The Football Chat

[RainbowDisney]

Portugal 0 - 0 Brazil.

 

Puts Portugal through to the last 16. What was perceived as arguably the potential standout game of the group stages failed to deliver on its promise as Portugal's desire to secure the point that would definitely seal what was already likely qualification from Group G limited any free-flowing football from either side.

 

North Korea 0 - 3 Ivory Coast

 

The Elephants' hopes of progressing to the second round in South Africa always appeared slim as they needed to not only emphatically beat their opponents to make up an enormous goal deficit, but also hope that Portugal lost to Brazil in the other fixture in Group G.

Edited June 25, 2010 by DisneyDude78

[BACYLON]

Spain had a few extra gears they didn't need to use tonight, the Torres situation must be a bit worrying for them tho. Chile looked good and will give Brazil a good game, their suspensions for that game might cost them.

 

The Swiss had their chances but the two quality teams from that group rightfully got through.

 

Now the real action starts....Looking forward to a least one penalty shootout in the next four days!!

[TommyT]

I think your question is "Why did the Football Association choose to put forward John Terry at a press conference?" He didn't turn up in front of the cameras unannounced and unapproved.

Let me be clear, regardless of your 'thoughts' my question was the one I originally wrote

In which case, I refer you to the bit of my original post which you didn't quote, viz "Who says he is?" as in who says John Terry is running England team meetings? Although once again I would suggest that if he's running a team meeting, it's presumably because some mixture of Capello, Gerrard and the FA want him to - again, you can't exactly hijack these meetings (well, not without a gun, anyway).

I'm not here to defend infidelity, or indeed anything else John Terry does off the pitch, but I thought he did a pretty decent job of defending Capello,

Again with the assumptions! It is an unwritten law that in team sport you do not mess around with partners (ex or current) of fellow team members.

Unwritten, and indeed unobserved, if you read some of the "racier" sporting biogs/autobiogs that have been published over the years. A perusal of the "resumes" of some of the WAGs makes for interesting reading in this regard too.

It would seem Capello, amongst many others, including players, press, the FA etc did not share your view of 'Terry's defense.'

There was a certain suspicious nature of how the story was treated. Commentators on Sky Sports news were originally very positive about Terry’s press conference, calling it a rallying call and the kind of impassioned demand for improvement that was needed, especially after so much fan dissatisfaction just 36 hours previous. After the Brazil-Ivory Coast game, Alan Shearer, Emmanuel Adebayor and Gary Lineker all praised John Terry, entirely backing his view that clear the air talks were needed. I am inclined to believe that pundits like Shearer, Adebayor and Lineker who have been in these sort of high-pressure situations have a pretty good handle on how these things "feel" to those involved. The press the next morning (and I'll wager most of them don't have the insight of Shearer, Lineker etc into the "compression" of a team at a World Cup) was different. (BBC Sport's chief football writer Phil McNulty, in a qualifiedly supportive piece pointed out something the press the next day were only too happy to ignore: "How can you criticise players for not being open and then criticise them when they are?")

The cynic in me suggests that the press have pages to fill, and they needed another angle to kick the corpse of the England team, having done to death the "they were rubbish" angle. Given that bad news always sells better than good, it's better copy to slate Terry than to laud him. You also have to remember that Terry is something of a hate figure for the press because of his attempt to get a super-injunction to block the whole infidelity story from being published (he does have some bad advisors - it was a crazy move to make) - and there's nothing that the press in this country hates more than somebody who tries to prevent them printing a story. To an extent, that's understandable, but it means that the press' attitude towards Terry is always going to have an underlying antipathy.

And your proof for

(i) him staging a coup at Chelsea; and

(ii) him trying to stage a coup in the current England camp

would be what?

Well, what were you expecting, signed affidavits? This is a forum, people express opinions if you read any of the press the next day mine (including the Scolari affair) happened to be shared by all the newspapers.

Well, certainly the Mail didn't blame Terry, and suggests that the Scolari sacking was a surprise even to Peter Kenyon (who for all his faults knew what was going on). It also incidentally suggests that "Roman Abramovich never really wanted Luiz Felipe Scolari." Paul Hayward in The Guardian pointed no fingers and suggested that it was more the management of the club who were responsible. Henry Winter in the Telegraph points out that the sacking happened while Terry was away on England duty, and says that Abramovich met with Ballack, Cech and Drogba, who persuaded him to ditch Scolari, also noting that Terry was angry at Scolari's sacking, and saying "Whatever others' reservations about Scolari, Terry was loyal.". Alan Green, writing in the Belfast Telegraph, took the same tack, saying "Was Abramovich so swayed by the likes of Cech, Drogba or Ballack? Why didn't he listen properly to the counter-view put by Terry and Lampard?" Similarly, an article in The Sun confirmed that Kenyon, Terry and Lampard were on Scolari's side and that Drogba, Ballack and Cech were the prime movers against Scolari.

That, I would suggest, rather trashes the idea that "all the newspapers" accused Terry of getting Scolari sacked.

 

I also apologise if my previous post offended you.

[KEVRAIL]

I get the feeling I'm not going to convince you............

 

Thank you for the apology, very decent of you, of course it is accepted, no grudges are held, we move on!

 

Rather than reply to your post, I think we have both waffled enough! I'm getting back to talking about the

 

football which has been getting alot better.

 

The ball, players getting to grips with it now? Some chipped goals, buses (free kicks) Stevie G. placing a shot.

[TommyT]

I'm getting back to talking about the football which has been getting alot better.

In places. Ghana-Germany was a delightful game, and the Japanese looked very impressive. By contrast, Brazil-Portugal was an abomination. And I can't help thinking that somebody "had a word" with that ref at halftime - there were certainly incidents in the second half that merited a yellow card.

The ball, players getting to grips with it now? Some chipped goals, buses (free kicks) Stevie G. placing a shot.

It does rather seem that they've picked up on the fact that blasting it is likely to send it into the stratosphere (kudos to the two Japanese free-kicks for showing that doesn't always happen), and that it's a safer (or at least more productive) option to try the chip or the placed shot, rather than the out-and-out scorcher. That does somewhat change the game, and whilst superficially one might think that rewarding precision over power should lead to a more interesting or refined game, a lot of "smashed" goals are either from distance, where a more delicate nuanced shot would therefore give the keeper much more time to save it, or the result of a player reacting athletically, or very quickly because they're under pressure; "forcing" him to have to also pay a delicate shot may very probably make his shot even harder, plus give the defence more time to effect a block.

To my mind it's a ball that further emasculates the game (even hard but fair tackles now often attract a yellow card) and potentially makes for less goals - which hardly seems a good idea.

And stuff FIFA's pompous "same game for everyone" stance - I'd like to see them crackdown on genuine foul play, and on simulation. Have a "citing commissioner" who looks at each match, and can upgrade a yellow to a red if an offence warrants it. And hand out yellows if the ref missed one. If somebody like Ronaldo was caught obviously diving four times during a game by the citing commissioner, and he gave him four yellow cards, this sort of behaviour would change overnight. Same with people going down clutching their face like they've just taken a prime Mike Tyson combination to the face when actually somebody's just brushed their shoulder. I wish they'd address that before they felt the need to tinker with the match equipment. But that's FIFA for you; rather play around with their own balls than deal with any real issues...

Edited June 26, 2010 by TommyT

[Daniel]

I thought Spain played quite well tonight, but not as good as they have done. Should be interesting to see how they do now.

[Will Jones]

Some great news for England....Germany's Cacau is out of the game tomorrow.

[thedude57]

good luck South Korea

[Will Jones]

The tournaments apparent "darlings" and "crowd favourites" South Korea have just drawn level 1-1 with 68 minutes going. Come on SKO.

[Will Jones]

Damn....SKO now losing 2-1. Great goal for Uruguay though.

 

And South Korea are out. Was hoping that they would go further. Me sad now.

 

Come on my Ghana brethren. You are my work sweep stake team. Spank the Yanks!!

[Will Jones]

Come on Ghana. Only 6 minutes to go. 2-1 up. Please win. Not only would the Yankees go home, but I would still be in the work's sweep stake!!!

 

Bye USA. Turn the light off in the changing room.

 

Next come the Germans.

 

And the vuvuzleas go wild!!!!

Edited June 26, 2010 by Will Jones

[BACYLON]

Shame England could only finish 2nd, we'd have beaten Ghana and faced a easier route to the semis.

 

USA were pretty poor tonight, with a few Ghana suspensions coming up, reckon Urguguay will walk the quarter final match next week.

 

Predictions for tomorrow, 2:0 to Germany

[timelord81r]

Shame England could only finish 2nd, we'd have beaten Ghana and faced a easier route to the semis.

 

USA were pretty poor tonight, with a few Ghana suspensions coming up, reckon Urguguay will walk the quarter final match next week.

 

Predictions for tomorrow, 2:0 to Germany

 

 

How dare you!

 

despite our flaws, we are gonna spank them 3-1 ;-)

 

im bloody working, might catch bits, cant believe it, bloody women and there cloths show live at my work! i hear they are gonna put a big screen up to show it, will have to see but if not ill be in the office on the net (i hope) its a crazy busy show

[Count Fooku]

I'm tryin hard not to snigger too much at the US tonight, there's a part of me thinking that could be England tomorrow!

[XLcatloveress]

I'm tryin hard not to snigger too much at the US tonight, there's a part of me thinking that could be England tomorrow!

 

Or Germany So .. yeah .. also trying to keep the chuckles to a minimum tonight so as to not jinx 'em With 'them' being the Germans in my case

[Daniel]

I was a little disappointed that USA lost , I have friends and family there so wanted them to do well.

 

Lets hope England can do it against Germany at a World Cup. I know we are capable, we just have to show it .

[Will Jones]

I was superbly glad that the Americans didn't get through. Not because they topped our group, or drew with us in the qualifiers. But because they became cocky and their media reports after the draw were so over the top. I am nto saying English media doesn't do the same, but only the American press could use the print media headline of "Best tie since Bunker Hill" and think it is good.

 

As long as England give 100%, then they will continue to win back my support. If they do not give 100% for their country, then they will remain prima donnas paid to kick a ball around.

 

I am a life long football fan. I have been to matches. I have played in a local league myself. But i have always given 100% to my supporting and playing.

 

Now, England. You know what you have to do. Stuff the Germans...preferably not on Penalties, but it would add a touch of irony to it.

[XLcatloveress]

I was a little disappointed that USA lost , I have friends and family there so wanted them to do well.

 

Lets hope England can do it against Germany at a World Cup. I know we are capable, we just have to show it .

 

I agree with you about the Americans but I guess we'll have to agree to disagree for now on Germany and England and see what happens a few hours from now

 

That said .. GO Germany

[thedude57]

COME ON ENGLAND

[XLcatloveress]

I have a (serious) question for all you England fans out there - is there a reason why the St. George's Cross is used as the team flag rather than the Union Jack?

 

Also, GO GERMAAAAANY!!

[timelord81r]

england not turned up AGAIN, poor defending, poor passing, poor shooting , here we go again, they need to pull there finger out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or the germans will embarrass us

[Will Jones]

I have a (serious) question for all you England fans out there - is there a reason why the St. George's Cross is used as the team flag rather than the Union Jack?

 

Also, GO GERMAAAAANY!!

The Union Jack is a Naval Flag for the British Forces.

 

The Union Flag is a combination of the English, Irish, Welsh and Scottish flags.

 

The St.George Cross is English.

 

 

 

england not turned up AGAIN, poor defending, poor passing, poor shooting , here we go again, they need to pull there finger out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or the germans will embarrass us

Are we watching the same game?

 

Aside from Shrek not knowing where his footballing skills have gone, the forst 20 odd minutes have been very tight. The goal was a sunday league "kick and rush" (ironic!).

 

Have some blooming faith in your countries team during the match at least.

[timelord81r]

I have a (serious) question for all you England fans out there - is there a reason why the St. George's Cross is used as the team flag rather than the Union Jack?

 

Also, GO GERMAAAAANY!!

 

 

because st George cross is the England flag, union flag is great Britain

Edited June 27, 2010 by timelord81r

[XLcatloveress]

Thanks guys! :) (not for the goal, mind you, though we've taken that gladly as well But for the quick answers regarding the flag :) Goes to show how much their remains to learn even when you consider yourself a not-too-stupid chick to begin with :) )

[timelord81r]

I have a (serious) question for all you England fans out there - is there a reason why the St. George's Cross is used as the team flag rather than the Union Jack?

 

Also, GO GERMAAAAANY!!

The Union Jack is a Naval Flag for the British Forces.

 

The Union Flag is a combination of the English, Irish, Welsh and Scottish flags.

 

The St.George Cross is English.

 

 

 

england not turned up AGAIN, poor defending, poor passing, poor shooting , here we go again, they need to pull there finger out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or the germans will embarrass us

Are we watching the same game?

 

Aside from Shrek not knowing where his footballing skills have gone, the forst 20 odd minutes have been very tight. The goal was a sunday league "kick and rush" (ironic!).

 

Have some blooming faith in your countries team during the match at least.

 

lol faith?

 

yer im watching the same game, the one were we run into the ref? concede a sunday league goal, and cant clear the first man on free kicks? and are hitting long balls when we arnt event playing heskey? oh dear

 

average and poor goal conceded, they need to pull there fingers out, this is it, win or go home! the payers we have are capable but arnt performing,

 

james just saved us from 2 nil