Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ManuGinobili

The Official World Cup 2010 thread

Recommended Posts

I agree mostly with Caco. I will explain why:

 

Nobody is saying Spain is not good. But there are 2 important things:

 

1- Brazil, Argentina, Italy, England and Germany will play the WC too

 

2- They have proven over the years to not have what it takes to win the Cup

 

I have seen Spain play, but not as much as you do. I think their ball movement is sound, and they have certainly developed a game speed far superior than most of their competitors. Also, Casillas, Puyol, Torres, D. Villa (the one I like the most, actually), Cesc, Iniesta, S. Ramos. These are important names. But compare them to Kaka, L. Fabiano, J. Cesar, Ronaldinho, Robinho, Lucio, Adriano, and they fade IMO.

 

But guess what? Football is more than names. Look at my national team playing. Messi is a disaster. I mean a 5-year old kid could play better than him when he wears light blue and white. I think he is as overrated as the Spanish National right now. I realise he is excellent in Barcelona, but until he proves me anything for Argentina, he wont be even near the great ones (Maradona, Kempes, Passarella, Burruchaga, and so on).

 

And also, why all the fuss about the EURO 08? In south America, when a team wins Americas Cup is quickly forgotten. Thats no indicator whatsoever. Also the Confederations Cup. Here the only thing that matters is the World Cup. Who cares about winning this continental things if you couldnt face Brazil or Argentina?. The same here. If we win Americas Cup, we could be maybe 1 day celebrating. If we win the WC, the country explodes (more than the usual, I mean).

 

And for last, who said Forlan and Torres arent on the same level? Forlan is completely amazing. I mean have you seen a striker kick with his left foot (being right) from 30m and score as easily as he does?. I think he is much better than Torres.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EnFuego    1

quote:
Originally posted by ManuGinobili:

 

And also, why all the fuss about the EURO 08? In south America, when a team wins Americas Cup is quickly forgotten. Thats no indicator whatsoever. Also the Confederations Cup. Here the only thing that matters is the World Cup. Who cares about winning this continental things if you couldnt face Brazil or Argentina?. The same here. If we win Americas Cup, we could be maybe 1 day celebrating. If we win the WC, the country explodes (more than the usual, I mean).

 

 

hmmm. Because finding out who's better between Brazil and Argentina is never going to be as exciting as the second best national tournament in the world.

 

England, France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, Holland, and Italy in one tournament. Are you kidding me? You're going to compare that to America's Cup?

 

As for the rest of your post, your opinion is your opinion but I just don't get this obsesion with what a country has done in the past?

 

Start looking at current games instead of history books. What had France ever done in the World Cup before 1998? Nothing of note, but they went in with the best generation of players the country had ever produced and won the tournament.

 

I know for a fact you have not seen Torres play more than a handful of games if you still think Forlan is better. No one who has would agree with you.

 

I find it ironic that you said that Football is more than names because you are the one caugh up in names. You are more impressed with a name player past his prime (Ronaldinho) than with younger players who are actually better than him right now. Have AC Milan call Liverpool and offer Ronaldhino for Torres and see how quickly the line goes dead. I'm not even sure (Dunga isn't either) that he'll even make the team for the WC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:
Originally posted by EnFuego:

quote:
Originally posted by ManuGinobili:

 

And also, why all the fuss about the EURO 08? In south America, when a team wins Americas Cup is quickly forgotten. Thats no indicator whatsoever. Also the Confederations Cup. Here the only thing that matters is the World Cup. Who cares about winning this continental things if you couldnt face Brazil or Argentina?. The same here. If we win Americas Cup, we could be maybe 1 day celebrating. If we win the WC, the country explodes (more than the usual, I mean).

 

 

hmmm. Because finding out who's better between Brazil and Argentina is never going to be as exciting as the second best national tournament in the world.

 

England, France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, Holland, and Italy in one tournament. Are you kidding me? You're going to compare that to America's Cup?

 

As for the rest of your post, your opinion is your opinion but I just don't get this obsesion with what a country has done in the past?

 

Start looking at current games instead of history books. What had France ever done in the World Cup before 1998? Nothing of note, but they went in with the best generation of players the country had ever produced and won the tournament.

 

I know for a fact you have not seen Torres play more than a handful of games if you still think Forlan is better. No one who has would agree with you.

 

I find it ironic that you said that Football is more than names because you are the one caugh up in names. You are more impressed with a name player past his prime (Ronaldinho) than with younger players who are actually better than him right now. Have AC Milan call Liverpool and offer Ronaldhino for Torres and see how quickly the line goes dead. I'm not even sure (Dunga isn't either) that he'll even make the team for the WC.

 

The comparision of the confederations cup and copa america to the european championship is laughable. You quite simply do not get bad teams in the euros. The confederations cup is the equivalent of a friendly tournament in my opinion. I actually think the European championship is harder to win than the world cup believe it or not. The world cup contains many poorer football nations. Teams like Australia, Canada, Honduras, New Zealand, North Korea, Algeria and Chile would have no chance of qualifying if they were placed in the European section. Teams like Russia, Croatia, Ireland, Sweden, Ukraine, Bosnia, Czech Rep, Turkey, Belguim and Romania are all better teams by some considerable difference and failed to qualify.

 

In my opinion the only top class sides outside of Europe are Brazil, Argentina, Ivory Coast and possibly to a lesser extent - Ghana, Cameroon and Mexico.

 

As for Forlan I dont agree that he is top class because unlike Torres he hasnt proved himself on the international stage or established himself in BOTH the premier league and primera league. Infact he was awful in England at Man Utd

 

Of the Brazilian players you named I would only class one of them as a game changing type player - Kaka. L. Fabiano and J. Cesar havent done anything yet. Robinho has to be one of the most overated players on the planet - he did nothing at Real and has done nothing at Man City. Ronaldinho is a shell of the player he once was and will be lucky to make the squad.

 

 

Look at the squad that played England - Julio Cesar (Internazionale), Doni (Roma), Maicon (Internazionale), Daniel Alves (Barcelona), Luis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also thought I would post a British Article on the thoughts of Brazil after they played England recently. The writer talks about how Dunga has assembled a squad with less skill and talent than previous squads but has them working together as a team and maximising their tactics. Its an interesting read with this debate about Brazil and Spain going on in this thread.

 

Brazil Refine Tactics For The World Cup

 

Unsurprisingly England's under-strength line-up looked like a collection of players. Brazil, meanwhile, looked like a team - and for this, plenty of credit has to go to Dunga.

 

I've been critical of Brazil's coach in the past and doubtless will be again in the future. For what it's worth, my preference would be for more football and a better range of passing from the central midfield duo.

 

But pleasing me, or those who think along similar lines, is not going to be high up on Dunga's list of priorities. He goes about things his way, and, with no previous coaching experience, what stands out is the clarity of his concepts. His team consistently seem to have a clear idea of what they are trying to achieve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:
Teams like Russia, Croatia, Ireland, Sweden, Ukraine, Bosnia, Czech Rep, Turkey, Belguim and Romania are all better teams by some considerable difference and failed to qualify.

 

Ok, hear both your points, and they are fair. Even though, I dont think European teams are as strong as you think, but well...

 

And you should consider that France played AT HOME while winning their only WC.

 

I am not a South American proud, or nothing even remotely close to it, but Ecuador who finished 6th and out of the WC, has a good team too. Paraguay and Chile grew up a lot lately.

 

And while you think that this is a competition between Brazil and Argentina, I must inform you that (apparently you havent heard), Bolivia, who was in the last place of the standings, beat both of them in La Paz, and even tied with them in Brazil. Paraguay beat both of them in Asuncion. Peru tied against both. Colombia beat Argentina and tied Brazil.

 

Maybe you should inform yourself a little more before speaking, and not only count Europe for your considerations, since it shows your lack of knowledge of other places where football is played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Caco    0

I think the Euro is far more difficult than the South American cup. Even now that Mexico is playing, that is out of disscution.

 

However, I do think you underestimate a little bit some of the South American teams.

Chile is playing great, Paraguay is very difficult to beat, and Argentina and Brazil are Argentina and Brazil.

 

Of the european teams listed, I would consider Chile and Paraguay above all of them except Sweden, Ireland and Czech Republic. They are at the same level or above the other teams on that list.

 

Saying that the Euro is more difficult than the WC is going too far.

European teams know each other very well, and play similar styles of football. When going to the WC, they have to play opponents they don't know very well, and there's usually one or two strong european teams out in the first round.

 

I do think tough, that the champion will always be an european, or Brazil or Argentina.

 

As for my comments on Spain, my arguments were oriented to say, that even when I rank them second, there's a bigger chance of them being an upset, than other teams.

Usually, they should win games, since they are the better team, but from second round and on, there's a bigger chance of them being beaten (

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:
Originally posted by ManuGinobili:

quote:
Teams like Russia, Croatia, Ireland, Sweden, Ukraine, Bosnia, Czech Rep, Turkey, Belguim and Romania are all better teams by some considerable difference and failed to qualify.

 

Ok, hear both your points, and they are fair. Even though, I dont think European teams are as strong as you think, but well...

 

And you should consider that France played AT HOME while winning their only WC.

 

I am not a South American proud, or nothing even remotely close to it, but Ecuador who finished 6th and out of the WC, has a good team too. Paraguay and Chile grew up a lot lately.

 

And while you think that this is a competition between Brazil and Argentina, I must inform you that (apparently you havent heard), Bolivia, who was in the last place of the standings, beat both of them in La Paz, and even tied with them in Brazil. Paraguay beat both of them in Asuncion. Peru tied against both. Colombia beat Argentina and tied Brazil.

 

Maybe you should inform yourself a little more before speaking, and not only count Europe for your considerations, since it shows your lack of knowledge of other places where football is played.

 

Dont get me wrong I think Paruguay are a good team I usually pick them as my dark horse to do well. As for Bolivia you and I both know they have a very good advantage when they play at home thanks to playing their matches at a stupidly high altitude. I'm going to guess that the only games they won against decent teams were at home?

 

I dont think the other South American teams are poor by any stretch of the imagination I think some are very decent - like you mentioned Columbia, (though the only player I recognise these days is Falcao)Uruguay and Chile are certainly capable of pulling of an upset. I just think if they were to play say the Czech Republic or Sweden or Croatia or Russia then those South American teams would more than likely struggle.

 

I would probably place teams like Chile and Uruguay on a par with a team like the Ukraine. A decent team that inflicted Englands only dropped points in their qualifying group but lack the consistency to play at a high enough level against good teams on a regular basis.

 

I certainly think that one of the other 3 teams from South America will pull off 1 or 2 surprising results, I just dont see them progressing past the second round.

 

I hope they prove me wrong as I always find games more interesting when its between two teams from different continents due to the significant differences in style of play and tactics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ullan    0

for a change of direction from who you reckon will finish 1,2,etc - who are your dark horses for the tournament?

 

I reckon serbia & ghana could be interesting

 

the US showed in the confederations cup that they have great heart and hustle, but I don't think they could last the stretch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:
Originally posted by adsm:

for a change of direction from who you reckon will finish 1,2,etc - who are your dark horses for the tournament?

 

I reckon serbia & ghana could be interesting

 

the US showed in the confederations cup that they have great heart and hustle, but I don't think they could last the stretch

 

Hmmmm its an interesting one, how about we name one from each nation?

 

South America - Paraguay

North America - Mexico

Asia/Oceania - Australia

Africa - Ivory Coast

Europe - Serbia

 

I think you could take your pick with the African nations - Cameroon, Ivory Coast and Ghana are all capable of mixing it with the big boys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Caco    0

quote:
Originally posted by crisby pancakes:

quote:
Originally posted by adsm:

for a change of direction from who you reckon will finish 1,2,etc - who are your dark horses for the tournament?

 

I reckon serbia & ghana could be interesting

 

the US showed in the confederations cup that they have great heart and hustle, but I don't think they could last the stretch

 

Hmmmm its an interesting one, how about we name one from each nation?

 

South America - Paraguay

North America - Mexico

Asia/Oceania - Australia

Africa - Ivory Coast

Europe - Serbia

 

I think you could take your pick with the African nations - Cameroon, Ivory Coast and Ghana are all capable of mixing it with the big boys.

 

South America - Chile (even tough they have the same flaws I find in Spain, they are playing extremely well. Watch out for Alexis Sanchez and Chupete Suazo)

 

North America - Mexico (always gets to at least the second round, but not much further)

 

Asia/Oceania - Australia (New Zealand is not good, Korea and Japan only succeeded when at home)

 

Africa - Ivory Coast (as you can imagine, I think Drogba rules, and they have lots of good players in important teams in Europe)

 

Europe - None (I don't think the teams that are not candidates will do well in the world cup, unless you consider Portugal or Holland as not candidates)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EnFuego    1

South America - Chile - why not

North America - USA - are they still underated?

Asia/Oceania - Japan - Tulio

Africa - South Africa (If South Korea could do it, why not)

Europe - Denmark - just like '86 again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×