Page 2 of 32

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:15 pm
by Dixie
ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

grrrrrr Beat France home and Away and have Italy in our qualifying group and we didnt qualify unfair cheating swine we should be in South Africa <mutter mutter mutter> etc etc.

The ENGLISH are in South Africa not the British - Irish got cheated by the French and we Scottich just got screwed by a system that put both the previous finalists in our qualifying group and we managed to beat France home and away - did I mention that...

Not that I have a chip on my shoulder in any way shape or form......

Shafted big style [:(] I'd like to see the Jocks at another tournament, there aren't enough ginger wigs at major sporting events [:D]

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:24 pm
by Dixie
ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Alfred

There are only 3 true world soccer superpowers:

Brazil
Italy
Germany

It does not matter how good or how bad their lead up preformances are, who the coach is or who is in the squad, whenever any of these countries are in a Championship, be it Euro/world Cup/Confederations etc, these three superpowers cannot be dismissed. They have:

(a) the domestic infrastructure which creates a huge pool of tough players/coaches/managers/ancillary staff

(b) a track record of international success, and past success generates future success, partly because coming second is a failure whereas subconsciously many countries equate qualifying of an international championship as a successful outcome - does the mention of Mexico, Russia (albeit not qualified for this World Cup), Sweden ring a bell?

(c) soccer is the preeminent domestic football code (and thereby garners the financial resources) which easily attracts everyone with any natural ability whereas other countries (eg England, France) which have the infrastructure and do produce technically proficient players nonetheless lose some of their naturally athletically endowed players to other football codes

Other countries are strong and when the right conjunction of talented players/coaches/circumstances come together at the same spot in the cycle, produce teams which can win a Championship but inevitably they eventually decline and need to rebuild until the next cycle conjunction. But only the three superpowers remain as enduring threats in any championship which they reach.

Alfred
Warspite1

World Cup history says that is broadly right.

You can never write-off the Germans. They broke every neutral's hearts in 54 and 74. And even when they are playing badly, I would never want to play them...ever.

Italy are hot and cold - but as their record suggests, more hot than cold.

Brazil are just well....Brazil - class.

Exactly, never write off the Germans [:D] They always seem to be able to grind out a result when it really matters. I hate to say iy but I've stuck a couple of quid on Ze Germans this year.
You'd be a fool to bet against Brazil, which is why I haven't got any money on them winning this year [:D]
Italy, they aren't going to win it this year.

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:38 pm
by topeverest
Lord knows USA wont even come close to winning in my lifetime. I will fancy the magic that is the tournament.

I did like both games today, especially Urugway tieing France, despite a red card. France defiantely was not at her best.

I still dont know which of the top teams really came to win the show.

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:45 pm
by Alfred
ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Alfred

There are only 3 true world soccer superpowers:

Brazil
Italy
Germany

It does not matter how good or how bad their lead up preformances are, who the coach is or who is in the squad, whenever any of these countries are in a Championship, be it Euro/world Cup/Confederations etc, these three superpowers cannot be dismissed. They have:

(a) the domestic infrastructure which creates a huge pool of tough players/coaches/managers/ancillary staff

(b) a track record of international success, and past success generates future success, partly because coming second is a failure whereas subconsciously many countries equate qualifying of an international championship as a successful outcome - does the mention of Mexico, Russia (albeit not qualified for this World Cup), Sweden ring a bell?

(c) soccer is the preeminent domestic football code (and thereby garners the financial resources) which easily attracts everyone with any natural ability whereas other countries (eg England, France) which have the infrastructure and do produce technically proficient players nonetheless lose some of their naturally athletically endowed players to other football codes

Other countries are strong and when the right conjunction of talented players/coaches/circumstances come together at the same spot in the cycle, produce teams which can win a Championship but inevitably they eventually decline and need to rebuild until the next cycle conjunction. But only the three superpowers remain as enduring threats in any championship which they reach.

Alfred
Warspite1

World Cup history says that is broadly right.

You can never write-off the Germans. They broke every neutral's hearts in 54 and 74. And even when they are playing badly, I would never want to play them...ever.

Italy are hot and cold - but as their record suggests, more hot than cold.

Brazil are just well....Brazil - class.

For our North American friends, I thought I would expand on Warspite1's specific reference to World Cup history.

1930 - won by Uruguay in Uruguay. Without any doubt the weakest World Cup ever. Just about every European country did not participate because they thought it would fail. Consequently the championship was really only a short South American championship won by the home country.

1934 - won by Italy in Italy. The Europeans turn up and dominate. Much stronger than 1930 but essentially a competition of two continents.

1938 - won by Italy in France. Stronger still but still dominated by the Europeans.

1950 - won by Uruguay in Uruguay. Europe still affected by effects of WWII (physical conditioning, no German participation allowed etc). Arguably weaker than the 1934 and 1938 championships. Again home ground advantage is significant.

1954 - won by West Germany in Switzerland. Post war recovery of Europe is evident. Germany allowed to participate, wins final against Hungary (a pre war powerhouse) in what some consider best final of all time.

1958 - won by Brazil in Sweden. Brazil had always been one of the strongest South American teams, but this championship establishes Brazil as the continent's consistent leader.

1962 - won by Brazil in Sweden. Again Brazil almost alone carries the South American flag against the might of Europe. Having Pele in the side does give Brazil a slight advantage.

1966 - won by England in England. Home ground advantage, the benefit of a dubious goal in the final against West Germany, and the conjunction of arguably the best English talent ever (Best, Ball, Charlton etc) brought together in the one team, makes this final a contender with Berne 1954 for best final ever albeit not for the same technical football reasons.

1970 - won by Brazil in Mexico. Italy fully recovered loses classic final against Brazil

1974 - won by West Germany in West Germany. By now championship has really expanded to include teams from all four corners of the world but remains essentially Europe v Brazil. The expansion results in many more lop sided matches.

1978 - won by Argentina in Argentina. Home ground advantage and what is widely viewed as match fixing (Argentina scores the 6 goals against Peru it needs to progress beyond the preliminary group stage).

1982 - won by Italy in Spain. Italy gains revenge over Brazil (perhaps the best non final game ever) and defeats West Germany in a classic final.

1986 - won by Argentina in Mexico. Whilst there might be some doubt that Argentian cheated in 1978, in 1986 there is absolutely no doubt that due to the "Hand of God aka Diego Maradona" Argentina cheats to defeat England in the semi final. Again a bit of suspicion that home town continental bias rears its head to ensure a South american team wins in latin America.

1990 - won by Germany (now unified) in Italy. Probably the worst final ever with Argentina reaching the final by playing everyone in front of goal and relying upon penalty shootouts to get through all the elimination matches. Italy beats England for third spot, the game that would have lifted the championship out of the mediocre had it been the final.

1994 - won by Brazil in USA. Brazil plays superb football in every match until the final when perfect Italian defence demonstrates Brazil is only a superpower, not THE power. Perhaps the best final ever but only for the cognescenti - casual spectators (read most of North America) would have not understood the subtle nuances and probably would have been underwhelmed. Penalty shootout determines final.

1998 - won by France in France. Again having a Zhidane in a football side is a bit like having a Pele. France was also the beneficiary in the final of playing a Brazil who had continued their 1994 form but whose world class players became sick on the eve of the final (some murmerings ensued). France has only ever been a world class power on three occasions - late 1950s, mid 1980s and late 1990s through to mid 2000s periods which are marked by having a world class striker, Platini and Zhidane.

2002 - won by Brazil in Japan/South Korea. Many matches were determined by very poor refereeing decisions, Italy's loss to South Korea (one of the two co-host countries) probably being the worst refereed game as an Italian goal was ruled off side incorrectly and a South Korean goal ruled OK even though it was sored from an off side position. Zhidane is in very poor form and as a result the defending champions produce the worst ever performance for a defending country.

2006 - won by Italy in Germany. Once again Germany fails to get past its World Cup bete noir Italy, this time losing a classic semi final. Zhidane is in poor form in the group stage and France barely make it through to the knock out stage, at which point Zhidane finds form and suddenly France storms through to the final where again superb Italian defence neutralises its opponent.

In summary World Cup history shows that Italy consistently has the best defence, Brazil consistently has the most dazzling attack and Germany the most consistent all round game.

For this World Cup I expect the following characteristics to apply:

Best Attack - Spain/Brazil/Serbia
Best Defence - Italy/Germany/
Best All round - Netherlands/Portugal

France only qualified after a blatent hand ball. Without Zhidane they will do well to progress beyond the group stage.
Argentina has some quality players but noone is convinced that Maradona knows how to coach. I doubt he won't blow up at some stage, thereby adversely affecting his team. People have forgotten how Argentina with its class players just managed to come 4th in the South American zone. They came very close to not qualifying at all.
Nigeria and Ghana are dark horses. If they make it to the knock out stage, then anything is possible.
On paper England should easily get through its first four matches. If that occurs you don't have to maintain form for much longer to figure in the final.

Alfred

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:49 pm
by TulliusDetritus
ORIGINAL: topeverest

Lord knows USA wont even come close to winning in my lifetime. I will fancy the magic that is the tournament.

I did like both games today, especially Urugway tieing France, despite a red card. France defiantely was not at her best.

I still dont know which of the top teams really came to win the show.

One year ago, I would have said "poor guys [US team], they'll be massacred". But I saw them playing in Christmas or so AND for the very first time they were not an INNOCENT team... full of naive players [:D] It took them a few decades, but they finally look like football players. As for winning...

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:49 pm
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Alfred

There are only 3 true world soccer superpowers:

Brazil
Italy
Germany

It does not matter how good or how bad their lead up preformances are, who the coach is or who is in the squad, whenever any of these countries are in a Championship, be it Euro/world Cup/Confederations etc, these three superpowers cannot be dismissed. They have:

(a) the domestic infrastructure which creates a huge pool of tough players/coaches/managers/ancillary staff

(b) a track record of international success, and past success generates future success, partly because coming second is a failure whereas subconsciously many countries equate qualifying of an international championship as a successful outcome - does the mention of Mexico, Russia (albeit not qualified for this World Cup), Sweden ring a bell?

(c) soccer is the preeminent domestic football code (and thereby garners the financial resources) which easily attracts everyone with any natural ability whereas other countries (eg England, France) which have the infrastructure and do produce technically proficient players nonetheless lose some of their naturally athletically endowed players to other football codes

Other countries are strong and when the right conjunction of talented players/coaches/circumstances come together at the same spot in the cycle, produce teams which can win a Championship but inevitably they eventually decline and need to rebuild until the next cycle conjunction. But only the three superpowers remain as enduring threats in any championship which they reach.

Alfred
Warspite1

World Cup history says that is broadly right.

You can never write-off the Germans. They broke every neutral's hearts in 54 and 74. And even when they are playing badly, I would never want to play them...ever.

Italy are hot and cold - but as their record suggests, more hot than cold.

Brazil are just well....Brazil - class.

For our North American friends, I thought I would expand on Warspite1's specific reference to World Cup history.

1930 - won by Uruguay in Uruguay. Without any doubt the weakest World Cup ever. Just about every European country did not participate because they thought it would fail. Consequently the championship was really only a short South American championship won by the home country.

1934 - won by Italy in Italy. The Europeans turn up and dominate. Much stronger than 1930 but essentially a competition of two continents.

1938 - won by Italy in France. Stronger still but still dominated by the Europeans.

1950 - won by Uruguay in Uruguay. Europe still affected by effects of WWII (physical conditioning, no German participation allowed etc). Arguably weaker than the 1934 and 1938 championships. Again home ground advantage is significant.

1954 - won by West Germany in Switzerland. Post war recovery of Europe is evident. Germany allowed to participate, wins final against Hungary (a pre war powerhouse) in what some consider best final of all time.

1958 - won by Brazil in Sweden. Brazil had always been one of the strongest South American teams, but this championship establishes Brazil as the continent's consistent leader.

1962 - won by Brazil in Sweden. Again Brazil almost alone carries the South American flag against the might of Europe. Having Pele in the side does give Brazil a slight advantage.

1966 - won by England in England. Home ground advantage, the benefit of a dubious goal in the final against West Germany, and the conjunction of arguably the best English talent ever (Best, Ball, Charlton etc) brought together in the one team, makes this final a contender with Berne 1954 for best final ever albeit not for the same technical football reasons.

1970 - won by Brazil in Mexico. Italy fully recovered loses classic final against Brazil

1974 - won by West Germany in West Germany. By now championship has really expanded to include teams from all four corners of the world but remains essentially Europe v Brazil. The expansion results in many more lop sided matches.

1978 - won by Argentina in Argentina. Home ground advantage and what is widely viewed as match fixing (Argentina scores the 6 goals against Peru it needs to progress beyond the preliminary group stage).

1982 - won by Italy in Spain. Italy gains revenge over Brazil (perhaps the best non final game ever) and defeats West Germany in a classic final.

1986 - won by Argentina in Mexico. Whilst there might be some doubt that Argentian cheated in 1978, in 1986 there is absolutely no doubt that due to the "Hand of God aka Diego Maradona" Argentina cheats to defeat England in the semi final. Again a bit of suspicion that home town continental bias rears its head to ensure a South american team wins in latin America.

1990 - won by Germany (now unified) in Italy. Probably the worst final ever with Argentina reaching the final by playing everyone in front of goal and relying upon penalty shootouts to get through all the elimination matches. Italy beats England for third spot, the game that would have lifted the championship out of the mediocre had it been the final.

1994 - won by Brazil in USA. Brazil plays superb football in every match until the final when perfect Italian defence demonstrates Brazil is only a superpower, not THE power. Perhaps the best final ever but only for the cognescenti - casual spectators (read most of North America) would have not understood the subtle nuances and probably would have been underwhelmed. Penalty shootout determines final.

1998 - won by France in France. Again having a Zhidane in a football side is a bit like having a Pele. France was also the beneficiary in the final of playing a Brazil who had continued their 1994 form but whose world class players became sick on the eve of the final (some murmerings ensued). France has only ever been a world class power on three occasions - late 1950s, mid 1980s and late 1990s through to mid 2000s periods which are marked by having a world class striker, Platini and Zhidane.

2002 - won by Brazil in Japan/South Korea. Many matches were determined by very poor refereeing decisions, Italy's loss to South Korea (one of the two co-host countries) probably being the worst refereed game as an Italian goal was ruled off side incorrectly and a South Korean goal ruled OK even though it was sored from an off side position. Zhidane is in very poor form and as a result the defending champions produce the worst ever performance for a defending country.

2006 - won by Italy in Germany. Once again Germany fails to get past its World Cup bete noir Italy, this time losing a classic semi final. Zhidane is in poor form in the group stage and France barely make it through to the knock out stage, at which point Zhidane finds form and suddenly France storms through to the final where again superb Italian defence neutralises its opponent.

In summary World Cup history shows that Italy consistently has the best defence, Brazil consistently has the most dazzling attack and Germany the most consistent all round game.

For this World Cup I expect the following characteristics to apply:

Best Attack - Spain/Brazil/Serbia
Best Defence - Italy/Germany/
Best All round - Netherlands/Portugal

France only qualified after a blatent hand ball. Without Zhidane they will do well to progress beyond the group stage.
Argentina has some quality players but noone is convinced that Maradona knows how to coach. I doubt he won't blow up at some stage, thereby adversely affecting his team. People have forgotten how Argentina with its class players just managed to come 4th in the South American zone. They came very close to not qualifying at all.
Nigeria and Ghana are dark horses. If they make it to the knock out stage, then anything is possible.
On paper England should easily get through its first four matches. If that occurs you don't have to maintain form for much longer to figure in the final.

Alfred
Warspite1

1950 was in Brazil - the only World Cup without a final - the last 4 teams played in a final pool. The "final" match for history book purposes is considered Brazil 1 - 2 Uruguay

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:50 pm
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: warspite1


Warspite1

World Cup history says that is broadly right.

You can never write-off the Germans. They broke every neutral's hearts in 54 and 74. And even when they are playing badly, I would never want to play them...ever.

Italy are hot and cold - but as their record suggests, more hot than cold.

Brazil are just well....Brazil - class.

For our North American friends, I thought I would expand on Warspite1's specific reference to World Cup history.

1930 - won by Uruguay in Uruguay. Without any doubt the weakest World Cup ever. Just about every European country did not participate because they thought it would fail. Consequently the championship was really only a short South American championship won by the home country.

1934 - won by Italy in Italy. The Europeans turn up and dominate. Much stronger than 1930 but essentially a competition of two continents.

1938 - won by Italy in France. Stronger still but still dominated by the Europeans.

1950 - won by Uruguay in Uruguay. Europe still affected by effects of WWII (physical conditioning, no German participation allowed etc). Arguably weaker than the 1934 and 1938 championships. Again home ground advantage is significant.

1954 - won by West Germany in Switzerland. Post war recovery of Europe is evident. Germany allowed to participate, wins final against Hungary (a pre war powerhouse) in what some consider best final of all time.

1958 - won by Brazil in Sweden. Brazil had always been one of the strongest South American teams, but this championship establishes Brazil as the continent's consistent leader.

1962 - won by Brazil in Sweden. Again Brazil almost alone carries the South American flag against the might of Europe. Having Pele in the side does give Brazil a slight advantage.

1966 - won by England in England. Home ground advantage, the benefit of a dubious goal in the final against West Germany, and the conjunction of arguably the best English talent ever (Best, Ball, Charlton etc) brought together in the one team, makes this final a contender with Berne 1954 for best final ever albeit not for the same technical football reasons.

1970 - won by Brazil in Mexico. Italy fully recovered loses classic final against Brazil

1974 - won by West Germany in West Germany. By now championship has really expanded to include teams from all four corners of the world but remains essentially Europe v Brazil. The expansion results in many more lop sided matches.

1978 - won by Argentina in Argentina. Home ground advantage and what is widely viewed as match fixing (Argentina scores the 6 goals against Peru it needs to progress beyond the preliminary group stage).

1982 - won by Italy in Spain. Italy gains revenge over Brazil (perhaps the best non final game ever) and defeats West Germany in a classic final.

1986 - won by Argentina in Mexico. Whilst there might be some doubt that Argentian cheated in 1978, in 1986 there is absolutely no doubt that due to the "Hand of God aka Diego Maradona" Argentina cheats to defeat England in the semi final. Again a bit of suspicion that home town continental bias rears its head to ensure a South american team wins in latin America.

1990 - won by Germany (now unified) in Italy. Probably the worst final ever with Argentina reaching the final by playing everyone in front of goal and relying upon penalty shootouts to get through all the elimination matches. Italy beats England for third spot, the game that would have lifted the championship out of the mediocre had it been the final.

1994 - won by Brazil in USA. Brazil plays superb football in every match until the final when perfect Italian defence demonstrates Brazil is only a superpower, not THE power. Perhaps the best final ever but only for the cognescenti - casual spectators (read most of North America) would have not understood the subtle nuances and probably would have been underwhelmed. Penalty shootout determines final.

1998 - won by France in France. Again having a Zhidane in a football side is a bit like having a Pele. France was also the beneficiary in the final of playing a Brazil who had continued their 1994 form but whose world class players became sick on the eve of the final (some murmerings ensued). France has only ever been a world class power on three occasions - late 1950s, mid 1980s and late 1990s through to mid 2000s periods which are marked by having a world class striker, Platini and Zhidane.

2002 - won by Brazil in Japan/South Korea. Many matches were determined by very poor refereeing decisions, Italy's loss to South Korea (one of the two co-host countries) probably being the worst refereed game as an Italian goal was ruled off side incorrectly and a South Korean goal ruled OK even though it was sored from an off side position. Zhidane is in very poor form and as a result the defending champions produce the worst ever performance for a defending country.

2006 - won by Italy in Germany. Once again Germany fails to get past its World Cup bete noir Italy, this time losing a classic semi final. Zhidane is in poor form in the group stage and France barely make it through to the knock out stage, at which point Zhidane finds form and suddenly France storms through to the final where again superb Italian defence neutralises its opponent.

In summary World Cup history shows that Italy consistently has the best defence, Brazil consistently has the most dazzling attack and Germany the most consistent all round game.

For this World Cup I expect the following characteristics to apply:

Best Attack - Spain/Brazil/Serbia
Best Defence - Italy/Germany/
Best All round - Netherlands/Portugal

France only qualified after a blatent hand ball. Without Zhidane they will do well to progress beyond the group stage.
Argentina has some quality players but noone is convinced that Maradona knows how to coach. I doubt he won't blow up at some stage, thereby adversely affecting his team. People have forgotten how Argentina with its class players just managed to come 4th in the South American zone. They came very close to not qualifying at all.
Nigeria and Ghana are dark horses. If they make it to the knock out stage, then anything is possible.
On paper England should easily get through its first four matches. If that occurs you don't have to maintain form for much longer to figure in the final.

Alfred
Warspite1

1950 was in Brazil - the only World Cup without a final - the last 4 teams played in a final pool. The "final" match for history book purposes is considered Brazil 0 - 2 Uruguay
Warspite 1

1962 was in Chile

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:56 pm
by Alfred
Yes you're right. 1962 was a typo error, clearly I still had Sweden on the mind from typing the 1958 summary. 1950 I forgot saw the largest world attendance ever. Was it officially 120,000 but unofficially generally estimated at more than 150,000. They don't build stadia like that anymore (well maybe we'll just have to see what Brazil gives us in 2014)[8D]

Alfred

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:17 pm
by TulliusDetritus
ORIGINAL: Alfred


Best Attack - Spain/Brazil/Serbia
Best Defence - Italy/Germany/
Best All round - Netherlands/Portugal

Alfred

Serbia? [&:][&:] And you forget possibly the best ATTACK: Argentina: Messi... Milito... Kun... Higuain [;)] Only Spain can show similar world-class players (attackers): Villa and Torres. England has Rooney. Brazil has er, Luis Fabiano, who is NOT a top class player, not on the same league of the players mentioned before [:)]

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:44 pm
by JeffroK
How about some sympathy for us, we get the Germans first up!!! Hopefully they are a bit rusty for the first game.

I hope for a competitive result against them, 0-1 or 1-2 would be enough. I would expect to get a win against either Ghana or Serbia, would a win adraw & a loss get us through??

As mentioned earlier, Coutnries where Soccer is pre-eminent (or a religion) rule these events, it probably rates as our 4th Football code (Australian Rules, Rugby League, Rugby Union then Soccer) and about 6-7th Sporting code (Cricket &&nbsp; Netball rate better)&nbsp; so in our view, qualifying is pretty good and any competitive/positive result seen as a success.

Hopefully the Germans have a day off, or dont come prepared. The last German to underestimate a group of Aussies was someone named Rommel!

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:48 pm
by TulliusDetritus
Jeffk, I will follow your analogy [:)]

Like in Tobruk, maybe you will need to park the bus and the cars of the players too. Good luck [:)]

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:51 pm
by tocaff
All of the stores are decorated in yellow and green, they are selling hats-balls-you name it.  Streets are painted with the Brazilian (Brasil in Portuguese) flag.  Every goal the team scores will be celebrated with fireworks so my dog will freak out.  Parties, what Brazilians do second best after football, will be constant and when the team plays work stops, if people go that day.  Football in Brazil is not a sport, not an obsession, but rather a religion.  If the team doesn't win the cup it was a total failure.



RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 12:36 am
by n01487477
ORIGINAL: JeffK
...
As mentioned earlier, Coutnries where Soccer is pre-eminent (or a religion) rule these events, it probably rates as our 4th Football code (Australian Rules, Rugby League, Rugby Union then Soccer) and about 6-7th Sporting code (Cricket &  Netball rate better)  so in our view, qualifying is pretty good and any competitive/positive result seen as a success.
...
Actually this isn't really true Jeff, football (yes the round ball game) has the highest participation rates of any of the codes bar netball. But I will concede that Aussie rules has the highest attendance rates, a fact which really boggles my mind[8|]. Then league, union and football(A-League). The A-league is doing much better in recent years though.
Wiki: While never receiving major media coverage, soccer is the only code of football that appears in the Australian Top Ten Sports and Physical Recreational Activities by Participation.[17]. Soccer enjoys a strong lead by number of participants ahead of the other popular football codes of Australian rules football, rugby league and rugby union [18].
but backed by Govt stats

Anyway, I agree with the sentiments that just being there is a great achievement and if Australia can get through the group stage, which I doubt on paper, then it will be a terrific achievement. We was robbed against Italy last time [;)]

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 12:44 am
by bigred
ORIGINAL: topeverest

3-1 england. Not much hope for the USA unless the brits dont show up. Stranger things have happened, but there it is. USA hasnt been the confederation cup team of 09. They seem to be missing that je ne sais quoi of team spirit that is neede to win against great opponents.


I disagree. The USA discovered in SA last winter what it will take to win at the highest level. I could see the competitive killer spirit come out in their play.

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 12:54 am
by bigred
ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

grrrrrr Beat France home and Away and have Italy in our qualifying group and we didnt qualify unfair cheating swine we should be in South Africa <mutter mutter mutter> etc etc.

The ENGLISH are in South Africa not the British - Irish got cheated by the French and we Scottich just got screwed by a system that put both the previous finalists in our qualifying group and we managed to beat France home and away - did I mention that...

Not that I have a chip on my shoulder in any way shape or form......


If you GBs all living on that island would unify instead of having 3 different teams then maybe you would have a chance. I see the Scot and Welsh teams to have an attitude of "well we will just make sure England never wins by us putting a team out there."
Typical "Screw the Crown" attitude.

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 1:31 am
by Mynok

[:D][:D] But this game isn't being played in Tobruk!

Having seen only four sides play so far it's hard to say. Defense ruled the day and Uruguay certainly showed they have a top one.

One must logically suspect as all others have said that the traditional powers will make a showing. Spain, Italy and Germany are all immensely talented and organized sides. I'm looking forward to seeing the Dutch play. England is talented but they have the longstanding tradition of choking to overcome. Brazil is Brazil but only a good look at them will tell whether they have their normal esprit de corps this Cup.

Africa can never be counted out. They aren't as organized as the European teams but they are more talented than anyone else on the planet for individual skills...by far. It remains only to be seen if they can play defense.


RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 3:19 am
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: bigred

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

grrrrrr Beat France home and Away and have Italy in our qualifying group and we didnt qualify unfair cheating swine we should be in South Africa <mutter mutter mutter> etc etc.

The ENGLISH are in South Africa not the British - Irish got cheated by the French and we Scottich just got screwed by a system that put both the previous finalists in our qualifying group and we managed to beat France home and away - did I mention that...

Not that I have a chip on my shoulder in any way shape or form......


If you GBs all living on that island would unify instead of having 3 different teams then maybe you would have a chance. I see the Scot and Welsh teams to have an attitude of "well we will just make sure England never wins by us putting a team out there."
Typical "Screw the Crown" attitude.
Warspite1

Wouldn't that be a rich irony - joining together the Football Associations of England. Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland just as politically the Union breaks apart.....

In answer to your point, it would never happen - I would be surprised if there was a single football fan in any of the four home countries that would want to lose their identity by joining together - nothing to do with politics - more about tradition. England vs Scotland is the oldest international of them all - 1872 - and these two are the oldest Football Associations in the world.

So worried are they that FIFA will force them to merge, three of the home nations are refusing to allow their players into the GB team at the 2012 Olympics - it will be an England team as a result. It is because of that fear of losing our individual FA's that - until 2012 - we have not entered a team at the Olympics since the early 1970's (despite this we still hold the most Gold medals - along with Hungary - in Olympic football [:)]).

Its always been an interesting pub subject though - who would play in a combined British (United Kingdom) team. Sadly, unlike golden days past however - Dennis Law, Ryan Giggs, George Best etc - I think there would be few non-English in the team at present so it does not make much difference [:(].


RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 4:41 am
by Durbik
My bet for this year is Argentina.

And I'm really surprised football took hold in the US as one of the top sports. When I was a kid, my dad told me that they don't play football north of mexican border - and I didn't believe that, I thought he's making fun of me. Everybody plays football, right?

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 4:55 am
by jmscho
Guys, you're talking about football (soccer for Americans). It is completely irrelevant when compared to WitP. Get back in the real world.

BTW can anyone suggest what flag I should fly from my car. I want one that does not represent a country in the World Cup - oh and where can I get one?

RE: OT World Cup 2010 South Africa

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 5:12 am
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: jmscho

Guys, you're talking about football (soccer for Americans). It is completely irrelevant when compared to WitP. Get back in the real world.

BTW can anyone suggest what flag I should fly from my car. I want one that does not represent a country in the World Cup - oh and where can I get one?
Warspite1

Well the top ranked teams not in the World Cup are Croatia, Russia and Egypt if you fancy one of those, but closer to home I'm sure you can get a Scottish, Welsh, Irish (Southern or Northern) flag for your car........I'm sure you can find a shop on the internet.

As much as I love military history [:)] and wargaming [:)] - I would, could, never agree that football is irrelevant [:-]