- Jul 19, 2009
- 949
- 0
- 0
I think that Italians have reduced their doping regime after that http://www.theguardian.com/football/2008/oct/08/europeanfootball.serieafootball
buckle said:Against Italy they were unreal. The Italians brought on a fast winger as final change (a guy called Cerci much in demand around Europe) and he was immediately triple teamed in searing heat during the last fifteen minutes. Against Greece they cracked a little so perhaps they were spooked by the recent tests. Greece themselves have had a big doping reputation since 2004. I suspect the Italians are doping less today and they struggle in domestic European tournaments which they used to dominate.
buckle said:CR run two top 10 teams into the ground to the point where even FIFA are moved to test 7 of their players after the the Italian game and this is not worthy of comment or speculation?
BradCantona said:Not particularly, no
This is the problem when speculation is based on results alone
Andynonomous said:Although you can't base it just on results, if you watch the matches, and see a team right on top of their opposition, every time they get the ball, all game, every game, you can be pretty sure something is up.
How "spirited" is the defense, is an obvious tell.
BradCantona said:Costa Rica were out on their feet against Greece. Campbell the star striker was a passenger for the last 15 mins of normal time / all of extra time
If anything Chile have been the team pressing high, not tiring... but they're out of the tournament now
bewildered said:Don't think CR are doped to any more sophisticated level than other teams. Perhaps they didn't have the same energy levels against Greece because of the Italy performance.
And I thought the Dutch took it very slow against Mexico in the first half and conserved energy for the second, so I agree somewhat with Lineker in their case. And perhaps playing a competitive 90 mins in that heat will affect them in their next game. Some of the fans had to move out their seats and into the shade during the match, so i can only imagine how draining that must have been to play in and ET was very close too.
buckle said:It's certainly of interest that NL knew how to conserve energy levels better than MX. Are Europeans that smart? CR played with 10 for an hour against GR which nullified any doping advantage.
Andynonomous said:I agree. I don't think teams "intentionally slow down" during part of their game to "conserve energy". When you play, your instincts take over, and you give a high effort (especially when the other team is pressing).
I think the talented teams that are not doped (as much) are out (England, Italy, Spain, Croatia, Switzerland), as well as the untalented teams that are heavily doped (South Korea, Usa).
What you have left over are the talented teams that do dope a lot (Brazil, Germany, Holland, Argentina...).
Andynonomous said:I agree. I don't think teams "intentionally slow down" during part of their game to "conserve energy". When you play, your instincts take over, and you give a high effort (especially when the other team is pressing).
I think the talented teams that are not doped (as much) are out (England, Italy, Spain, Croatia, Switzerland), as well as the untalented teams that are heavily doped (South Korea, Usa).
What you have left over are the talented teams that do dope a lot (Brazil, Germany, Holland, Argentina...).
del1962 said:All you have done there is judged performances and from that decided who is doped or not
I have a theory on how lethargic Italy and England looked, their first game was played in extremely demanding conditions and the subsequent long transfers meant for their next matches they where not sufficiently recovered.
del1962 said:All you have done there is judged performances and from that decided who is doped or not
I have a theory on how lethargic Italy and England looked, their first game was played in extremely demanding conditions and the subsequent long transfers meant for their next matches they where not sufficiently recovered.
thrawn said:Spain not doped? Hahahahahahahahaha.
Andynonomous said:I agree. I don't think teams "intentionally slow down" during part of their game to "conserve energy". When you play, your instincts take over, and you give a high effort (especially when the other team is pressing).
I think the talented teams that are not doped (as much) are out (England, Italy, Spain, Croatia, Switzerland), as well as the untalented teams that are heavily doped (South Korea, Usa).
What you have left over are the talented teams that do dope a lot (Brazil, Germany, Holland, Argentina...).
BradCantona said:Doping might be a major issue in football, it might not be. These kind of aimless speculation based on results alone does nothing to further the outing of such practices
Almeisan said:Is there any evidence that doping testing does anything to change the amount of doping going on?
Andynonomous said:Again, you keep repeating the straw man "you are just basing your suspicions on results", when I keep repeating that I am basing it on the observed speed of their defense.
Andynonomous said:I agree. I don't think teams "intentionally slow down" during part of their game to "conserve energy". When you play, your instincts take over, and you give a high effort (especially when the other team is pressing).
I think the talented teams that are not doped (as much) are out (England, Italy, Spain, Croatia, Switzerland), as well as the untalented teams that are heavily doped (South Korea, Usa).
What you have left over are the talented teams that do dope a lot (Brazil, Germany, Holland, Argentina...).
buckle said:Italy were not lethargic against Uruguay (66:33 passing stats for the first 45) - it was a bad call which changed the game. I suspect that was influenced by traditional anti-Italian bias by FIFA appointed officials. Whether LS's behaviour was itself driven by steroid abuse is also worthy of consideration. Most of the Uruguayans were also shattered after their CR game though.