

IdleRich
"crap world cup"
Click to expand...
I wouldn't go that far but it wasn't spectacular in the end - I think that teams were too cautious in the knock-out rounds which meant that there weren't many goals.
"possibly the most violent act i've ever seen on a football field"
Click to expand...
That's a bit strong, it was a clear sending-off but what about that Leonardo elbow or Schumacher close-line and those are just from previous World Cups. It did bug me the way that Zidane acted so hard-done-by and the coach clapped sarcastically, apparently they are still saying that Materazzi over-acted to get Zidane sent-off which is a bit cheeky. I agree with what you say about the video evidence though Ness.
I just think it's a shame that the final was decided on penalties, it's disappointing enough when a team is knocked out on penalties but it seems to be very anti-climactic when the whole tournament ends that way. Obviously I would say that as an England supporter but I do think that it would be good if they could find another way (I haven't got any decent suggestions though).
 
D

don_quixote

Trent End
i dont remember the leonardo elbow, but i'd agree about schumacher. the whole zidane story in this world cup has been captivating. could easily make a film from the moment he has a dream telling him to rejoin the french team until the headbutt. he has won the golden ball and quite rightly. he may not have even been the best player on the pitch, but more then 1998, this tournament has been zidane's world.

the enduring images for me yesterday is domenech being completely abandoned from his team as zidane carries them through.
 
B

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
IdleRich said:
I wouldn't go that far but it wasn't spectacular in the end - I think that teams were too cautious in the knock-out rounds which meant that there weren't many goals.

That's a bit strong, it was a clear sending-off but what about that Leonardo elbow or Schumacher close-line and those are just from previous World Cups. It did bug me the way that Zidane acted so hard-done-by and the coach clapped sarcastically, apparently they are still saying that Materazzi over-acted to get Zidane sent-off which is a bit cheeky. I agree with what you say about the video evidence though Ness.
I just think it's a shame that the final was decided on penalties, it's disappointing enough when a team is knocked out on penalties but it seems to be very anti-climactic when the whole tournament ends that way. Obviously I would say that as an England supporter but I do think that it would be good if they could find another way (I haven't got any decent suggestions though).
Click to expand...

It was just na immensely sad end to a glittering career.

Agree completely about penalties - the short-term drama is a pretty poor pay-off for the long-term disappointment of the match being settled in such a way.
 
IdleRich

IdleRich

IdleRich
"Agree completely about penalties - the short-term drama is a pretty poor pay-off for the long-term disappointment of the match being settled in such a way."
Click to expand...
Not to take anything away from Italy but it does seem to taint the win in a way, same as in 1994 when Italy were the losers on penalties. I don't know why I feel that with the final more than in the knock-out stage but for some reason I do.
As I understand it this final will probably have been the most watched event in the history of the world ever and so it ought to be a good advert for the game not something that boils down to what is little better than a coin toss. Of course if teams are inseparable in the group stages then it is possible to be knocked out by drawing lots - has that ever happened? I've never heard of it happening but if it ever did there would surely be a big outcry, I would feel pretty gutted if my team was knocked out that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top