Main Menu

Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 11:19:17 PM

Login with username, password and session length

The World Cup

Started by Utter Shit, May 15, 2006, 08:09:27 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

ccbaxter

Odd having the hosts playing the first game, rather than the holders.
After all, Cameroon beating Argentina and Senegal beating France were among the true highlights of recent-ish tournaments.

EDIT: Not that Costa Rica beating Germany would be lacking in entertainment value, of course...

The Duck Man

Bit of a Portugal fan, Utter Shit?

Utter Shit

Not so much a big Portugal fan as a fan of matches between two excellent teams (Portugal vs Mexico) and matches that could well end in a rout (Portugal vs Angola, Portugal vs Iran).

That said, I know precisely fuck all about Angola, same with Togo. I'm sure a few of these African teams will surprise people. Ghana and Ivory Coast are the obvious choices, both could go far.

ccbaxter

Mexico v Bulgaria was one of my favourite games of the 1994 World Cup, indeed any World Cup... Ruined by a ref and two outrageous red cards in the first half, but maybe that just added to the sheer pleasure, in the early hours of the morning, seeing this bafflingly-compelling clash out to the irrelevant finish...

Maybe, but looking at half of the teams that have got in this year I'm pretty stunned. You can already see exactly who's going through from each group (bar E & F) because there's some real dross in there. I assume they must be decent enough to get through but do you think Angola (or any African team) will really make as big an impression as Cameroon have done in previous years? They've been in it for years (since 1990?) and have the most world experience of all African teams but still haven't come close.

I'll be personally interested to see whether the Aussies turn up, they're capable of getting some great results on their day. In all seriousness though I can't see past England, Brazil or Argentina for the cup.

ccbaxter

I would have suggested Italy as a hardy perennial, but the various shenanigans over there look about as destabilising as can be - certainly when such an important 'keeper as Buffon is so obviously dragged in too... (not that the foolish fascist warrants much sympathy, but still... Actually, I extend that to all those Juve players who capitulated so cravenly in the Champions League quarter-final...)
But anyway... Holland will, schurely, have to come good some time. Just a shame for them that they didn't persuade Rijkaard to stick around longer than his first rookie years, and first international tournament.
They'd probably find some reason to fall out, anyway...

Serbia-Croatia quarter-final, anyone...?

Utter Shit

Italy always fuck it up anyway. Them, Spain and Holland can always be disregarded regardless of the quality throughout the side.

On paper, Spain are easily as good as any side bar Brazil and maybe Argentina, but you know they'll piss it up the wall against some shite in the 2nd round.

imitationleather

I'm excited about the World Cup, of course. I'm going to aim to watch just about every game (apart from the ones that clash, of course) and bathe myself in a football odyssey for a month.

But on the subject of WSC... I buy it every month and while there's usually a couple of interesting articles in the magazine, the letters pages are full of absolute fucking twats. A few months ago there was a letter which enraged me a lot. It went something like, "People keep going on about the high prices of top-flight football. Well, I go to watch my local team, Newcastle Town. It might not be Premiership standard, but the shed next to the pitch does a good pie and they serve pints in proper glasses rather than the plastic cups you get in the top-flight." I'm paraphrasing there, but that's the basic jist of it. My main problem with that letter is all the "it might not be Premiership standard" and "they serve pints in proper glasses" crap which makes the writer sound like a complete and utter Michael Parkinson. Y'know what I'm getting at: a cunt. It's just his suggestion that unless you're as happy  seeing some fucking Unibond Premier team play in a bog as you are seeing the team you actually support you're not a fan which enrages me so much. Christ, I think I'm going to go to a Newcastle Town match next season and kill everyone there!

So, the World Cup...

El Unicornio, mang

Quote from: "Peter Hammill"

This WC is a Ok for TV times, compared to the 7.30 kick offs in Japan  If the kick off times were 1 hour later if would be perfect.  The game times are 2.00, 5.00 and 8.00.  Most of the 2.00 midweek matches are pretty crap matches apart from Spain v Ukraine.

.

It'll be 10am, 12pm and 3pm for us, in other words, sneakily watching midweek games via the internet

This site has the schedules too and lets you set your region
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/origin?cameFrom=worldcup/fixtures%3F

TheWizard

The BBC videos are only viewable in the UK. We should have mentioned that.

The hosts are opening the tournament and not the holders because the holders have to qualify instead of getting automatic entry.

TOCMFIC

I have a perfectly lovely proxy here so I can take advantage of my Dad's license fee and watch them, just need to find them!:) (Already tested the proxy on another UK only site.)

What's really weird is I look at the match list posted above, and for reasons unknown. I saw Poland vs Ecuador and thought "Oh, I've gotta watch that!" And I have no idea why:)

I reckon the African teams will throw up some surprises, just like Cameroon in 1990. I don't think I've ever looked forward to a World Cup as much as this one!

I picked up WSC recently over here, but imported magazines are VERY expensive, but I'd like to get a decent footie one regularly.

I can't remember where I read it, but the other day I saw someone say "I thought I had World Cup fever, but it turned out to be syphilis." Well, it amused me...

the midnight watch baboon

I don't even know what footie mags there are these days, I used to read 90mins as a wee nipper.[/quote]

90 minutes was ace, don't know why it disappeared.. I got my name on the back page after seeing an Ian Walker Painting and Decorating service in my local paper, got a far-too-small t-shirt as a reward.

FourFourTwo is good. Mmmmm.

the midnight watch baboon

Quote from: ccbaxterMexico v Bulgaria was one of my favourite games of the 1994 World Cup, indeed any World Cup...

I remember staying up to watch this match... was it the one where the Mexican 'keeper managed to break his goal?

Bilko

Yes the goalframe collapsed, resulting in a replacement goal being carried out.  That was the Mexico goal keeper who wore that bright jerssey, keeping Bob Wilson amused for hours.

Quote from: "The Boston Crab"Maybe, but looking at half of the teams that have got in this year I'm pretty stunned. You can already see exactly who's going through from each group (bar E & F) because there's some real dross in there. I assume they must be decent enough to get through but do you think Angola (or any African team) will really make as big an impression as Cameroon have done in previous years?
That's what I concluded too when looking through each group, there is some absolute crap teams in this years tournament.  Increasing the teams to 32 has defo made the groups stages less close.  I can see all the African teams going out in the first round, I hope not, not at the expensive of some turgid European team like Switzerland.

Italy is the interesting group, I fancy USA to get through, if the Czech Republic are still a force like they were in Euro 2004, Italy could be going out in the group stage.  Italy's strikeforce offers nothing new, and their midfield has no creativity.

I tried to download the URL through http://javimoya.com/blog/youtube_en.php  of the BBC videos but it doesn't work.  Damn.

the midnight watch baboon

Robinson
Neville                                                                                                                      A.Cole
                                     Ferdinand                               Terry

                          Beckham                                                       Carrick

         Gerrard                                       Lampard                                     J.Cole

                                                               Owen


I think we'll line up like this against Paraguay, providing Rooney doesn't defy medical science.

Mr. Analytical

I think that we should really be looking to get 9 points from the group games.  Sweden are a bit tricky but we've beaten them before, Paraguay are hardly the most deadly of South American teams.

That's a fair auld formation babboo, I think we could feel quite confident with it.

To be unbelievably obvious, I can't see us getting knocked out unless we fail to score a single goal. Brazil's attack looks shit hot but you can't play five men up front can you? (Yes, I know Brazil technically could and have...) I seriously think we have the world's greatest midfield and defensively we've got experience spread through some damn fine players. G Nev almost never fucks up, Cole is lightning and has improved immeasurably over the last two years, Terry is a beast and Rio may just be the weak link ;)

Looking at the sides who are in it, it feels almost obscene that Rooney is unfit for this. I can't see a single side he wouldn't have terrified, even the Brazilians. It would have been our best chance for 40 years, easily, but even without him, if Beckham keeps it simple, Gerrard brings his Prem form through and a couple of the other midfield lads can find a goal or two, I think we're still in with a strong chance. We've got to be tough to beat at least. Even chasing the game though, we've got the creativity and the goalscorers in midfield to press teams down.

Shoulders?-Stomach!

I can't remember Gerrard ever being good for England. Give him the captaincy and the same role he has for Liverpool, I say.

Try leaving Lampard or Gerrard out of one of the group matches to see how well we play with Carrick in the holding role and Lampard/Gerrard storming forward for the goals.

True, me neither! Maybe with Carrick behind him though without the same responsibilities for getting back, he'll have a real chance to shine. Basically it's pointless asking him and Lampard to rotate, one forward-one back depending on how play is going, because the system is pure theory when either player has ever touched anything similar in their entire career. In fact, name one team who've ever employed such an idea effectively. This looks like the best midfield shape we could have (although I understand where you're going by saying make a choice between the two and stick Carrick at the back for sure, also good). The only tension is that between them these guys NEED to get goals. This formation probably suits Owen better than it does Rooney though anyway, what with him often coming deeper to get involved and not quite having Owen's pace. If Rooney didn't exist and this was how England had been forced to play for the last two/four years, I'd be very optimistic.

Shoulders?-Stomach!

Yeah, it's desperate that we're going to have to drop one of the two. In a perfect world we'd have 1 world class defensive midfielder and one world-class attacking midfielder, but we're going to have to make do with Carrick. I doubt his ability at this level but he's still the best we have.

Christ knows what happened to Nicky Butt...sharp terminal decline!

Frank Lampard is deserving of the captaincy. I think it's a shame how Beckham gets it purely on popular demand/ridiculous commercialism. Frank has everything you'd want in a captain and he plays a positive attacking game. David has shirked many times. Gerrard obviously was super human on the weekend for Liverpool but i think he has a tendancy to sulk.

Give it to Frank. He'll guarantee at least two goals for England too. He always does.

(I'm not Frank's mother by the way)

Shoulders?-Stomach!

Well you sound like it.

I think Gerrard steps up when needed- the quality you need most in a knockout tournament. Gerrard always turns it on in knockout tournaments. Partly the reason why Liverpool have such a tremendous record in them over the past 6 years.

Mr. Analytical

Beckham's captaincy and position in the starting XI are unassailable until Sven goes.  Originally there was some basis for him being captain as the idea was that he lead by example.

However, he's now actually one of the weaker players in the side and his tendency to cheat, not be respected by the younger players and have no idea of how to lead a group of men make his captaincy a vanity thing.

wheatgod

Quote from: "depressed beyond tablets"I think it's a shame how Beckham gets it purely on popular demand/ridiculous commercialism.

Popular demand? No one I know thinks he should be in the team, let alone captain.
Would Beckham even be in the squad if he wasn't Sven's 1st choice captain? It fucks England up. Sven plays him as a winger, meaning we have to play a system that fits him in.

The Culture Bunker

Quote from: "Mr. Analytical"Sweden are a bit tricky but we've beaten them before,

Not since 1968, I believe.

Shoulders?-Stomach!

They're always better organised and hard to break down than us.

Not hard, considering most of Sven's matches have made our players look like one-legged gnomes who've never seen a football before, let alone booted one about.

imitationleather

I heard something about there being a condition in England's new sponsorship deal that Beckham has to remain captain after the World Cup. What a fucking joke, we're never going to be rid of him!

Quote from: "imitationleather"I heard something about there being a condition in England's new sponsorship deal that Beckham has to remain captain after the World Cup. What a fucking joke, we're never going to be rid of him!

Martin O'Neill was told that he would have to agree to playing Beckham (in important matches) if he was fit. O'Neill said that he couldn't gaurantee any player automatic selection. The rest is history.

This is what i mean about Beckham's selection. It's the money men pulling the strings. Fucking Adidas.  Also, most little kids think he's Elvis so he is the popular choice, just not the correct one.

Football is still full of propaganda.

Shoulders?-Stomach!

At least if that is true it'll provide a clear enough watermark for the level of influence sponsors have in international football.

Utter Shit

Quote from: "The Boston Crab"Basically it's pointless asking him [Gerrard] and Lampard to rotate, one forward-one back depending on how play is going, because the system is pure theory when either player has ever touched anything similar in their entire career. In fact, name one team who've ever employed such an idea effectively.
United employed this sort of midfield to great effect in the 90s, with Keane and Scholes. Scholes spent more time attacking, but they certainly switched as and when necessary.