the REAL football thread - no rugby or american football alloved!
You do not have enough Respect Points to post in this topic.
[jimmyjames] Saturday, June 19, 2010 3:51:23 PM
Yeah I like the golden goal method. If after extra time a result has not been reached the sides just carry on playing until somebody scores. Sides may be out on their feet but it brings fitness and fortitude into it. Logistically replaying the game is to much hassle and penalties are a lottery. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Head banger from Saturday, June 19, 2010 11:35:03 AM)
Head banger wrote:
I would rather not see the final in penalties either. but I liked the tourney. I wonder though if they could manage with either a play till there is a winner sudden death game or just replay the final if its a tie. both are problematic given the energy expended in the game.
jimmyjames wrote:
Mainly because the final was decided on a penalty shootout. It sucks when games are decided that way. I remember watching that tournament and it just not having the excitement of previous ones. Might be just me but it was average as far as the World Cup goes.
Head banger wrote:
why did you think 94 sucked?
jimmyjames wrote:
Never seen Pele, he was finished years before I was born, so can't comment. If I was to compare the 02 tournament to the 06 tournament, I would say 02 sucked. That's from someone who has no stake in who wins it.
guidogodoy wrote:
I am a fan and I wouldn't say that either tourny sucked. Sorry to disagree. Call it bias for Brasil if you like.
Also, while I admit Maradona was a fine player and I have even had the good fortune to see him in person a few times, he burned out quickly and didn't hold a candle to the likes of someone such as Pelé who was on three WC winning squads. By no means was that a coincidence.
jimmyjames wrote:
Sour grapes for what? I don't really support any team as such. Be nice to see our guys do well but they are no hope of winning it. We haven't even been in the World Cup much, this is only our second time, the last time was in 82. So as to who wins it, it doesn't really bother me either way. I just like football in general. It's just been a coincidence that Brazil won the last two crappy cups in 02 and 94, that's all. Any fan would tell you those two tournaments sucked.
Maradona was the best ever. Coke or no coke.
guidogodoy wrote:
Ha! Sour grapes, I say. Brazil just "happens" to win? They must have paid off the right people. Nope, certainly couldn't have had anything to do with actual talent. Five times.
As for Maradona, were I that hyped up on coke at the time, I think I'd play much better too. He WAS a fine player. I suppose drug arrests take a lot out of a guy.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[Becks] Saturday, June 19, 2010 3:49:46 PM
I heard somewhere they need to beat Serbia by 3 goals, not sure if that's right though. Just watching a replay of the Aussie match now, lots of Aussies up in arms about the red card. As far as I know if it hits your arm on the goal line it's a straight red, but I am not sure. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Saturday, June 19, 2010 3:45:53 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
I saw that, gutted they're still in with a mathematical chance. Denmark Japan should be a good game judging by last nights results. Looking forward to tonights game too, I'd love it if we got a point against the Italians.
Becks wrote:
Hey JJ - I see Harry Kewell got sent off in Australias draw with Ghana. Fricken dirty as team Australia are at the moment. They were all waiting for Kewell to return too, and now he's gone and stuffed it up.
[jimmyjames] Saturday, June 19, 2010 3:45:53 PM
I saw that, gutted they're still in with a mathematical chance. Denmark Japan should be a good game judging by last nights results. Looking forward to tonights game too, I'd love it if we got a point against the Italians. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Saturday, June 19, 2010 2:52:34 PM)
Becks wrote:
Hey JJ - I see Harry Kewell got sent off in Australias draw with Ghana. Fricken dirty as team Australia are at the moment. They were all waiting for Kewell to return too, and now he's gone and stuffed it up.
I was in Brasil during that shootout and, I guarantee, it was a nailbiter.
Back to your comment about Pelé....following your logic that he stopped playing before you were born, I question how you can comment on BANDS that stopped playing before you were born. I can all but guarantee that you never saw a Led Zep concert. Did it minimize their influence in the music world? Priest, for that matter? I think not. You gather your information from recordings, awards, impact on the genre and the like. In a similar fashion, you can find footage of Pelé who, I guarantee, revolutionized the game. Again, while Maradona was a good player, time will prove that he had no such longevity nor impact on the game as a whole. Never called "O Rei" (King) of Football, never had a civil war stop to watch him play (Nigeria, if I recall) or named Athlete of the Century by organizations as varied as FIFA (2000), France, UNICEF, England, USA, South America, etc.
Ask someone younger than yourself. I will bet you money that someone 10 years younger would be hard-pressed to name Madona's home country.
jimmyjames wrote:
Mainly because the final was decided on a penalty shootout. It sucks when games are decided that way. I remember watching that tournament and it just not having the excitement of previous ones. Might be just me but it was average as far as the World Cup goes.
Head banger wrote:
why did you think 94 sucked?
jimmyjames wrote:
Never seen Pele, he was finished years before I was born, so can't comment. If I was to compare the 02 tournament to the 06 tournament, I would say 02 sucked. That's from someone who has no stake in who wins it.
guidogodoy wrote:
I am a fan and I wouldn't say that either tourny sucked. Sorry to disagree. Call it bias for Brasil if you like.
Also, while I admit Maradona was a fine player and I have even had the good fortune to see him in person a few times, he burned out quickly and didn't hold a candle to the likes of someone such as Pelé who was on three WC winning squads. By no means was that a coincidence.
jimmyjames wrote:
Sour grapes for what? I don't really support any team as such. Be nice to see our guys do well but they are no hope of winning it. We haven't even been in the World Cup much, this is only our second time, the last time was in 82. So as to who wins it, it doesn't really bother me either way. I just like football in general. It's just been a coincidence that Brazil won the last two crappy cups in 02 and 94, that's all. Any fan would tell you those two tournaments sucked.
Maradona was the best ever. Coke or no coke.
guidogodoy wrote:
Ha! Sour grapes, I say. Brazil just "happens" to win? They must have paid off the right people. Nope, certainly couldn't have had anything to do with actual talent. Five times.
As for Maradona, were I that hyped up on coke at the time, I think I'd play much better too. He WAS a fine player. I suppose drug arrests take a lot out of a guy.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
Edited at: Saturday, June 19, 2010 3:58:23 PM
[Becks] Saturday, June 19, 2010 2:52:34 PM
Hey JJ - I see Harry Kewell got sent off in Australias draw with Ghana. Fricken dirty as team Australia are at the moment. They were all waiting for Kewell to return too, and now he's gone and stuffed it up.
[Head banger] Saturday, June 19, 2010 11:35:03 AM
I would rather not see the final in penalties either. but I liked the tourney. I wonder though if they could manage with either a play till there is a winner sudden death game or just replay the final if its a tie. both are problematic given the energy expended in the game. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, June 18, 2010 8:53:05 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
Mainly because the final was decided on a penalty shootout. It sucks when games are decided that way. I remember watching that tournament and it just not having the excitement of previous ones. Might be just me but it was average as far as the World Cup goes.
Head banger wrote:
why did you think 94 sucked?
jimmyjames wrote:
Never seen Pele, he was finished years before I was born, so can't comment. If I was to compare the 02 tournament to the 06 tournament, I would say 02 sucked. That's from someone who has no stake in who wins it.
guidogodoy wrote:
I am a fan and I wouldn't say that either tourny sucked. Sorry to disagree. Call it bias for Brasil if you like.
Also, while I admit Maradona was a fine player and I have even had the good fortune to see him in person a few times, he burned out quickly and didn't hold a candle to the likes of someone such as Pelé who was on three WC winning squads. By no means was that a coincidence.
jimmyjames wrote:
Sour grapes for what? I don't really support any team as such. Be nice to see our guys do well but they are no hope of winning it. We haven't even been in the World Cup much, this is only our second time, the last time was in 82. So as to who wins it, it doesn't really bother me either way. I just like football in general. It's just been a coincidence that Brazil won the last two crappy cups in 02 and 94, that's all. Any fan would tell you those two tournaments sucked.
Maradona was the best ever. Coke or no coke.
guidogodoy wrote:
Ha! Sour grapes, I say. Brazil just "happens" to win? They must have paid off the right people. Nope, certainly couldn't have had anything to do with actual talent. Five times.
As for Maradona, were I that hyped up on coke at the time, I think I'd play much better too. He WAS a fine player. I suppose drug arrests take a lot out of a guy.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[guidogodoy] Saturday, June 19, 2010 10:21:16 AM
Believe it or not, Pelé (like Elvis, Speed Racer, Don Budge, Napoleon and CHRIST) were all before my day too. Doesn't diminish their impact (or lack thereof) on the world today or our right to continue to comment on them. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, June 18, 2010 11:40:21 PM)
Becks wrote:
I can't really comment on Pele either, cos that was before my time too, but I do know and acknowledge he was one of, if not the, greatest.
guidogodoy wrote:
I was in Brasil during that shootout and, I guarantee, it was a nailbiter.
Back to your comment about Pelé....following your logic that he stopped playing before you were born, I question how you can comment on BANDS that stopped playing before you were born. I can all but guarantee that you never saw a Led Zep concert. Did it minimize their influence in the music world? Priest, for that matter? I think not. You gather your information from recordings, awards, impact on the genre and the like. In a similar fashion, you can find footage of Pelé who, I guarantee, revolutionized the game. Again, while Maradona was a good player, time will prove that he had no such longevity nor impact on the game as a whole. Never called "O Rei" (King) of Football, never had a civil war stop to watch him play (Nigeria, if I recall) or named Athlete of the Century by organizations as varied as FIFA (2000), France, UNICEF, England, USA, South America, etc.
Ask someone younger than yourself. I will bet you money that someone 10 years younger would be hard-pressed to name Madona's home country.
jimmyjames wrote:
Mainly because the final was decided on a penalty shootout. It sucks when games are decided that way. I remember watching that tournament and it just not having the excitement of previous ones. Might be just me but it was average as far as the World Cup goes.
Head banger wrote:
why did you think 94 sucked?
jimmyjames wrote:
Never seen Pele, he was finished years before I was born, so can't comment. If I was to compare the 02 tournament to the 06 tournament, I would say 02 sucked. That's from someone who has no stake in who wins it.
guidogodoy wrote:
I am a fan and I wouldn't say that either tourny sucked. Sorry to disagree. Call it bias for Brasil if you like.
Also, while I admit Maradona was a fine player and I have even had the good fortune to see him in person a few times, he burned out quickly and didn't hold a candle to the likes of someone such as Pelé who was on three WC winning squads. By no means was that a coincidence.
jimmyjames wrote:
Sour grapes for what? I don't really support any team as such. Be nice to see our guys do well but they are no hope of winning it. We haven't even been in the World Cup much, this is only our second time, the last time was in 82. So as to who wins it, it doesn't really bother me either way. I just like football in general. It's just been a coincidence that Brazil won the last two crappy cups in 02 and 94, that's all. Any fan would tell you those two tournaments sucked.
Maradona was the best ever. Coke or no coke.
guidogodoy wrote:
Ha! Sour grapes, I say. Brazil just "happens" to win? They must have paid off the right people. Nope, certainly couldn't have had anything to do with actual talent. Five times.
As for Maradona, were I that hyped up on coke at the time, I think I'd play much better too. He WAS a fine player. I suppose drug arrests take a lot out of a guy.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[_strat_] Saturday, June 19, 2010 5:23:19 AM
Meh... Thats just because they have a strong league, good clubs and good players. It leads them to think that their national team is good too. They should have learned by now that that isnt so.
If England plays against us like they did on the first two games, Im not even worried. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, June 18, 2010 8:22:59 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
Yeah, they are looking good. One thing that really cracks me up is all the hype surrounding England at World Cups and how dismally they perform. I Hope Slovenia bury England, they don't deserve to go through.
Becks wrote:
Yeah they do, but like I said, they need to focus on the next game now. They have a good chance of making the next round.
jimmyjames wrote:
I just saw that disallowed goal. The US have a right to feel very hard done by.
Becks wrote:
I should add, most other sports have a video replay, FIFA is just a bit behind LOL.
Becks wrote:
Even if the world cup was in the US, there would have been no video refs. There never is and never has been in football/soccer. FIFA likes to keep things very old school. Biased reffing isn't an outside the US only thing, it happens everywhere occasionally. And when it is caught, it is dealt with. Like I said, this ref made a poor decision, but he didn't have the benefit of seeing the angles etc we did because in football there is no video reffing full stop.
spapad wrote:
In US sport there would have been the instant replay. I think that call would have been overturned had it taken place here. I don't trust international refs as they tend to call it as they would like it to be, like it happens in the Olympics often. Not saying the ref was biased but even his own country called him 3rd rate.
Oh, well we all know US doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of winning so all of this is a mute point.
Becks wrote:
Apparently there was a foul in there somewhere, but we're all struggling to figure out where. The ref is only human, he doesn't have the benefit of multi camera views that we have. There's heaps of talk on the US Soccer facebook page about petitioning FIFA - nothing can be done now, all that can happen is they pick themselves up and worry about the upcoming game against Algeria next week.
spapad wrote:
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
[_strat_] Saturday, June 19, 2010 5:20:56 AM
Petition? Lol... Never worked, and I hope it wont this time. If they file a petition, then we might think about it too - it was anounced today that one of our star strikers had his ankle broken by Dempsey, and wont be able to play on the cup anymore. Red card? Nope. Not even a yellow one. The ref was crap, but he wasnt biased. He was crap to both teams.
That and Lettermans very funny skit definately makes me root for Algeria in the next round. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, June 18, 2010 6:52:14 PM)
Becks wrote:
Apparently there was a foul in there somewhere, but we're all struggling to figure out where. The ref is only human, he doesn't have the benefit of multi camera views that we have. There's heaps of talk on the US Soccer facebook page about petitioning FIFA - nothing can be done now, all that can happen is they pick themselves up and worry about the upcoming game against Algeria next week.
spapad wrote:
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
Edited at: Saturday, June 19, 2010 5:21:19 AM
[Becks] Friday, June 18, 2010 11:40:21 PM
I can't really comment on Pele either, cos that was before my time too, but I do know and acknowledge he was one of, if not the, greatest. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by guidogodoy from Friday, June 18, 2010 9:15:53 PM)
guidogodoy wrote:
I was in Brasil during that shootout and, I guarantee, it was a nailbiter.
Back to your comment about Pelé....following your logic that he stopped playing before you were born, I question how you can comment on BANDS that stopped playing before you were born. I can all but guarantee that you never saw a Led Zep concert. Did it minimize their influence in the music world? Priest, for that matter? I think not. You gather your information from recordings, awards, impact on the genre and the like. In a similar fashion, you can find footage of Pelé who, I guarantee, revolutionized the game. Again, while Maradona was a good player, time will prove that he had no such longevity nor impact on the game as a whole. Never called "O Rei" (King) of Football, never had a civil war stop to watch him play (Nigeria, if I recall) or named Athlete of the Century by organizations as varied as FIFA (2000), France, UNICEF, England, USA, South America, etc.
Ask someone younger than yourself. I will bet you money that someone 10 years younger would be hard-pressed to name Madona's home country.
jimmyjames wrote:
Mainly because the final was decided on a penalty shootout. It sucks when games are decided that way. I remember watching that tournament and it just not having the excitement of previous ones. Might be just me but it was average as far as the World Cup goes.
Head banger wrote:
why did you think 94 sucked?
jimmyjames wrote:
Never seen Pele, he was finished years before I was born, so can't comment. If I was to compare the 02 tournament to the 06 tournament, I would say 02 sucked. That's from someone who has no stake in who wins it.
guidogodoy wrote:
I am a fan and I wouldn't say that either tourny sucked. Sorry to disagree. Call it bias for Brasil if you like.
Also, while I admit Maradona was a fine player and I have even had the good fortune to see him in person a few times, he burned out quickly and didn't hold a candle to the likes of someone such as Pelé who was on three WC winning squads. By no means was that a coincidence.
jimmyjames wrote:
Sour grapes for what? I don't really support any team as such. Be nice to see our guys do well but they are no hope of winning it. We haven't even been in the World Cup much, this is only our second time, the last time was in 82. So as to who wins it, it doesn't really bother me either way. I just like football in general. It's just been a coincidence that Brazil won the last two crappy cups in 02 and 94, that's all. Any fan would tell you those two tournaments sucked.
Maradona was the best ever. Coke or no coke.
guidogodoy wrote:
Ha! Sour grapes, I say. Brazil just "happens" to win? They must have paid off the right people. Nope, certainly couldn't have had anything to do with actual talent. Five times.
As for Maradona, were I that hyped up on coke at the time, I think I'd play much better too. He WAS a fine player. I suppose drug arrests take a lot out of a guy.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[guidogodoy] Friday, June 18, 2010 9:15:53 PM
I was in Brasil during that shootout and, I guarantee, it was a nailbiter.
Back to your comment about Pelé....following your logic that he stopped playing before you were born, I question how you can comment on BANDS that stopped playing before you were born. I can all but guarantee that you never saw a Led Zep concert. Did it minimize their influence in the music world? Priest, for that matter? I think not. You gather your information from recordings, awards, impact on the genre and the like. In a similar fashion, you can find footage of Pelé who, I guarantee, revolutionized the game. Again, while Maradona was a good player, time will prove that he had no such longevity nor impact on the game as a whole. Never called "O Rei" (King) of Football, never had a civil war stop to watch him play (Nigeria, if I recall) or named Athlete of the Century by organizations as varied as FIFA (2000), France, UNICEF, England, USA, South America, etc.
Ask someone younger than yourself. I will bet you money that someone 10 years younger would be hard-pressed to name Madona's home country.
Mainly because the final was decided on a penalty shootout. It sucks when games are decided that way. I remember watching that tournament and it just not having the excitement of previous ones. Might be just me but it was average as far as the World Cup goes.
Head banger wrote:
why did you think 94 sucked?
jimmyjames wrote:
Never seen Pele, he was finished years before I was born, so can't comment. If I was to compare the 02 tournament to the 06 tournament, I would say 02 sucked. That's from someone who has no stake in who wins it.
guidogodoy wrote:
I am a fan and I wouldn't say that either tourny sucked. Sorry to disagree. Call it bias for Brasil if you like.
Also, while I admit Maradona was a fine player and I have even had the good fortune to see him in person a few times, he burned out quickly and didn't hold a candle to the likes of someone such as Pelé who was on three WC winning squads. By no means was that a coincidence.
jimmyjames wrote:
Sour grapes for what? I don't really support any team as such. Be nice to see our guys do well but they are no hope of winning it. We haven't even been in the World Cup much, this is only our second time, the last time was in 82. So as to who wins it, it doesn't really bother me either way. I just like football in general. It's just been a coincidence that Brazil won the last two crappy cups in 02 and 94, that's all. Any fan would tell you those two tournaments sucked.
Maradona was the best ever. Coke or no coke.
guidogodoy wrote:
Ha! Sour grapes, I say. Brazil just "happens" to win? They must have paid off the right people. Nope, certainly couldn't have had anything to do with actual talent. Five times.
As for Maradona, were I that hyped up on coke at the time, I think I'd play much better too. He WAS a fine player. I suppose drug arrests take a lot out of a guy.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:53:05 PM
Mainly because the final was decided on a penalty shootout. It sucks when games are decided that way. I remember watching that tournament and it just not having the excitement of previous ones. Might be just me but it was average as far as the World Cup goes.
Never seen Pele, he was finished years before I was born, so can't comment. If I was to compare the 02 tournament to the 06 tournament, I would say 02 sucked. That's from someone who has no stake in who wins it.
guidogodoy wrote:
I am a fan and I wouldn't say that either tourny sucked. Sorry to disagree. Call it bias for Brasil if you like.
Also, while I admit Maradona was a fine player and I have even had the good fortune to see him in person a few times, he burned out quickly and didn't hold a candle to the likes of someone such as Pelé who was on three WC winning squads. By no means was that a coincidence.
jimmyjames wrote:
Sour grapes for what? I don't really support any team as such. Be nice to see our guys do well but they are no hope of winning it. We haven't even been in the World Cup much, this is only our second time, the last time was in 82. So as to who wins it, it doesn't really bother me either way. I just like football in general. It's just been a coincidence that Brazil won the last two crappy cups in 02 and 94, that's all. Any fan would tell you those two tournaments sucked.
Maradona was the best ever. Coke or no coke.
guidogodoy wrote:
Ha! Sour grapes, I say. Brazil just "happens" to win? They must have paid off the right people. Nope, certainly couldn't have had anything to do with actual talent. Five times.
As for Maradona, were I that hyped up on coke at the time, I think I'd play much better too. He WAS a fine player. I suppose drug arrests take a lot out of a guy.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
Never seen Pele, he was finished years before I was born, so can't comment. If I was to compare the 02 tournament to the 06 tournament, I would say 02 sucked. That's from someone who has no stake in who wins it.
guidogodoy wrote:
I am a fan and I wouldn't say that either tourny sucked. Sorry to disagree. Call it bias for Brasil if you like.
Also, while I admit Maradona was a fine player and I have even had the good fortune to see him in person a few times, he burned out quickly and didn't hold a candle to the likes of someone such as Pelé who was on three WC winning squads. By no means was that a coincidence.
jimmyjames wrote:
Sour grapes for what? I don't really support any team as such. Be nice to see our guys do well but they are no hope of winning it. We haven't even been in the World Cup much, this is only our second time, the last time was in 82. So as to who wins it, it doesn't really bother me either way. I just like football in general. It's just been a coincidence that Brazil won the last two crappy cups in 02 and 94, that's all. Any fan would tell you those two tournaments sucked.
Maradona was the best ever. Coke or no coke.
guidogodoy wrote:
Ha! Sour grapes, I say. Brazil just "happens" to win? They must have paid off the right people. Nope, certainly couldn't have had anything to do with actual talent. Five times.
As for Maradona, were I that hyped up on coke at the time, I think I'd play much better too. He WAS a fine player. I suppose drug arrests take a lot out of a guy.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:36:38 PM
Never seen Pele, he was finished years before I was born, so can't comment. If I was to compare the 02 tournament to the 06 tournament, I would say 02 sucked. That's from someone who has no stake in who wins it. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by guidogodoy from Friday, June 18, 2010 8:28:13 PM)
guidogodoy wrote:
I am a fan and I wouldn't say that either tourny sucked. Sorry to disagree. Call it bias for Brasil if you like.
Also, while I admit Maradona was a fine player and I have even had the good fortune to see him in person a few times, he burned out quickly and didn't hold a candle to the likes of someone such as Pelé who was on three WC winning squads. By no means was that a coincidence.
jimmyjames wrote:
Sour grapes for what? I don't really support any team as such. Be nice to see our guys do well but they are no hope of winning it. We haven't even been in the World Cup much, this is only our second time, the last time was in 82. So as to who wins it, it doesn't really bother me either way. I just like football in general. It's just been a coincidence that Brazil won the last two crappy cups in 02 and 94, that's all. Any fan would tell you those two tournaments sucked.
Maradona was the best ever. Coke or no coke.
guidogodoy wrote:
Ha! Sour grapes, I say. Brazil just "happens" to win? They must have paid off the right people. Nope, certainly couldn't have had anything to do with actual talent. Five times.
As for Maradona, were I that hyped up on coke at the time, I think I'd play much better too. He WAS a fine player. I suppose drug arrests take a lot out of a guy.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[Head banger] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:34:52 PM
instant replay sucks. deal with mistakes. refs do their best and they get most of it right.I have nothing but respect for them [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by spapad from Friday, June 18, 2010 7:51:03 PM)
spapad wrote:
In US sport there would have been the instant replay. I think that call would have been overturned had it taken place here. I don't trust international refs as they tend to call it as they would like it to be, like it happens in the Olympics often. Not saying the ref was biased but even his own country called him 3rd rate.
Oh, well we all know US doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of winning so all of this is a mute point.
Becks wrote:
Apparently there was a foul in there somewhere, but we're all struggling to figure out where. The ref is only human, he doesn't have the benefit of multi camera views that we have. There's heaps of talk on the US Soccer facebook page about petitioning FIFA - nothing can be done now, all that can happen is they pick themselves up and worry about the upcoming game against Algeria next week.
spapad wrote:
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
[Head banger] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:33:10 PM
dont hold back tell us how you realy feel. that was well done by maradona, I remember a canada mexico qualifier where the mexican keeper took the ball from his own end on a run like that and scored.
amazing. mind you he did sometimes play forward
Fuck that was bad. He should have been suspended for that or killed. Check out this. Snortiego Maradona goal against England in 86.
Becks wrote:
On another reffing note, anyone remember this piece of ridiculousness from the '02 world cup? Stupid Rivaldo, I was cheering for Turkey then he goes and gets one of their players sent off.
[guidogodoy] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:28:13 PM
I am a fan and I wouldn't say that either tourny sucked. Sorry to disagree. Call it bias for Brasil if you like.
Also, while I admit Maradona was a fine player and I have even had the good fortune to see him in person a few times, he burned out quickly and didn't hold a candle to the likes of someone such as Pelé who was on three WC winning squads. By no means was that a coincidence. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, June 18, 2010 7:37:38 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
Sour grapes for what? I don't really support any team as such. Be nice to see our guys do well but they are no hope of winning it. We haven't even been in the World Cup much, this is only our second time, the last time was in 82. So as to who wins it, it doesn't really bother me either way. I just like football in general. It's just been a coincidence that Brazil won the last two crappy cups in 02 and 94, that's all. Any fan would tell you those two tournaments sucked.
Maradona was the best ever. Coke or no coke.
guidogodoy wrote:
Ha! Sour grapes, I say. Brazil just "happens" to win? They must have paid off the right people. Nope, certainly couldn't have had anything to do with actual talent. Five times.
As for Maradona, were I that hyped up on coke at the time, I think I'd play much better too. He WAS a fine player. I suppose drug arrests take a lot out of a guy.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[Head banger] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:27:13 PM
Bullshit. the game within the game exists in every sport. where to run in NFL. throw a flag pattern on certain corners.... Soccer (to you) has the same thing, so does every sport. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:50:23 PM)
Deep Freeze wrote:
Baseball is awesome. I am sure you have heard the term, "the game within the game"...? It actually IS full throttle in its own way. Out guessing the opponent. Putting on plays. Clutch hitting, fielding and focused pitching. Working around an opponent's strengths and exploiting the weaknesses. Much more than throwing and hitting but I was really referring more to AMERICAN football where there is savage violence and all out war. WINNING at all costs!!
As for the series thing, it is simply to determine the BEST team overall, not just the best one on THAT day. Anyone can beat anyone, it is said. By playing five or seven games, the "cream rises" as it were.
jimmyjames wrote:
Then how the hell can you watch baseball. It's hardly full throttle. Also in American sports why is the final result best out of 7 or whatever. Why not just have one game, Baseball, Hockey and Basketball all have a final series rather than a one off. How can you watch?
Deep Freeze wrote:
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:26:46 PM
Fuck that was bad. He should have been suspended for that or killed. Check out this. Snortiego Maradona goal against England in 86.
On another reffing note, anyone remember this piece of ridiculousness from the '02 world cup? Stupid Rivaldo, I was cheering for Turkey then he goes and gets one of their players sent off.
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:22:59 PM
Yeah, they are looking good. One thing that really cracks me up is all the hype surrounding England at World Cups and how dismally they perform. I Hope Slovenia bury England, they don't deserve to go through. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, June 18, 2010 8:15:29 PM)
Becks wrote:
Yeah they do, but like I said, they need to focus on the next game now. They have a good chance of making the next round.
jimmyjames wrote:
I just saw that disallowed goal. The US have a right to feel very hard done by.
Becks wrote:
I should add, most other sports have a video replay, FIFA is just a bit behind LOL.
Becks wrote:
Even if the world cup was in the US, there would have been no video refs. There never is and never has been in football/soccer. FIFA likes to keep things very old school. Biased reffing isn't an outside the US only thing, it happens everywhere occasionally. And when it is caught, it is dealt with. Like I said, this ref made a poor decision, but he didn't have the benefit of seeing the angles etc we did because in football there is no video reffing full stop.
spapad wrote:
In US sport there would have been the instant replay. I think that call would have been overturned had it taken place here. I don't trust international refs as they tend to call it as they would like it to be, like it happens in the Olympics often. Not saying the ref was biased but even his own country called him 3rd rate.
Oh, well we all know US doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of winning so all of this is a mute point.
Becks wrote:
Apparently there was a foul in there somewhere, but we're all struggling to figure out where. The ref is only human, he doesn't have the benefit of multi camera views that we have. There's heaps of talk on the US Soccer facebook page about petitioning FIFA - nothing can be done now, all that can happen is they pick themselves up and worry about the upcoming game against Algeria next week.
spapad wrote:
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
[Becks] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:22:05 PM
On another reffing note, anyone remember this piece of ridiculousness from the '02 world cup? Stupid Rivaldo, I was cheering for Turkey then he goes and gets one of their players sent off.
[Becks] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:15:29 PM
Yeah they do, but like I said, they need to focus on the next game now. They have a good chance of making the next round. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, June 18, 2010 8:13:42 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
I just saw that disallowed goal. The US have a right to feel very hard done by.
Becks wrote:
I should add, most other sports have a video replay, FIFA is just a bit behind LOL.
Becks wrote:
Even if the world cup was in the US, there would have been no video refs. There never is and never has been in football/soccer. FIFA likes to keep things very old school. Biased reffing isn't an outside the US only thing, it happens everywhere occasionally. And when it is caught, it is dealt with. Like I said, this ref made a poor decision, but he didn't have the benefit of seeing the angles etc we did because in football there is no video reffing full stop.
spapad wrote:
In US sport there would have been the instant replay. I think that call would have been overturned had it taken place here. I don't trust international refs as they tend to call it as they would like it to be, like it happens in the Olympics often. Not saying the ref was biased but even his own country called him 3rd rate.
Oh, well we all know US doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of winning so all of this is a mute point.
Becks wrote:
Apparently there was a foul in there somewhere, but we're all struggling to figure out where. The ref is only human, he doesn't have the benefit of multi camera views that we have. There's heaps of talk on the US Soccer facebook page about petitioning FIFA - nothing can be done now, all that can happen is they pick themselves up and worry about the upcoming game against Algeria next week.
spapad wrote:
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:13:42 PM
I just saw that disallowed goal. The US have a right to feel very hard done by. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, June 18, 2010 8:01:50 PM)
Becks wrote:
I should add, most other sports have a video replay, FIFA is just a bit behind LOL.
Becks wrote:
Even if the world cup was in the US, there would have been no video refs. There never is and never has been in football/soccer. FIFA likes to keep things very old school. Biased reffing isn't an outside the US only thing, it happens everywhere occasionally. And when it is caught, it is dealt with. Like I said, this ref made a poor decision, but he didn't have the benefit of seeing the angles etc we did because in football there is no video reffing full stop.
spapad wrote:
In US sport there would have been the instant replay. I think that call would have been overturned had it taken place here. I don't trust international refs as they tend to call it as they would like it to be, like it happens in the Olympics often. Not saying the ref was biased but even his own country called him 3rd rate.
Oh, well we all know US doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of winning so all of this is a mute point.
Becks wrote:
Apparently there was a foul in there somewhere, but we're all struggling to figure out where. The ref is only human, he doesn't have the benefit of multi camera views that we have. There's heaps of talk on the US Soccer facebook page about petitioning FIFA - nothing can be done now, all that can happen is they pick themselves up and worry about the upcoming game against Algeria next week.
spapad wrote:
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
[Becks] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:08:15 PM
Like I said earlier, shit happens in sport unfortunately, and the US team won't be the only team 'robbed' of something at this tournament. All the US team can do now is move forward to their game against Algeria. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by spapad from Friday, June 18, 2010 8:06:08 PM)
spapad wrote:
Which amounts to robbing a team, and nobody knows if it was a biased decision or a erroneous decision, only that it was the wrong decsion.
Becks wrote:
Even if the world cup was in the US, there would have been no video refs. There never is and never has been in football/soccer. FIFA likes to keep things very old school. Biased reffing isn't an outside the US only thing, it happens everywhere occasionally. And when it is caught, it is dealt with. Like I said, this ref made a poor decision, but he didn't have the benefit of seeing the angles etc we did because in football there is no video reffing full stop.
spapad wrote:
In US sport there would have been the instant replay. I think that call would have been overturned had it taken place here. I don't trust international refs as they tend to call it as they would like it to be, like it happens in the Olympics often. Not saying the ref was biased but even his own country called him 3rd rate.
Oh, well we all know US doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of winning so all of this is a mute point.
Becks wrote:
Apparently there was a foul in there somewhere, but we're all struggling to figure out where. The ref is only human, he doesn't have the benefit of multi camera views that we have. There's heaps of talk on the US Soccer facebook page about petitioning FIFA - nothing can be done now, all that can happen is they pick themselves up and worry about the upcoming game against Algeria next week.
spapad wrote:
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
[spapad] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:06:08 PM
Which amounts to robbing a team, and nobody knows if it was a biased decision or a erroneous decision, only that it was the wrong decsion. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, June 18, 2010 7:57:33 PM)
Becks wrote:
Even if the world cup was in the US, there would have been no video refs. There never is and never has been in football/soccer. FIFA likes to keep things very old school. Biased reffing isn't an outside the US only thing, it happens everywhere occasionally. And when it is caught, it is dealt with. Like I said, this ref made a poor decision, but he didn't have the benefit of seeing the angles etc we did because in football there is no video reffing full stop.
spapad wrote:
In US sport there would have been the instant replay. I think that call would have been overturned had it taken place here. I don't trust international refs as they tend to call it as they would like it to be, like it happens in the Olympics often. Not saying the ref was biased but even his own country called him 3rd rate.
Oh, well we all know US doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of winning so all of this is a mute point.
Becks wrote:
Apparently there was a foul in there somewhere, but we're all struggling to figure out where. The ref is only human, he doesn't have the benefit of multi camera views that we have. There's heaps of talk on the US Soccer facebook page about petitioning FIFA - nothing can be done now, all that can happen is they pick themselves up and worry about the upcoming game against Algeria next week.
spapad wrote:
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
[Becks] Friday, June 18, 2010 8:01:50 PM
I should add, most other sports have a video replay, FIFA is just a bit behind LOL. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, June 18, 2010 7:57:33 PM)
Becks wrote:
Even if the world cup was in the US, there would have been no video refs. There never is and never has been in football/soccer. FIFA likes to keep things very old school. Biased reffing isn't an outside the US only thing, it happens everywhere occasionally. And when it is caught, it is dealt with. Like I said, this ref made a poor decision, but he didn't have the benefit of seeing the angles etc we did because in football there is no video reffing full stop.
spapad wrote:
In US sport there would have been the instant replay. I think that call would have been overturned had it taken place here. I don't trust international refs as they tend to call it as they would like it to be, like it happens in the Olympics often. Not saying the ref was biased but even his own country called him 3rd rate.
Oh, well we all know US doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of winning so all of this is a mute point.
Becks wrote:
Apparently there was a foul in there somewhere, but we're all struggling to figure out where. The ref is only human, he doesn't have the benefit of multi camera views that we have. There's heaps of talk on the US Soccer facebook page about petitioning FIFA - nothing can be done now, all that can happen is they pick themselves up and worry about the upcoming game against Algeria next week.
spapad wrote:
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
[Becks] Friday, June 18, 2010 7:57:33 PM
Even if the world cup was in the US, there would have been no video refs. There never is and never has been in football/soccer. FIFA likes to keep things very old school. Biased reffing isn't an outside the US only thing, it happens everywhere occasionally. And when it is caught, it is dealt with. Like I said, this ref made a poor decision, but he didn't have the benefit of seeing the angles etc we did because in football there is no video reffing full stop. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by spapad from Friday, June 18, 2010 7:51:03 PM)
spapad wrote:
In US sport there would have been the instant replay. I think that call would have been overturned had it taken place here. I don't trust international refs as they tend to call it as they would like it to be, like it happens in the Olympics often. Not saying the ref was biased but even his own country called him 3rd rate.
Oh, well we all know US doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of winning so all of this is a mute point.
Becks wrote:
Apparently there was a foul in there somewhere, but we're all struggling to figure out where. The ref is only human, he doesn't have the benefit of multi camera views that we have. There's heaps of talk on the US Soccer facebook page about petitioning FIFA - nothing can be done now, all that can happen is they pick themselves up and worry about the upcoming game against Algeria next week.
spapad wrote:
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
[spapad] Friday, June 18, 2010 7:51:03 PM
In US sport there would have been the instant replay. I think that call would have been overturned had it taken place here. I don't trust international refs as they tend to call it as they would like it to be, like it happens in the Olympics often. Not saying the ref was biased but even his own country called him 3rd rate.
Oh, well we all know US doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of winning so all of this is a mute point. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, June 18, 2010 6:52:14 PM)
Becks wrote:
Apparently there was a foul in there somewhere, but we're all struggling to figure out where. The ref is only human, he doesn't have the benefit of multi camera views that we have. There's heaps of talk on the US Soccer facebook page about petitioning FIFA - nothing can be done now, all that can happen is they pick themselves up and worry about the upcoming game against Algeria next week.
spapad wrote:
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
[Becks] Friday, June 18, 2010 7:49:02 PM
Nah I don't like league personally, too many idiots and stupid dramas going on. Plus, any sport affiliated with John Hopoate is a bit dodgy, LOL! [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, June 18, 2010 7:46:57 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
What about League? League is awesome, blood and guts on the pitch and high drama off it.
Becks wrote:
Hehehe I HATE american football with a passion. Rugby is miles better. So is proper football.
Strat - if we beat Italy in a couple of days, I will probably have a heart attack
jimmyjames wrote:
They wear all that armour because they're soft.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, I sure as hell dont understand you, Freeze... I mean, tahts what the group stage is for in football tournaments - same as the series thing. Algeria sucked against us, but they came back and were great against England today. Serbia sucked in the first game, but they came back and beaten the Germans today. Thats whats its all about - you dont send a team home right away - you wait until they all played a bit, and then it really turns out who deserves to go on, and who deserves to stay.
Personaly, I only ever watched American Football once (a local sports channel made a brave attempt to promote it here, but crashed and burned after a few weeks of crap ratings), and yeah, it kinda looks like a war. A bunch of guys in armor, piling up on each other, and looking pretty miserable and clueless. Then again, Im looking at it like you look at our football, so I guess we will just have to leave it at that.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Baseball is awesome. I am sure you have heard the term, "the game within the game"...? It actually IS full throttle in its own way. Out guessing the opponent. Putting on plays. Clutch hitting, fielding and focused pitching. Working around an opponent's strengths and exploiting the weaknesses. Much more than throwing and hitting but I was really referring more to AMERICAN football where there is savage violence and all out war. WINNING at all costs!!
As for the series thing, it is simply to determine the BEST team overall, not just the best one on THAT day. Anyone can beat anyone, it is said. By playing five or seven games, the "cream rises" as it were.
jimmyjames wrote:
Then how the hell can you watch baseball. It's hardly full throttle. Also in American sports why is the final result best out of 7 or whatever. Why not just have one game, Baseball, Hockey and Basketball all have a final series rather than a one off. How can you watch?
Deep Freeze wrote:
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 7:46:57 PM
What about League? League is awesome, blood and guts on the pitch and high drama off it. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, June 18, 2010 5:54:57 PM)
Becks wrote:
Hehehe I HATE american football with a passion. Rugby is miles better. So is proper football.
Strat - if we beat Italy in a couple of days, I will probably have a heart attack
jimmyjames wrote:
They wear all that armour because they're soft.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, I sure as hell dont understand you, Freeze... I mean, tahts what the group stage is for in football tournaments - same as the series thing. Algeria sucked against us, but they came back and were great against England today. Serbia sucked in the first game, but they came back and beaten the Germans today. Thats whats its all about - you dont send a team home right away - you wait until they all played a bit, and then it really turns out who deserves to go on, and who deserves to stay.
Personaly, I only ever watched American Football once (a local sports channel made a brave attempt to promote it here, but crashed and burned after a few weeks of crap ratings), and yeah, it kinda looks like a war. A bunch of guys in armor, piling up on each other, and looking pretty miserable and clueless. Then again, Im looking at it like you look at our football, so I guess we will just have to leave it at that.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Baseball is awesome. I am sure you have heard the term, "the game within the game"...? It actually IS full throttle in its own way. Out guessing the opponent. Putting on plays. Clutch hitting, fielding and focused pitching. Working around an opponent's strengths and exploiting the weaknesses. Much more than throwing and hitting but I was really referring more to AMERICAN football where there is savage violence and all out war. WINNING at all costs!!
As for the series thing, it is simply to determine the BEST team overall, not just the best one on THAT day. Anyone can beat anyone, it is said. By playing five or seven games, the "cream rises" as it were.
jimmyjames wrote:
Then how the hell can you watch baseball. It's hardly full throttle. Also in American sports why is the final result best out of 7 or whatever. Why not just have one game, Baseball, Hockey and Basketball all have a final series rather than a one off. How can you watch?
Deep Freeze wrote:
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 7:37:38 PM
Sour grapes for what? I don't really support any team as such. Be nice to see our guys do well but they are no hope of winning it. We haven't even been in the World Cup much, this is only our second time, the last time was in 82. So as to who wins it, it doesn't really bother me either way. I just like football in general. It's just been a coincidence that Brazil won the last two crappy cups in 02 and 94, that's all. Any fan would tell you those two tournaments sucked.
Maradona was the best ever. Coke or no coke. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by guidogodoy from Friday, June 18, 2010 4:51:14 PM)
guidogodoy wrote:
Ha! Sour grapes, I say. Brazil just "happens" to win? They must have paid off the right people. Nope, certainly couldn't have had anything to do with actual talent. Five times.
As for Maradona, were I that hyped up on coke at the time, I think I'd play much better too. He WAS a fine player. I suppose drug arrests take a lot out of a guy.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[Becks] Friday, June 18, 2010 6:52:14 PM
Apparently there was a foul in there somewhere, but we're all struggling to figure out where. The ref is only human, he doesn't have the benefit of multi camera views that we have. There's heaps of talk on the US Soccer facebook page about petitioning FIFA - nothing can be done now, all that can happen is they pick themselves up and worry about the upcoming game against Algeria next week. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by spapad from Friday, June 18, 2010 6:49:27 PM)
spapad wrote:
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
[spapad] Friday, June 18, 2010 6:49:27 PM
Just watched the condensed version of todays games which is all I could take I think. Must say looks like the US got a screwing on that goal. Saw it from about five different angles and while plenty of the other team should have got yellow cards, no one touched the goal scorer. Kinda sucked. Good thing I'm not passionate about this game or I would be very loud. I do know one thing, if the sound of those horns makes the constant background noise of an angry bee nest I think I would go crazy and start to grab horns away from people and flogg them with them.
[Becks] Friday, June 18, 2010 5:54:57 PM
Hehehe I HATE american football with a passion. Rugby is miles better. So is proper football.
Strat - if we beat Italy in a couple of days, I will probably have a heart attack [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, June 18, 2010 4:01:59 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
They wear all that armour because they're soft.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, I sure as hell dont understand you, Freeze... I mean, tahts what the group stage is for in football tournaments - same as the series thing. Algeria sucked against us, but they came back and were great against England today. Serbia sucked in the first game, but they came back and beaten the Germans today. Thats whats its all about - you dont send a team home right away - you wait until they all played a bit, and then it really turns out who deserves to go on, and who deserves to stay.
Personaly, I only ever watched American Football once (a local sports channel made a brave attempt to promote it here, but crashed and burned after a few weeks of crap ratings), and yeah, it kinda looks like a war. A bunch of guys in armor, piling up on each other, and looking pretty miserable and clueless. Then again, Im looking at it like you look at our football, so I guess we will just have to leave it at that.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Baseball is awesome. I am sure you have heard the term, "the game within the game"...? It actually IS full throttle in its own way. Out guessing the opponent. Putting on plays. Clutch hitting, fielding and focused pitching. Working around an opponent's strengths and exploiting the weaknesses. Much more than throwing and hitting but I was really referring more to AMERICAN football where there is savage violence and all out war. WINNING at all costs!!
As for the series thing, it is simply to determine the BEST team overall, not just the best one on THAT day. Anyone can beat anyone, it is said. By playing five or seven games, the "cream rises" as it were.
jimmyjames wrote:
Then how the hell can you watch baseball. It's hardly full throttle. Also in American sports why is the final result best out of 7 or whatever. Why not just have one game, Baseball, Hockey and Basketball all have a final series rather than a one off. How can you watch?
Deep Freeze wrote:
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[guidogodoy] Friday, June 18, 2010 4:51:14 PM
Ha! Sour grapes, I say. Brazil just "happens" to win? They must have paid off the right people. Nope, certainly couldn't have had anything to do with actual talent. Five times.
As for Maradona, were I that hyped up on coke at the time, I think I'd play much better too. He WAS a fine player. I suppose drug arrests take a lot out of a guy. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:27:06 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 4:01:59 PM
They wear all that armour because they're soft. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by _strat_ from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:56:25 PM)
_strat_ wrote:
Well, I sure as hell dont understand you, Freeze... I mean, tahts what the group stage is for in football tournaments - same as the series thing. Algeria sucked against us, but they came back and were great against England today. Serbia sucked in the first game, but they came back and beaten the Germans today. Thats whats its all about - you dont send a team home right away - you wait until they all played a bit, and then it really turns out who deserves to go on, and who deserves to stay.
Personaly, I only ever watched American Football once (a local sports channel made a brave attempt to promote it here, but crashed and burned after a few weeks of crap ratings), and yeah, it kinda looks like a war. A bunch of guys in armor, piling up on each other, and looking pretty miserable and clueless. Then again, Im looking at it like you look at our football, so I guess we will just have to leave it at that.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Baseball is awesome. I am sure you have heard the term, "the game within the game"...? It actually IS full throttle in its own way. Out guessing the opponent. Putting on plays. Clutch hitting, fielding and focused pitching. Working around an opponent's strengths and exploiting the weaknesses. Much more than throwing and hitting but I was really referring more to AMERICAN football where there is savage violence and all out war. WINNING at all costs!!
As for the series thing, it is simply to determine the BEST team overall, not just the best one on THAT day. Anyone can beat anyone, it is said. By playing five or seven games, the "cream rises" as it were.
jimmyjames wrote:
Then how the hell can you watch baseball. It's hardly full throttle. Also in American sports why is the final result best out of 7 or whatever. Why not just have one game, Baseball, Hockey and Basketball all have a final series rather than a one off. How can you watch?
Deep Freeze wrote:
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 4:00:50 PM
He cracks me up waddling around on the sideline with his expensive suits and diamond earrings, He's like some kind of South American drug baron. The fact that they're in and playing pretty well should change their opinion of him. Tevez is playing really well also. Messi is finesse, Tevez is muscle. They played great together the other day. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by _strat_ from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:50:30 PM)
_strat_ wrote:
Ah well... I dont like him exactly because of his antics... And whenever Argentina is playing, I am split between rooting against him, or rooting for Messi. Argentinians are pretty pissed with Maradona, tho, or so I hear. Apparently he wasnt a very good coach in the qualifiers.
jimmyjames wrote:
He was and is great, his sideline antics and press conferences are one of the highlights of this tournament so far. I would love to see him take Argentina to the Cup again.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, yeah, lol, Ive seen both. They are legendary. The game that almost restarted the Falklands war! Maradona may be a prick, but he can sure play football.
jimmyjames wrote:
94 sucked. The final was decided on penalties. 86 was the best tournament in my life time. Check out Maradonas two goals against England on youtube, one was a handball that still pisses off the English. The other was one of the greatest individual goals ever.
_strat_ wrote:
Lol... Quieter... A dedicated Brazil fan is lurking around, betting shirts...
Well, I certainly agree about 2002 and 2006 world cups... Even though I do not like Italy. I dont remember 86 and 94.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
Same with football, thats why they have the group stage. Anyone can beat anyone thats why you play off against each other to see who goes through. Qualification for this tournament is hard enough, this is the final 32 of 100+ playing nations. Every team that makes it has a chance to perform.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Baseball is awesome. I am sure you have heard the term, "the game within the game"...? It actually IS full throttle in its own way. Out guessing the opponent. Putting on plays. Clutch hitting, fielding and focused pitching. Working around an opponent's strengths and exploiting the weaknesses. Much more than throwing and hitting but I was really referring more to AMERICAN football where there is savage violence and all out war. WINNING at all costs!!
As for the series thing, it is simply to determine the BEST team overall, not just the best one on THAT day. Anyone can beat anyone, it is said. By playing five or seven games, the "cream rises" as it were.
jimmyjames wrote:
Then how the hell can you watch baseball. It's hardly full throttle. Also in American sports why is the final result best out of 7 or whatever. Why not just have one game, Baseball, Hockey and Basketball all have a final series rather than a one off. How can you watch?
Deep Freeze wrote:
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[_strat_] Friday, June 18, 2010 3:56:25 PM
Well, I sure as hell dont understand you, Freeze... I mean, tahts what the group stage is for in football tournaments - same as the series thing. Algeria sucked against us, but they came back and were great against England today. Serbia sucked in the first game, but they came back and beaten the Germans today. Thats whats its all about - you dont send a team home right away - you wait until they all played a bit, and then it really turns out who deserves to go on, and who deserves to stay.
Personaly, I only ever watched American Football once (a local sports channel made a brave attempt to promote it here, but crashed and burned after a few weeks of crap ratings), and yeah, it kinda looks like a war. A bunch of guys in armor, piling up on each other, and looking pretty miserable and clueless. Then again, Im looking at it like you look at our football, so I guess we will just have to leave it at that. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:50:23 PM)
Deep Freeze wrote:
Baseball is awesome. I am sure you have heard the term, "the game within the game"...? It actually IS full throttle in its own way. Out guessing the opponent. Putting on plays. Clutch hitting, fielding and focused pitching. Working around an opponent's strengths and exploiting the weaknesses. Much more than throwing and hitting but I was really referring more to AMERICAN football where there is savage violence and all out war. WINNING at all costs!!
As for the series thing, it is simply to determine the BEST team overall, not just the best one on THAT day. Anyone can beat anyone, it is said. By playing five or seven games, the "cream rises" as it were.
jimmyjames wrote:
Then how the hell can you watch baseball. It's hardly full throttle. Also in American sports why is the final result best out of 7 or whatever. Why not just have one game, Baseball, Hockey and Basketball all have a final series rather than a one off. How can you watch?
Deep Freeze wrote:
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 3:56:15 PM
Same with football, thats why they have the group stage. Anyone can beat anyone thats why you play off against each other to see who goes through. Qualification for this tournament is hard enough, this is the final 32 of 100+ playing nations. Every team that makes it has a chance to perform. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:50:23 PM)
Deep Freeze wrote:
Baseball is awesome. I am sure you have heard the term, "the game within the game"...? It actually IS full throttle in its own way. Out guessing the opponent. Putting on plays. Clutch hitting, fielding and focused pitching. Working around an opponent's strengths and exploiting the weaknesses. Much more than throwing and hitting but I was really referring more to AMERICAN football where there is savage violence and all out war. WINNING at all costs!!
As for the series thing, it is simply to determine the BEST team overall, not just the best one on THAT day. Anyone can beat anyone, it is said. By playing five or seven games, the "cream rises" as it were.
jimmyjames wrote:
Then how the hell can you watch baseball. It's hardly full throttle. Also in American sports why is the final result best out of 7 or whatever. Why not just have one game, Baseball, Hockey and Basketball all have a final series rather than a one off. How can you watch?
Deep Freeze wrote:
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[_strat_] Friday, June 18, 2010 3:50:30 PM
Ah well... I dont like him exactly because of his antics... And whenever Argentina is playing, I am split between rooting against him, or rooting for Messi. Argentinians are pretty pissed with Maradona, tho, or so I hear. Apparently he wasnt a very good coach in the qualifiers. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:48:05 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
He was and is great, his sideline antics and press conferences are one of the highlights of this tournament so far. I would love to see him take Argentina to the Cup again.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, yeah, lol, Ive seen both. They are legendary. The game that almost restarted the Falklands war! Maradona may be a prick, but he can sure play football.
jimmyjames wrote:
94 sucked. The final was decided on penalties. 86 was the best tournament in my life time. Check out Maradonas two goals against England on youtube, one was a handball that still pisses off the English. The other was one of the greatest individual goals ever.
_strat_ wrote:
Lol... Quieter... A dedicated Brazil fan is lurking around, betting shirts...
Well, I certainly agree about 2002 and 2006 world cups... Even though I do not like Italy. I dont remember 86 and 94.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[Deep Freeze] Friday, June 18, 2010 3:50:23 PM
Baseball is awesome. I am sure you have heard the term, "the game within the game"...? It actually IS full throttle in its own way. Out guessing the opponent. Putting on plays. Clutch hitting, fielding and focused pitching. Working around an opponent's strengths and exploiting the weaknesses. Much more than throwing and hitting but I was really referring more to AMERICAN football where there is savage violence and all out war. WINNING at all costs!!
As for the series thing, it is simply to determine the BEST team overall, not just the best one on THAT day. Anyone can beat anyone, it is said. By playing five or seven games, the "cream rises" as it were.
Then how the hell can you watch baseball. It's hardly full throttle. Also in American sports why is the final result best out of 7 or whatever. Why not just have one game, Baseball, Hockey and Basketball all have a final series rather than a one off. How can you watch?
Deep Freeze wrote:
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 3:48:05 PM
He was and is great, his sideline antics and press conferences are one of the highlights of this tournament so far. I would love to see him take Argentina to the Cup again. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by _strat_ from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:44:40 PM)
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, yeah, lol, Ive seen both. They are legendary. The game that almost restarted the Falklands war! Maradona may be a prick, but he can sure play football.
jimmyjames wrote:
94 sucked. The final was decided on penalties. 86 was the best tournament in my life time. Check out Maradonas two goals against England on youtube, one was a handball that still pisses off the English. The other was one of the greatest individual goals ever.
_strat_ wrote:
Lol... Quieter... A dedicated Brazil fan is lurking around, betting shirts...
Well, I certainly agree about 2002 and 2006 world cups... Even though I do not like Italy. I dont remember 86 and 94.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[_strat_] Friday, June 18, 2010 3:46:32 PM
Well, that is what it comes down to in the end. Even in the group stage, its only theoretical that a team could qualify for the next round with three ties. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:45:01 PM)
Deep Freeze wrote:
Victory- stay
Loss- Leave
End of story. If its about prolonging the inevitable, perhaps a double elimination format would be better? I don't know. I just hate ties.
_strat_ wrote:
Victory: 3 points
Draw: 1 point
Defeat: 0 points
The losers will go home.
Deep Freeze wrote:
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[Deep Freeze] Friday, June 18, 2010 3:45:01 PM
Victory- stay
Loss- Leave
End of story. If its about prolonging the inevitable, perhaps a double elimination format would be better? I don't know. I just hate ties. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by _strat_ from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:42:36 PM)
_strat_ wrote:
Victory: 3 points
Draw: 1 point
Defeat: 0 points
The losers will go home.
Deep Freeze wrote:
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[_strat_] Friday, June 18, 2010 3:44:40 PM
Oh, yeah, lol, Ive seen both. They are legendary. The game that almost restarted the Falklands war! Maradona may be a prick, but he can sure play football. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:39:02 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
94 sucked. The final was decided on penalties. 86 was the best tournament in my life time. Check out Maradonas two goals against England on youtube, one was a handball that still pisses off the English. The other was one of the greatest individual goals ever.
_strat_ wrote:
Lol... Quieter... A dedicated Brazil fan is lurking around, betting shirts...
Well, I certainly agree about 2002 and 2006 world cups... Even though I do not like Italy. I dont remember 86 and 94.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 3:44:21 PM
Then how the hell can you watch baseball. It's hardly full throttle. Also in American sports why is the final result best out of 7 or whatever. Why not just have one game, Baseball, Hockey and Basketball all have a final series rather than a one off. How can you watch? [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:39:10 PM)
Deep Freeze wrote:
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable.
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[Deep Freeze] Friday, June 18, 2010 3:39:10 PM
In theory, yes. You are right. BOTH sides play to win. However, I have seen professional teams playing "NOT to lose". Playing it safe. Not taking chances. Whatever. For me, you do whatever you can, including cheat! If you aint cheatin, you aint tryin....HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Fact is, you do what you can and try what you can and hope you get away with it. WINNING is what matters. If they did away with this silly "points" nonsense and required losers to GO HOME you might see a significant increase in passion, my friend!
I am not much for all of the subtleties. I like passionate, full throttle action. I like kill or be killed mentality. I like that raw, take no prisoners attitude. For me, professional sport is about winning at all costs. WIN WIN WIN. Nothing else is acceptable. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by _strat_ from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:32:17 PM)
_strat_ wrote:
Oh, come on... Both sides play to win, and sometimes it just happens that both sides are equally good. Besides, when there has to be a winner there are tiebreakers. Right now, they play for points.
As far as refs are concerned.. Sometimes refs do influence the outcome of the match. If it wasnt for refs, France wouldnt even be on the cup, thats how much they can influence things. But yeah, no point dwelling on it, and the human element thing is interesting, I must say.
Deep Freeze wrote:
It is yelloW, strat. I have NO idea what the other is!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said, I watched the stupid game and I have NO idea what happened. Ties ("draws") blow. That is all there is to it. You play to WIN. Winning is ALL there is. It is the reason you play! Anything less is FAILURE, especially at this level!!! You do whatever you must to win. ANYTHING. Ties and whatnot are for children in schoolyards. No hurt feelings. Mommy makes it all better, etc.
And as I mentioned, I never feel it is right to blame a referee. They are not PLAYING. They are OFFICIATING. I actually LIKE the "human element". Mistakes are part of sport, for both for players AND officials. It makes things interesting. It keeps it "real".
[jimmyjames] Friday, June 18, 2010 3:39:02 PM
94 sucked. The final was decided on penalties. 86 was the best tournament in my life time. Check out Maradonas two goals against England on youtube, one was a handball that still pisses off the English. The other was one of the greatest individual goals ever. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by _strat_ from Friday, June 18, 2010 3:33:58 PM)
_strat_ wrote:
Lol... Quieter... A dedicated Brazil fan is lurking around, betting shirts...
Well, I certainly agree about 2002 and 2006 world cups... Even though I do not like Italy. I dont remember 86 and 94.
jimmyjames wrote:
The 02 World Cup was a shocker in every way. It's funny, crappy World Cups seem to be won by Brazil. 02 was a horrible tournament as was 94, both were won by Brazil. Best World Cups in recent history, 06 ( Italy winners ) and 86 ( Argentina winners ).
_strat_ wrote:
Nah, no offside, at least not where I could see it... In any case, yeah, good summary. In any case, we have to give it to the refs on this cup. Save for Slovenia vs Usa and Germany vs Serbia, referees on this cup are very professional, and there were very few controversial decisions. If anyone remembers 2002 world cup... That was awfull. We were cheated against Spain, they got cheated in the quarterfinals, Italy was cheated, South Korea has only the refs to thank that they got so far... This is nothing in comparison.
In any case - we will finally be on the same page on Sunday! Beat Italy, and I will move to New Zealand and marry your coach.
Becks wrote:
Just found a video of the goal, not sure what was going on, the screen thing said offside, but I'm not sure. The ref saw 'something' cos he blew the whistle before the ball went in. Who knows what he saw though lol. Ah well, as harsh as it sounds, shit happens, deal with it. No point dwelling on shit referees, cos unfortunately they will be encountered in even professional sport. Focus on the next game. I think a draw is a fair result, both teams had defensive lapses from what I saw, and the game was pretty even.
_strat_ wrote:
Well, ill stick to my opinion, regardless of the shitstorm that seems to have engulfed every web page that ends either with .si or .us... The goal was regular, and it was a nice one too. But since the US team deserved at least one red card and got none, ill say it was all fair in the end, with both teams still looking good to qualify to the round of 16.
As for ties, if our teams make it to the playoffs, you wont have to put up with those anymore, because there cant be a tie in playoffs.
Im just a little bit pissed on the supporters of both countries. Youtube comments always make me feel like a nuclear war wouldnt be such a bad thing, but this is something new alltogether.
Deep Freeze wrote:
Speaking as one that very honestly has NO idea what is going on with regard to this game, I can only assume that there was a grievous error by this referee. I would not know it if I saw it but all the ESPN pundits keep babbling on about it so there has to be something there, no? I was watching and it appeared to me that all the players were pushing and shoving and whatnot. Nothing glaringly obvious that I could see. I do know that I NEVER feel it is right to blame an official for a loss. I mean, the fact remains that the US team did not WIN it. Period. Refs and umpires don't make plays...PLAYERS make them. Or, as in this case, do NOT make them. As for the particulars, that is for you soccer folks to debate. I STILL say ties SUCK!
