After running through the archives of the World Cup, I'm really surprised how much the format has changed.
Even more surprising is how arbitrary most of the results can be seen to be: if you consider a decision on penalties to be a "draw", in 1990 Yugoslavia, Argentina, Germany, Italy and England could've all been in the final. 1986 three of the quarter finals went to penalties (fortunately, the only one not to involved the eventual winners). In all, the number of qf/sf games going to penalties does make you wonder why people take it quite so seriously.
Portugal coach Luiz Felipe Scolari said his side's inability to score was the reason for their World Cup semi-final exit at the hands of France in Munich.
I'd blame 'his ability to pick a team capable of scoring'? After all, they ended up with no strikers on the field due to tactical substitutions and they even took plenty of fit ones!
Dio wrote:I'd blame 'his ability to pick a team capable of scoring'? After all, they ended up with no strikers on the field due to tactical substitutions and they even took plenty of fit ones!
Which makes him a tactical mastermind next to Sven .
Rev. Stuart Campbell wrote:Henry, you cheating, diving French cunt.
Compared to the Portugese, who were falling over for fun - again! -
Who could blame them, though? They'd just gone behind to a penalty given for a blatant dive, I imagine they felt they were owed one. Carvalho's eyes are totally on the loose ball, nowhere near Henry, and you can see him falling long before the contact as he drags his foot along the ground looking for something for it to trip over.
I don't buy it. The Portugese were trying it on BEFORE the penalty. Ronaldo tried to get a penalty twice.
I think the greater problem was Scolari getting the tactics and substitutions wrong again. As I said before, England snuffed out Simao, Pauleta, Figo, Ronaldo (who looks out of place playing as a centre forward), Postiga and Viana. France did pretty much the same.
Dio wrote:The one in which Portugal seemed to offer virtually no attacking threat at all?
Not the France game, then. He was Portugal's most dangerous player by miles, going past the French right-back at will, but when he got to crossing position he had nobody to aim for except that useless crapsack Pauleta.
http://wosland.podgamer.com "You are a fucking bastard smeghead that continues
to prove people and pretend is doing nothing."
Rev. Stuart Campbell wrote:Ronaldo "snuffed out" against France? What game were YOU watching?
The one where he resorted to diving.....or do i need to narrow that down for you?..oh you remember, he was wearing his maroon shirt.
Bill Shankly:
"I was the best manager in Britain because I was never devious or cheated anyone. I'd break my wife's legs if I played against her, but I'd never cheat her."
Dio wrote:The one in which Portugal seemed to offer virtually no attacking threat at all?
Not the France game, then. He was Portugal's most dangerous player by miles, going past the French right-back at will, but when he got to crossing position he had nobody to aim for except that useless crapsack Pauleta.
So he still might as well not have been on the pitch then?
To be fair, he did look like Portugal's one genuine attacking threat. The French resorted to marking him with three men every time he got the ball, and even then, likely as not, he got a cross in, won a corner, or beat them. As a footballer I think he's grown up in this tournament.
This still doesn't stop him being a cheating sack o' shit, though.
Take that back, or I shall be forced to call you a cunt
.
