World Cup Qualifiers.

[Viking]

Yes, people expect him to excel in the national team, because that's what great players do, and there are countless examples of it throughout history.

 

[outlaw_member]

Yes, people expect him to excel in the national team, because that's what great players do, and there are countless examples of it throughout history.

But if the NT isn't designed for you to excel than there is little the player can do. Henry was very underwhelming for the French NT but it was so obvious why he couldn't perform in the same way as he did for Arsenal. France were an incredibly defensive side who only attacked with 3-4 players, thus hindering Henry from playing his best game. This is almost identical to the circumstances that Ibrahimovic played under at Inter Milan. Not to mention that Sweden are currently a relatively weak NT who aren't going to make a player look great. I thought the fact that even Denmark beat them told a million stories.

Like who? I guarantee you that there aren't many who excelled under the same conditions as Ibrahimovic.

 

[thegame24]

Worst world cup in decades? did you see WC 2002? the worst of all time and also fixed for the home nations which made me sick to my stomach.

 

[Alfonso]

Gurgen, Italy Germany was the best game in that World Cup, entertainment wise, football wise, quality wise, you name it.

France were not entetaining? There games against Spain and Brazil were, and the renascence of Zidane on the world football stage was very entertaining too. His performane against Brazil was very memorable and iconic.

The final was also entertaining, if it was not the greatest game ever it still had high tension, great players and drama. Name me a better World Cup final in recent years?

As for the Euros, ironically, Turkey (sorry Game) were the most entertaining and interesting team I thought.

And yes, agree with Game, 2002 was so bad it should go down as void.

 

[xcdude24]

The bottom line is that teams like New Zealand or even secondary European nations rarely make the drama that the big boys like Argentina and Portugal do. As a neutral, I want to see as entertaining of a World Cup as possible. A maradona-managed Argentina playing anyone is infinitely more entertaining than watching Bahrain play Ukraine in a quarterfinal match.

That's not just based on logic or whatever, that's just what I prefer as a neutral.

 

[GaelForce22]

I agree with alf. Before anyone mentions greece 04 to me i must say that was different.

You would say that! But I agree with both of you - a world cup without Ronaldo, Messi (and to a lesser extent Maradona) would be ridiculous.

 

[Klaus Daimler]

Yes, people expect him to excel in the national team, because that's what great players do, and there are countless examples of it throughout history.

Now you're just rubbing it in. He has been excelling in the national team more often than not, at least relative to the level of the team itself. He'll never come even close to winning a big competition with them though, but that doesn't mean that he hasn't performed well. I've already pointed out a couple of great examples and I'll be happy to link to a few more. In the game against Denmark he created two goals, and though the first one was indeed offside the second one should probably have stood. It's a bit tedious to say that he failed to impress just because that sorry excuse for a team didn't had it in them to perform for ninety minutes - even when the world cup was depending on it.

 

[Viking]

Yes, people expect him to excel in the national team, because that's what great players do, and there are countless examples of it throughout history.

Now you're just rubbing it in. He has been excelling in the national team more often than not, at least relative to the level of the team itself. He'll never come even close to winning a big competition with them though, but that doesn't mean that he hasn't performed well. I've already pointed out a couple of great examples and I'll be happy to link to a few more. In the game against Denmark he created two goals, and though the first one was indeed offside the second one should probably have stood. It's a bit tedious to say that he failed to impress just because that sorry excuse for a team didn't had it in them to perform for ninety minutes - even when the world cup was depending on it.

Well, I never said he didn't perform, I just said that using the Swedish team as an excuse for when he doesn't perform is silly, because great players deal with it. Great players are able to drag the entire team to their level (though not all the time), instead of just having to rescue the team when the **** hits the fan. A prime example is Michael Laudrup against Nigeria in 1998.

 

[Gurgen]

Gurgen, Italy Germany was the best game in that World Cup, entertainment wise, football wise, quality wise, you name it.

France were not entetaining? There games against Spain and Brazil were, and the renascence of Zidane on the world football stage was very entertaining too. His performane against Brazil was very memorable and iconic.

The final was also entertaining, if it was not the greatest game ever it still had high tension, great players and drama. Name me a better World Cup final in recent years?

As for the Euros, ironically, Turkey (sorry Game) were the most entertaining and interesting team I thought.

And yes, agree with Game, 2002 was so bad it should go down as void.

I really don't know how to respond to this, we must have totally different views as to what constitutes a good football game. Tension does not equal quality.

By the way, Zidane's performance against Brazil was terrible. All he did was do meaningless pirouettes in the centre circle and ruin Henry's game, like in the other matches.

The fact that Zidane (who did nothing amazing) was the 'star' of that WC proves how ****ing **** it was.

 

[Klaus Daimler]

Great players are able to drag the entire team to their level (though not all the time), instead of just having to rescue the team when the s**t hits the fan. A prime example is Michael Laudrup against Nigeria in 1998.

Really? As I recall it, Laudrup was pretty invisible in the group stages of that tournament and Denmark only advanced because they were facing blueberry nations like Saudi Arabia and South Africa. Peter Möller scoring within three minutes against Nigeria probably helped to ease the pressure too. Möller also took the freekick ten minutes later on which Brian Laudrup scored on the rebound. How hard is it to perform in a team that is two-nil up within the first 13 minutes? And why is Denmark putting four goals past a defensively * team a prime example of the class of Laudrup, while Ibrahimovic scoring a backheel against a far superior Italy on the other hand is merely seen as "rescuing the team when the **** hits the fan"? I sense some double standards here.

 

[Tony Montana]

Well, you have hindsight on your side, before the finals did you think Russia would have done better than both of the two World Cup finalists?Also, I dont think I ever said that a Euro feating Spain and Holland was a bad thing.

Look back the last World Cup, the two best teams football wise were France and Italy, which was only two years before the Euros, so what would you have said about their inclusion in that final? The majority of both sets of players were playing in Euro 2008.

No, Arsenal should win the European Cup because we are a big team with big player, have a good tradition in the CL over the past decade, featured in the final etc. Portugal have never won the World Cup before but if they miss out then it would be considered a blow to the compeition as they are seen as a 'big nation'.

Hindsight?

During that whole competition, it was clear that Spain, Holland, Russia and even Turkey were the best teams in that tournament. Italy and France were very poor in general.

You were clearly pissed off that both those nations got knocked out or were in danger of not getting out of their group.

And only a month ago or ao you said you couldn't care less about Portugal missing out.

 

[Clrnc]

Crucial facts
-Argies only won once away this campaign
-Uruguay only lost once at home this campaign
-Argentina haven't won at Uruguay for 33 years

Lineup

------Muslera
Scotti Lugano Caceres
------Gargano
Maxi Pereira Rogriguez
-------Perez
---Forlan--Suarez


---------------Romero
Otamendi Demichelis Schiavi Heinze
Jonas Mascherano Veron DiMaria
-----------Messi Higuain


And immediately Uruguay almost score twice. Very very close. All over Argentina at the moment who is hanging on by a thread

 

[Thommybhoy]

Very entertaining from the start. Uruguay really close on several occasions.

 

[AnthonyG]

Argentina looks like crap. (They'll win 3-0 now).

 

[Clrnc]

Their only threat is Angel Di Maria.

Other than that it has all been Uruguay

 

[thegame24]

Poor line up and tactics from the legend.

Put messi wide and bring riquelme back, needs a team that can pass it about then let messi loose

 

[Invincible]

Di Maria is Argentina's own version of Abou Diaby. Weren't we linked with him before? Thank **** nothing materialized.

And Maradona is a spastic for playing Shiavi when Walter Samuel is available.

 

[USArsenal]

Chile beating Ecuador 1-0... if these results stand, then Argentina go thru by the skin of their teeth and Uru will get the PO spot

 

[Thommybhoy]

Chile 1-0 up v Ecuador, so Argentina to see World Cup after all.

74th min Funny from Lugano still 0-0

 

[Thommybhoy]

1-0 Argentina by Bolatti