Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FIFA World Cup 2014 Schedule and Team Previews

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • rah
    replied
    Originally posted by Main_Brain View Post
    This is actually how Italy won in 2006 :shrug:
    Which is one reason why some teams do it. I just don't and never will like it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Imran Siddiqui
    replied
    Spain is not having a good tourney... 1-0 Chile

    Leave a comment:


  • Main_Brain
    replied
    Originally posted by rah View Post
    When you're a couple of goals up I can defend that type of playing or if there's only a few minutes left to go. But to do it with only a one goal lead and 88 minutes to play is stupid.
    This is actually how Italy won in 2006 :shrug:

    Leave a comment:


  • Imran Siddiqui
    replied
    Which is shocking (Mexico-wise) because in qualification they were abysmal. Almost didn't make it - had to do a one game playoff.

    Leave a comment:


  • dannubis
    replied
    Belgium sucked hairy donkey balls... Let's hope they'll grow as the tournament progresses.
    Mexico was great.

    Leave a comment:


  • Imran Siddiqui
    replied
    What in the world has gotten into Mexico?

    Leave a comment:


  • N35t0r
    replied
    USa

    Belgium

    Leave a comment:


  • Imran Siddiqui
    replied
    WOW! Belgium, trailing most of the match, yet dominating play scores twice late, 70th and 82nd minute to take the lead. Let's see if Algeria has got anything left for the equalizer.

    Leave a comment:


  • rah
    replied
    As I said, not an expert. They just didn't seem aggressive on their passes. It was like they were playing prevent.
    My thinking is more that if you're in their half, it's harder for them to score. They seem satisfied to just clear it.

    But not going to complain. When they tied it, I started to sense doom, and was happy to be proved wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • Imran Siddiqui
    replied
    If safe passes are easier to defend, they wouldn't be all that 'safe' would they?

    Leave a comment:


  • rah
    replied
    If you're only trying safe passes, maybe not. Safe passes are more predictable so easier to defend. But then, I'm not an expert by any means.

    Leave a comment:


  • Imran Siddiqui
    replied
    I'd say that you have to be able to pass the ball effectively if you want to be aggressive .

    Leave a comment:


  • rah
    replied
    The passing I'll partially agree with, since if they were being more aggressive it might not have been that awful.

    I will agree 100% on your flank comment.

    Leave a comment:


  • Imran Siddiqui
    replied
    Well there was also the fact that the US team couldn't string a pass together. It was embarrassing. Also the defending along the flanks was piss poor.

    Leave a comment:


  • rah
    replied
    I think it appeared that Ghana dominated because of chicken **** coaching on the US's part. The US played like it was protecting a lead for most of the game. (Which is was)
    When you're a couple of goals up I can defend that type of playing or if there's only a few minutes left to go. But to do it with only a one goal lead and 88 minutes to play is stupid.
    And it almost cost them. I've always hated that type of thinking in any sport. (similar to what the black hawks did when they would get up by two goals and eventually lose.)

    Keep playing like how you got there. I'd much rather go down in flames that way than playing a prevent type of game.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X