Fifa Germany 2006 - world cup thread

Originally posted by Dregh
[B]Riquelme had the entire game in his pocket?

In my last post I said "G'Night" and was about to go to sleep when I suddenly noticed someone complimenting Riquelme. He's one of the best players we have but if you had actually watched the match you would know he sucked ass and he shouldn't be complimented for anything he did in this WC except for the 2 good passes in the Ivory Coast match. Nothing more. He's getting slower and selfish everytime that Spanish press compliments him. He isn't even close to being the captain of the team and he thinks he IS the team. He's still a good player but I just can't tolerate people complimenting him just for his surname. [/B]

I don't agree with that at all. I heard that a lot of Argentinians were complaining that he ''never runs'' and he has no pace and whatever, but obviously they don't understand the subtletly of his contribution to the team. He never runs, because he doesn't have to. He sits in the middle of the field and dictates play, and often, the pace of the entire game. I think because he's not often the one who puts in the killer final pass is the reason why some dislike him. He starts moves with that amazing vision of his, and starting them is as important as finishing them. He's a fantastic player. And arrogance and top South American players kind of goes hand in hand anyway, so I wouldn't complain.

Anyway, who saw the USA match? What a performance, what a bad referee, what a game! Dempsey, Beasley, Donovan and Reyna were superb, McBride did us proud and boy do I hate Italian players now. Diving, manipulative, spiteful, and of course, pretty ineffective. Pirlo and Zambrotta aside.

USA were so unlucky last night, I really wanted 'em to claim the three points, they outplayed Italy at quite a few stages of the game, such ashame, if they'd have won, everyone would be on 3 points, and it would all be very exciting going into the last game

If USA had kept their heads, they could've won, the two they had sent off really damaged their chances of winning, even though the straight red given to one of the American players was utter shite, it should've been a yellow

The things I like about the American team is that they almost never dive, never play up the injuries unless they are actually injured, and rarely encourage the ref to make decisions.

-AC

That's what being an American football country does to you.

It's the same with the Canadian team (even though they suck), they never dive or anything because of hockey.

Brazil had a better game this time. Things really started picking up when Ronaldo went off, so hopefully Parriera will learn from that.

Although Ronaldo played better 2nd half. Props to Australia though, they gave it a go. Robinho was outstanding though, he gave them problems.

My only confusion is why Carlos still takes free kicks. Juninho should have had at least an appearance by now.

-AC

Originally posted by Deathblow
I don't agree with that at all. I heard that a lot of Argentinians were complaining that he ''never runs'' and he has no pace and whatever, but obviously they don't understand the subtletly of his contribution to the team. He never runs, because he doesn't have to. He sits in the middle of the field and dictates play, and often, the pace of the entire game. I think because he's not often the one who puts in the killer final pass is the reason why some dislike him. He starts moves with that amazing vision of his, and starting them is as important as finishing them. He's a fantastic player. And arrogance and top South American players kind of goes hand in hand anyway, so I wouldn't complain.

Anyway, who saw the USA match? What a performance, what a bad referee, what a game! Dempsey, Beasley, Donovan and Reyna were superb, McBride did us proud and boy do I hate Italian players now. Diving, manipulative, spiteful, and of course, pretty ineffective. Pirlo and Zambrotta aside.

1) It's not about running, It's about not losing the ball like he and Mascherano horribly did in the Ivory Coast match. But at least Mascherano redeemed himself with this match.
2) He doesn't dictate play. Sorin, Ayala and Pekerman do, not him.
3) He isn't having an amazing vision lately.

I still like him and he's one of our best players, but as said in my last post, he has done very little lately to get a compliment.

About the USA match, I think that being USA a non-soccer country they made a wonderful appearance against one of the best soccer countries in the world. I really hope that USA can make it far on the WC or at least not lose in the first round, which effort-less Czech Rep. players should.

Originally posted by Deathblow

Anyway, who saw the USA match? What a performance, what a bad referee, what a game! Dempsey, Beasley, Donovan and Reyna were superb, McBride did us proud and boy do I hate Italian players now. Diving, manipulative, spiteful, and of course, pretty ineffective. Pirlo and Zambrotta aside.

Yeah that was a really good match with the exception of the ref. What pissed me off was some of the tackles later in the game were just as bad as the ones that the U.S. players got sent off with reds.

I would disagree with you about Beasley. The man hasn't done shit. He sleep walked through the Czech game and then subbing into a game with fresh legs and Italian players looking exhausted, he barely did a thing. I wouldn't have a problem if Arena doesn't play him for the rest of the World Cup. At least the other U.S. players seem to give a shit.

None of them did well in the Czech game, but Beasley was still good in the Italy game, regardless of fatigue in the Italian defenders. They're still supposed to be the best in the world, and Beasley put one in the net past them. I know it was discounted and all, but it was still and excellent effort and a great run.

I read somewhere today that Riquelme gets a pretty poor reception in Argentina, so I guess that's where this criticism is coming from. See in Europe Dregh, everyone rates him extremely highly, and so far he's been one of the best players of the tournament, in fact, possibly the best. And that's kind of a common thought. It may be a cultural difference, or maybe you guys are just much harsher on our own players, like the English.

Originally posted by Deathblow

I read somewhere today that Riquelme gets a pretty poor reception in Argentina, so I guess that's where this criticism is coming from. See in Europe Dregh, everyone rates him extremely highly, and so far he's been one of the best players of the tournament, in fact, possibly the best. And that's kind of a common thought. It may be a cultural difference, or maybe you guys are just much harsher on our own players, like the English.

You are right when you talk about the rating in Europe but I think the Spanish press (and rest of the European press) are spoiling him and ever since he missed that penalty against Arsenal (was it Arsenal or Barcelona? I don't remember) he's been going down. What's worse, he is such a cold player he never recognizes mistakes and just changes subject when asked about performance.

brazil struggled to break down the aussies defence. australia deserved something out the game

With all due respect, that's because their defense was all 11 men. Brazil are great, they're not capable of dodging a whole team and whacking it in the net, nobody is. When Brazil stretched them out more with Robinho, they were getting more and more chances. Of course they couldn't do much, though. Look at the way Australia played, they played to get the draw and occasionally tried to get a goal.

Australia has a couple of open goals and didn't take them. Dida fumbled and Harry Kewell, a man who the commentator had just referenced as "Like a Brazilian", missed an open net.

They played well, they gave it a great shot like I expected they would, but when you miss open goals, you've gotta start asking if they "deserve" anything. Missing chances is one thing, but open nets should be easy for any striker.

-AC

Alpha, are you brazilian?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
With all due respect, that's because their defense was all 11 men. Brazil are great, they're not capable of dodging a whole team and whacking it in the net, nobody is. When Brazil stretched them out more with Robinho, they were getting more and more chances. Of course they couldn't do much, though. Look at the way Australia played, they played to get the draw and occasionally tried to get a goal.

well what do you expect a team like australia to do against a team like Brazil? all out attack?

Trinidad and Tobago sat behind the ball for the majority of the game but you didnt defend the bad England performance.

Australia sat back and tried to get Brazil on the break, looked solid in defence in the first half and made a few chances for themselves as well.
They went 1-0 down and rather than sticking to the same tactic they tried to get a goal... which inevitably meant they looked weaker in defence, and so Brazil started opening them up alot more, nothing to do with Robinho, just the Aussie back line was soo much higher up the pitch.

Originally posted by Df02
well what do you expect a team like australia to do against a team like Brazil? all out attack?

No, I was stating that the reason Brazil found it hard to break them down was because they literally had their whole team in their own half. I didn't say they were wrong to do it, I was saying it doesn't exactly make Brazil look bad, no team could do that.

Originally posted by Df02
Trinidad and Tobago sat behind the ball for the majority of the game but you didnt defend the bad England performance.

Trinidad were much more spread out, mobile and open than Australia. Australia defended with 8 men then sent a couple to attack, then quickly bailed back. Trinidad were playing more to the game. They didn't actually have every one of their men infront of the goal. Gerrard was having to make challenges and hold the ball in midfield because Trinidad were moving up to secure that area, Australia were camped infront of their goal first half.

They played like they know how to play and they gave it a great shot, I think they're going to be a bit of a bogey team for someone in the future, but with tactics like that and people missing open goals (Especially Bresciano's (sp) chance), they won't get far into the latter stages if they qualify the group.

Originally posted by Df02
Australia sat back and tried to get Brazil on the break, looked solid in defence in the first half and made a few chances for themselves as well.
They went 1-0 down and rather than sticking to the same tactic they tried to get a goal... which inevitably meant they looked weaker in defence, and so Brazil started opening them up alot more, nothing to do with Robinho, just the Aussie back line was soo much higher up the pitch.

It was everything to do with Robinho. Brazil were playing much better as soon as Ronaldo left the pitch. As soon as Robinho came on he was running rings around defenders, running BACK to make challenges and win the ball, he very nearly scored a few times. One of which gave Fred his goal.

-AC

To think that may have been Zidane's last game internationally.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No, I was stating that the reason Brazil found it hard to break them down was because they literally had their whole team in their own half. I didn't say they were wrong to do it, I was saying it doesn't exactly make Brazil look bad, no team could do that.

Trinidad were much more spread out, mobile and open than Australia. Australia defended with 8 men then sent a couple to attack, then quickly bailed back. Trinidad were playing more to the game. They didn't actually have every one of their men infront of the goal. Gerrard was having to make challenges and hold the ball in midfield because Trinidad were moving up to secure that area, Australia were camped infront of their goal first half.

-AC

there was actually no difference between the way Australia played and the way TaT played... both had alot of people behind the ball and both tried to play on the counter.
if you play for the counter ofcourse you're gonna have men bailing back when you lose the ball... TaT had a 15-20 window of the game where they looked threatening and moved forward.. not saying their only chances came then, but it was when they looked to actually play up the pitch... and for the last 10-15minutes of the first half Australia had exactly the same spell of foward minded play.

Both teams defended, both teams defended well, both teams tried to counter and both team enjoyed small period of psuedo-dominance... resulting in both teams making their opponents look distinctly average.
there is actually very little difference between the Aussie V Brazil and England v TaT for me, you've just chosen to say England were poor, and that Australia were making things difficult for Brazil, when the reality is, both applies to both, Brazil were pretty poor, and Australia made it difficult, just as England were poor, and TaT made it difficult.

true say..when people attack brazil and england, then you will see the best of them both.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It was everything to do with Robinho. Brazil were playing much better as soon as Ronaldo left the pitch. As soon as Robinho came on he was running rings around defenders, running BACK to make challenges and win the ball, he very nearly scored a few times. One of which gave Fred his goal.

-AC

but the only reason Robinho had the option to run at people was because the Australians were pushing forward to try equalise, if Robinho had been on in the first half he would'vestruggled to do much against a solid block of defenders, who were closing players down quickly, just like the rest of the Brazil team.

but Ronaldo is playing piss-poorly, he never looks interested and even when he does he looks off pace and criminally off-form... i say criminally because it's a crime to waste a striker spot when there are dozens of good Brazilian strikers to fill it.

ronaldo is playing shit. he wont play again

i think he will, the Brazilian press are worse than the british, if he ever drops any of the 'fab 4' there'd be a riot, even if they are playing shit.