Andrew in CA Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 Last I heard, they were trying to find the right cast for him to wear so that he could play. I hope he can play– I've had tomorrow's Cote D'Ivoire-Portugal circled on my calendar since the schedule was announced.
ajzepp Posted June 15, 2010 Author Posted June 15, 2010 I hope he can play– I've had tomorrow's Cote D'Ivoire-Portugal circled on my calendar since the schedule was announced. I hope so too...seeing him and C.Ronaldo should make for an entertaining match. EDIT: Wow, for some reason I didn't realize Brazil was in that group, too....that kinda sucks, cause three of my favorite teams to watch are in that group
Pete Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 I hope he can play– I've had tomorrow's Cote D'Ivoire-Portugal circled on my calendar since the schedule was announced. they said that they would not know until two hours before game time if his cast would be legal to play with
meazza Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 I hope so too...seeing him and C.Ronaldo should make for an entertaining match. I'm still not sold on Portugal passing that group. Ronaldo has often been surrounded by superstars. Right now, he's the only one. As I keep watching this tournament, I'm convinced that a club summer tournament would be much more entertainment. Some of these national teams are just bad.
Andrew in CA Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 I hope so too...seeing him and C.Ronaldo should make for an entertaining match. EDIT: Wow, for some reason I didn't realize Brazil was in that group, too....that kinda sucks, cause three of my favorite teams to watch are in that group But that's the best part! You're gonna have 3 great games, as long as the group isn't set by the time Brazil and Portugal meet up.
ajzepp Posted June 15, 2010 Author Posted June 15, 2010 I'm still not sold on Portugal passing that group. Ronaldo has often been surrounded by superstars. Right now, he's the only one. As I keep watching this tournament, I'm convinced that a club summer tournament would be much more entertainment. Some of these national teams are just bad. I agree...he better step up his game and take this team on his shoulders, or Ivory Coast and Brazil will leave them behind. Should be an interesting group to watch! North Korea can suck it
ajzepp Posted June 15, 2010 Author Posted June 15, 2010 But that's the best part! You're gonna have 3 great games, as long as the group isn't set by the time Brazil and Portugal meet up. True....I hope it plays out that way. I'd rather see all three teams in the knockout stage, but if there's sudden death on the line for that game it'll be almost the same thing.
Andrew in CA Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 I agree...he better step up his game and take this team on his shoulders, or Ivory Coast and Brazil will leave them behind. Should be an interesting group to watch! North Korea can suck it All 3 teams can be great but have significant flaws– it should make for more exciting matchups. I hope PRK loses by 5 each time out. F– 'em.
meazza Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 All 3 teams can be great but have significant flaws– it should make for more exciting matchups. I hope PRK loses by 5 each time out. F– 'em. Brazil has no flaws. I fear they will have a 7th star on their gold shirt.
LeviF Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 Quick question about England's flag... I think I may know the answer but want another take... Why is the flag: St. George's Cross and not the Union Jack? ?? It's because England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland all have different national teams. Scotland, Wales, and N. Ireland just happen to rarely qualify
Britbillsfan Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 Quick question about England's flag... I think I may know the answer but want another take... Why is the flag: St. George's Cross and not the Union Jack? ?? St George's Cross is the national flag of England. I think US States have their own flags, just this one predates the UK (since the Union Jack did not come into being until after the union between England and Scotland).
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 It's because England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland all have different national teams. Scotland, Wales, and N. Ireland just happen to rarely qualify This is what I don't get...wouldn't they be a lot more successful as a collective United Kingdom team? Wouldn't this be like FIFA recognizing separate US teams from California, Texas, New York, Florida, etc.?
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 Soccer officially announces that it is gay... http://www.theonion.com/video/soccer-offic...t-is-gay,17603/
linksfiend Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 Soccer officially announces that it is gay... http://www.theonion.com/video/soccer-offic...t-is-gay,17603/ "Knocking Boots with those of like mind"
linksfiend Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 "3. Goalies have 6 seconds to play the ball after controlling it. No punting. Maybe dropkicks, maybe not. Otherwise just one arm throws." That's already the rule I believe? Right. I forgot about that. They banned where a goalie could drop the ball, dribble it, and pick it back up maybe two WCs ago. As well as picking up a ball that is played back by a defender. See - I knew it was a good idea.
linksfiend Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 The offside trap is one of the most difficult yet smartest strategies to implement. The best strikers in the world get goals by beating the offside trap. I think you'd fundamentally change the game. I don't think offsides are the problem. Here I disagree. There are plenty of scoring chances negated (often just after corner kicks) where the defenders head away or deflect the ball upfield yet never gain control. Then the attacking team gets whistled for offsides when the defenders pull up. I'd like to see the defenders advance at least advance the ball past a certain point before offsides takes affect again. Like clearing the blue line in hockey. I think this would add to the offensive flow of the game. And hey, there never used to be a forward pass in hockey. Or a forward pass in football. Or offensive linemen never used to be allowed to use their arms to block. All these were major (maybe fundamental) changes. And big improvements.
meazza Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 Here I disagree. There are plenty of scoring chances negated (often just after corner kicks) where the defenders head away or deflect the ball upfield yet never gain control. Then the attacking team gets whistled for offsides when the defenders pull up. I'd like to see the defenders advance at least advance the ball past a certain point before offsides takes affect again. Like clearing the blue line in hockey. I think this would add to the offensive flow of the game. And hey, there never used to be a forward pass in hockey. Or a forward pass in football. Or offensive linemen never used to be allowed to use their arms to block. All these were major (maybe fundamental) changes. And big improvements. I think that the World Cup is a bad indicator of if the rules are effective or not. I watch this stuff every weekend and sometimes intra week during Champions league and it is quite offensive. It does happen that games finish 0-0 and it does also happen that games finish 4-2. The reason being that these guys play together all year and are more effective of moving the ball. How effective is an NFL offense if it just meets a few times a year and for a summer? Would they be able to move the ball effectively? Once you reach the later stages, teams are very scared to make a mistake so they play cautiously. I understand your rule changes but I think the game should be looked at closer in the league play as the World Cup is not a good sample of the sport.
Britbillsfan Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 This is what I don't get...wouldn't they be a lot more successful as a collective United Kingdom team? Wouldn't this be like FIFA recognizing separate US teams from California, Texas, New York, Florida, etc.? It has historical roots from the early days of football when the only countries playing were England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland. Other football nations can find it annoying but it is part of the history of the game. In most years only a few players from Scotland/N Ireland/Wales would make the squad (after all England has nearly 90% of the population of the UK) except for rare individuals (the amazing George Best and Ryan Giggs, for example). The one major exception would be the Scots team in the late 70's, which had some real depth and class, even if they underperformed at the World Cup. The rivalry is pretty intense between the 'Home Nations'. I imagine a few Scotsmen (in particular) would feel pretty murderous towards any who tried to force them to combine their team with England's.
taterhill Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 You know if there is any contact Ronaldo will go down...maybe even a puff of wind Another note...how long until a kid is named VUVUZELA
meazza Posted June 15, 2010 Posted June 15, 2010 You know if there is any contact Ronaldo will go down...maybe even a puff of wind Another note...how long until a kid is named VUVUZELA He does get fouled a lot though, more than the average player. If the ref let's them get away with it, player will try and draw the foul. Soccer is not a contact sport. Portugal played strategically today. A loss would have knocked them out of the tournament. 1 point today, try and tie Brazil and destroy North Korea. Can't say i blame them.
Recommended Posts