FIFA World Cup 2010

Page 31 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
A

Anonymous

Guest
France getting what they deserved. .Should never have been in the world cup.
No consolation at all for the Irish, but its something at least.
 
Jul 19, 2009
1,861
3
10,485
Looked onside by a tiny bit. And even if it wasn't, it's still a goal now..I'm rooting for mexico, by the way..
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
its also really nice to hear/watch a game of football and be able to hear the crowd, and the drums and not those bloody vuvezulas..

Was the crowd noise made me look up from the computer and see the goal.

Ah.. turns out BBC have filtered the vuvuthings out, because of radio commentary they are still there well and truly.. Brilliant job by the bbc in removing them.
 
Jul 2, 2009
5,596
71
17,580
TeamSkyFans said:
France getting what they deserved. .Should never have been in the world cup.
No consolation at all for the Irish, but its something at least.

I object to this. Obviously the Henry goal shouldn't have counted, but even then it would still have gone to penalty kicks, and there's no guarantee Ireland would've won that. Yes, it should've gone to penalties, but France could've still won those and qualified.
 
Jul 19, 2009
1,861
3
10,485
France is really not looking good. Nothing like last time. Uruguay and Mexico through from this group. (too bad about the host eliminated).
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
334knqw.jpg
 
Jun 22, 2009
10,644
2
0
:D :D :D

TeamSkyFans said:
France getting what they deserved. .Should never have been in the world cup.
No consolation at all for the Irish, but its something at least.

amen brother, although as mentioned it was no guarantee for the Irish (they did deserve it though).

I'm over the moon. There is no team I detest as much as the french.

Mexico were the better team and deserved their win, and now France have an uphill struggle.

Epic Gesink Victory + Epic French defeat = Epic Night :D

---

btw it's not so much the ball, but the balls reaction to the altitude. Guarantee other balls (not all) would react similar in this climate.
And it should be noted also, that every nation had been given these balls four months ago, but only the bundesliga played with them --- this is because leagues like EPL and erdivise are binded to the nike sponsorship.
And I'm sure anyone else who has watched the bundesliga in the last few months (I know i have, it's my favorite league) can vouch that the ball did not react like this in Germany.
So yeah the notion that the balls are crap... is bullsh!t.
 
Jul 19, 2009
1,861
3
10,485
I really don't understand how france can be this poor. They've got the players, they just didn't do anything. Maybe that's what happens when you hire an astrologer for your manager.
 
Mar 10, 2009
2,278
4
11,485
zapata said:
Looked onside by a tiny bit. And even if it wasn't, it's still a goal now..I'm rooting for mexico, by the way..

It was offside, but Mexico deserves the win. France looked terrible (and I was cheering for them!).
 
Jul 19, 2009
1,861
3
10,485
Moose McKnuckles said:
France was as horrendous as the footballs being used at this Cup.

I think France is out, honestly. I don't see how they make the 2nd round.

they only have to beat south africa, which they should be capable of, and hope mexico and uruguay don't draw. and score enough goals to pass whoever loses out of M and U. Hope and think they won't, though.
 
Jul 2, 2009
5,596
71
17,580
Moose McKnuckles said:
France was as horrendous as the footballs being used at this Cup.

I think France is out, honestly. I don't see how they make the 2nd round.

Not impossible. If Uruguay beats Mexico 2-0, say, and France crushes South Africa 4-0 then France will go through on better goal difference.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Moondance said:
Not impossible. If Uruguay beats Mexico 2-0, say, and France crushes South Africa 4-0 then France will go through on better goal difference.

you really think uruguay and mexico will do anything other than draw?
 
Sep 21, 2009
2,978
0
0
Moondance said:
Not impossible. If Uruguay beats Mexico 2-0, say, and France crushes South Africa 4-0 then France will go through on better goal difference.

I wouldn't mind if Uruguay and Mexico make something like Germany and Austria did in 1982 and send the French back home.
 
Jul 19, 2009
1,861
3
10,485
mr. tibbs said:
It was offside, but Mexico deserves the win. France looked terrible (and I was cheering for them!).

I haven't studied the replays, but it looked onside to me. Just. Anyways, as I said, it doesn't really matter once the referee says it's a goal..
 
Jun 14, 2010
34,930
60
22,580
I hate France but the worst thing about this is the draw england now have.

For england the worst case scenario was that they would have to face France (who barely qualified and the worst of all the seeded teams) in the last 8 and that was by no means guaranteed.
Now to get to the semis they have to beat the following.

algeria
slovenia
ghana/ serbia/ australia
south korea/ greece/ uruguay/ mexico

Meanwhile in other parts of the draw Portugal, Germany, Spain, Netherlands, Brazil, Ivory Coast, Italy, Chille, Paraguay will all cancel eachother out.

Usually when someone gets an easy draw its because weaker teams have knocked out the big guns. But here england are simply given all the easier teams while the big guns have to fight eachother for the right to meet england in the last 4.

The equivalent of this in a tennis grand slam would be seeding Federer Nadal Roddick, Djokovic, Del Potro in one half of the draw and Murray + the girls under 15 singles in the other.
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
theyoungest said:
issoisso said:
To be fair to Verbeek, he also got his tactics horribly wrong in a miriad of different ways

Blablabla


Chill out dude, I'm not exactly the guy's biggest fan, but Australia losing 4-0 wasn't all down to tactics.

Oh, and by the way, Forza Svizzera!

You changed my post to "bla bla bla"? Seriously?
I argued he made a number of incredibly basic tactical mistakes that completely burned Australia out of the game and I detailed them in a rational manner, and your argument to the contrary basically amounts to "nyah uh!".

Nice. What level. What constructive critique.

EDIT: Oh right. I remember you know. You're the guy who always blindly defends every dutchman. Verbeek is dutch. It all makes perfect sense now.