Jump to content
BritFan

World Cup

Recommended Posts

Who do people think will win it?

I think Brazil have a great chance, but I hope England wins their 2nd trophy

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who do people think will win it?

I think Brazil have a great chance, but I hope England wins their 2nd trophy

The US is a little over-rated to this point I feel.

I do think they have a pretty good chance to take the thing though. The Germany game last WC left a sour taste in my mouth. I think the US outplayed Germany in that game, but their Keeper really stepped up and single handedly, IMO, won that game.

Brazil is always in the Mix, I think Germany for obvious reasons can take it, as well as England.

Should be interesting. I am glad the US is finally in the mix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not a big soccer fan at all but i must say, i will watch the World Cup.

As for who can win it? Who knows. Lots of teams can win it. Be pretty cool to se the US win and dominate yet another sport but i think the US is at least 2 World Cups away from having a legit chance to win.

Has the US ever won the WC??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was really surprised to see that Adu didn't make the World Cup.

Your strikers are (I think) Brian Mcbride, Josh Wolff and Clint Mathis.

I think only Mcbride plays for a European team. i've watched him play, he's not bad, but he won't strike fear into the opposition. The USA have Eddie Lewis who plays for my team, Leeds. So I hope he plays well

Adu is mentioned in British press a lot, apparently the English champions Chelsea want to buy him. I read a story on Espn that said he wasn't chosen because he wasn't playing regularly for his club, but England chose a player whose 17, and has never played for his team yet.

I think the U'S needs some good young players to come through soon, the current squad looks pretty much on their way out. The U.S will be my 2nd team though, but I don't think they make it out their group.

The England team is very strong this year, but Rooney may be injured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be in Munich for the semi-final...hope to see the US has made it that far. The US is a very good team this year, but they are in a very tough group. Not many teams will want to face them.

England is very strong and I would love to see them take it all if the US isn't there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know much about it. I just hope they don't have games that end in that stupid tie-breaker shoot-out thing. That might be the worst rule I've ever seen in sports.

In baseball, it would be like saying "OK, if we get past 10 innings, we're gonna decide this by having a HR-hitting contest: Each team picks 3 sluggers and this old guy over here will throw each one of them 5 batting-practice pitches. Whichever team's 3-sluggers gets the most dingers wins!"

Who invented that stupid tie-breaker thing, and why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know much about it. I just hope they don't have games that end in that stupid tie-breaker shoot-out thing. That might be the worst rule I've ever seen in sports.

In baseball, it would be like saying "OK, if we get past 10 innings, we're gonna decide this by having a HR-hitting contest: Each team picks 3 sluggers and this old guy over here will throw each one of them 5 batting-practice pitches. Whichever team's 3-sluggers gets the most dingers wins!"

Who invented that stupid tie-breaker thing, and why?

Penalties

Not a great way to end a game, but anyone have a better idea?

1st of all, "soccor" is an exahausting sport, especially when its played at the speed which we'll witness at the world cup. Your analagy doesn't quite work because Baseball is full of fat men who don't run (No knock against the sport, but its a fact)

I'll give you an example of where penalties are needed. The F.A Cup final in England was last week. Liverpool against West Ham. Game was 3-3 so it went into the extra half an hour of time. Both teams had used all their substitutes. Players were getting cramp left right and centre, even though there was 20 minutes to go. What was previously one of the best games I'd ever watched slowed down to almost a standstill

Liverpool won the shootout, and even though it isn't honourable, it is fair and there is always a hero in the victory. Penalties are played in cup games all around the world, America are one of the few, if not the only one to keep playing. Besides, Penalties are exciting, the underdog who worked their butt off for the whole game has en even chance of winning against the better team.

Btw, in MLS games what do they do if its a draw? Do they keep playing untill someone scores? If so what is the longest a team has played a game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
. Your analagy doesn't quite work because Baseball is full of fat men who don't run (No knock against the sport, but its a fact)

You're getting fact and outdated stereotypes mixed up. Even the bigger men are much more conditioned than they used to be. I'm not saying they could last on a pitch, but it's not like it was even 20 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brazil won't win because S. American teams generally win whenever the WC is played outside of Europe, and European teams genreally win when it's played in Europe.

That said, I think you've got to like the chances of Germany, as the home side. Italy and England are also worthy choices, although Italy is in a tough group with the Czechs and the US.

But I will do as I always do and take perennial under-performer, SPAIN.

The other perennial under-performer is Holland, and my guess is that they get shocked in group play and don't even make it past Serbia-Montenegro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Penalties

Not a great way to end a game, but....

What do penalties have to do with breaking a tie? (I'm not being a jerk about this, I just don't understand.)

anyone have a better idea?

I don't know the game, but I've run across many people who say they have a better idea, and it's always a version of the same one. For several years, I had to travel a lot to speak at conferences, hold meetings, etc. Whenever I'd get in a taxi outside of the U.S. (or in the U.S. if the driver had a foreign accent), I'd ask'em about this. And, boy howdy, every single time, their eyes would get big and they'd start talking a mile a minute ;-)

Here's what about 75%-80% of them said:

1. The problem isn't tie-breaking, the problem is that the current rules make it nearly impossible to score. (One guy in London told me that we get more hurricanes over here than they get football/soccer goals over there ;-)

2. Because it's so hard to score, everybody gets super-conservative as soon as they get a lead. Because a lead is so hard to come by, the minute a team gets one, they stop being aggressive about scoring and instead get paranoid about losing their lead. So, they stop playing to win and start playing to not-lose. Which just makes the scoring even less.

3. If you fix this problem, then you don't need idiotic tie-breaker rules because the teams would be able to break ties on the field by (get this!) playing the game.

4. The best way to fix the underlying problem is to change the rule about "offsides" or "icing" or whatever it's called. If you changed this rule (evidently, there are several ways you might do this, but I'm hazy on the details), then instead of games that are 1-0, 1-1, and 2-1, you'd have games that are 4-3, 5-4, and 7-5. Furthermore (so they tell me), you would create an exciting new era of strategy development and coaching innovation, as the offense-geniuses and defense-geniuses would take turns out-smarting each other for years to come.

5. The only big obstacle, so they tell me, is "purists" who evidently feel that the relatively-recent current rules were handed down by God, or the Queen, or somebody like that ;-)

Like I said, I'm not a student of this game, so I don't really know. Whatcha think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US is surprisingly ranked fourth in the tournament which is overrating them a good bit. However once you are in the top 15 in the World Cup anything can happen.

Unfortunately, we are in the same bracket as freaking Italy -ranked 13th I think, and the Czech Republic -possibly ranked 8th, with Ghana being the team that everyone needs to beat (however, anyone who is into the World Cup knows the history of many pesky African teams- Camaroon, Senegal etc.)

Even if the US does survive this bracket there is a good chance we are going to go up against Brazil in the second round with Ronaldhino, Ronaldo, Kaka, and Adriano. Not promising, but anything can happen. The US would be wise to finish first in its bracket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do penalties have to do with breaking a tie? (I'm not being a jerk about this, I just don't understand.)

I don't know the game, but I've run across many people who say they have a better idea, and it's always a version of the same one. For several years, I had to travel a lot to speak at conferences, hold meetings, etc. Whenever I'd get in a taxi outside of the U.S. (or in the U.S. if the driver had a foreign accent), I'd ask'em about this. And, boy howdy, every single time, their eyes would get big and they'd start talking a mile a minute ;-)

Here's what about 75%-80% of them said:

1. The problem isn't tie-breaking, the problem is that the current rules make it nearly impossible to score. (One guy in London told me that we get more hurricanes over here than they get football/soccer goals over there ;-)

2. Because it's so hard to score, everybody gets super-conservative as soon as they get a lead. Because a lead is so hard to come by, the minute a team gets one, they stop being aggressive about scoring and instead get paranoid about losing their lead. So, they stop playing to win and start playing to not-lose. Which just makes the scoring even less.

3. If you fix this problem, then you don't need idiotic tie-breaker rules because the teams would be able to break ties on the field by (get this!) playing the game.

4. The best way to fix the underlying problem is to change the rule about "offsides" or "icing" or whatever it's called. If you changed this rule (evidently, there are several ways you might do this, but I'm hazy on the details), then instead of games that are 1-0, 1-1, and 2-1, you'd have games that are 4-3, 5-4, and 7-5. Furthermore (so they tell me), you would create an exciting new era of strategy development and coaching innovation, as the offense-geniuses and defense-geniuses would take turns out-smarting each other for years to come.

5. The only big obstacle, so they tell me, is "purists" who evidently feel that the relatively-recent current rules were handed down by God, or the Queen, or somebody like that ;-)

I understand where your coming from, the offside rule is a hazy rule at best. However, it is most definately needed otherwise each team would "goalhang" and score stupid goals that required absolutely no stratagy and technique, just a lucky hit up the field on the counter-attack. The offside rule does have many lopholes which teams exploit, like if a player isn't interfering with play he isn't offside. This leads to the defense not marking a player because he's way offside. This player can then come back onside and receive a pass, whilst not being marked.

Also, goals aren't everything in a soccer game. I've watched some fantastic games which have finished 1-0 or 0-0. It all depends on what you want out of a game. I assume you like excitement, but some people prefer watching to closely matched teams battle away with each showing excellent technique and ability.

You made a really good point about how some teams sit on a lead. That is true for the way some teams play. Italy is a good example of this. English teams play at an incredibly high tempo, so even if there are no goals, it is fun to watch.

And don't mock the Queen's rules! :D

America is ranked 4th because most of the teams they play are of a much poorer quality than the teams Europe plays. The U.S Win/loss ratio is very good because they beat most of the teams from the Carribean when they qualify for the World Cup. The U.S has an ok team this year, but I think its worse than 4 years ago. A lot of American players like Carlos Bocanagra, Claudio Reyna, Brian Mcbride, and Tim Howard play in England. However, they alll play for underachieving clubs and their performances arn't much better. I hope the U.S does well, but there is no way they should be ranked 4th in the World.

P.S I knew someone was going to call my analogy out :002_ssmile: . The sterotype isn't quite true, but the English turn on a game and see the likes of Bonds, Mo Vaughn and Young of the O's and the impression sticks. My main point was just to say Baseball isn't as tiring as a soccer game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







×
×
  • Create New...