Shak Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Disappointed, but happy with the performance at this tournament. Showed more promise (and offered better play) than most of the supposedly 'superior' teams who flopped out. The game in the U.S. is on a meteoric rise and will only continue to become more popular. The U.S. will win a World Cup in my lifetime and they'll do it before England win it again. The collective US footballing chest is out so far at the moment. Please don't make me regret cheering for you guys. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
triggs Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Belgium will definitely beat Argentina IMO. I agree, I think the European teams left in the tournament have shown a bit more than the South American big guns. Argentina play too slowly and Brazil are playing long ball when it's not natural to their game. Columbia are the exception, they've been the best team from that part of the world IMO. Don't see what Belgium have shown. They were average in the group and struggled to beat USA Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Belgium will definitely beat Argentina IMO. I agree, I think the European teams left in the tournament have shown a bit more than the South American big guns. Argentina play too slowly and Brazil are playing long ball when it's not natural to their game. Columbia are the exception, they've been the best team from that part of the world IMO. Don't see what Belgium have shown. They were average in the group and struggled to beat USA Nonsense again. They'd have won at a canter if not for Howard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 They've not won anything at a canter, and for the most part Howard's saves were fairly ordinary, even if he had to make 1 billion of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsley Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Belgium will definitely beat Argentina IMO. I agree, I think the European teams left in the tournament have shown a bit more than the South American big guns. Argentina play too slowly and Brazil are playing long ball when it's not natural to their game. Columbia are the exception, they've been the best team from that part of the world IMO. Don't see what Belgium have shown. They were average in the group and struggled to beat USA They flattered to deceive in the groups but were impressive last night imo, created a ton of chances. From an attacking perspective, Argentina haven't shown that sort of penetrative quality yet - imo it's mostly been hopeful give and go's just outside the penalty area that lead to nothing more often than not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Belgium will definitely beat Argentina IMO. I agree, I think the European teams left in the tournament have shown a bit more than the South American big guns. Argentina play too slowly and Brazil are playing long ball when it's not natural to their game. Columbia are the exception, they've been the best team from that part of the world IMO. Don't see what Belgium have shown. They were average in the group and struggled to beat USA I just think they have a bit more aggressive intent to their game and play at a higher tempo. For Argentina everything hinges on Messi and they don't look like they believe in their other players much. Belgium have Hazard and Lukaku so it's not like they are powder puff up front either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
triggs Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Belgium will definitely beat Argentina IMO. I agree, I think the European teams left in the tournament have shown a bit more than the South American big guns. Argentina play too slowly and Brazil are playing long ball when it's not natural to their game. Columbia are the exception, they've been the best team from that part of the world IMO. Don't see what Belgium have shown. They were average in the group and struggled to beat USA Nonsense again. They'd have won at a canter if not for Howard. Only saw from about the 60th minute onward but none of those saves were particularly outstanding. Only when Lukaku came on they started to create good chances Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 They'd have won at a canter if it wasn't for that pesky goalkeeper not letting them score. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
triggs Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 They wouldn't have won at a canter either because even if they had have got one goal in normal time, they would have retreated and let USA have the ball like they did in extra time Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Incidentally, this doesn't mean I think Argentina are going to facerape them or owt. I think half the reason this WC has been class is that the TOP teams have had flaws, and it's made every game a toss up. It's class. Such a difference from Man City vs Cardiff etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Just so Flip doesn't get what he wants. Brazil v. Belgium in the final. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
triggs Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Incidentally, this doesn't mean I think Argentina are going to facerape them or owt. I think half the reason this WC has been class is that the TOP teams have had flaws, and it's made every game a toss up. It's class. Such a difference from Man City vs Cardiff etc. Argentina and Belgium have had pretty identical tournaments so far. I do think that Switzerland are a good bit better than USA though Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanj Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 USA's "Athelete first, sportsman second" nature seems to be shifting a tiny bit. Though Yedlin is, quite blatantly, a professional sprinter. It's not healthy to be that fast. Not from what i've seen on other forums. Superior athletes + "sound fundamentals" is their mind state. I agree. They need some flair badly. They have nobody to create apart from Bradley who hasn't been great That player is Dempsey, but he was forced to play as a lone striker since the 20th minute of the Ghana game, and that completely neutralizes his ability to create. He needs a big target striker to play off of, which is why he's had such great success with Altidore for the U.S. team and with Martins for Seattle over the past year. Good news is, we've got a few young players coming up through the ranks who play as creative AMs, so I'm not too worried about filling the hole. did my tits in seeing clint up top. The setup needed a hard working grafter type up top with the creative outlet in behind. Dempsey is a terrible #9 iyam, just purely through his body language and lack of desire to constantly keep making runs & jostling with defenders. Plus Bradley did f***ing terribly when he was that high up, god knows why. He did so much better as a deep lying playmaker where he could survey the field. In the #10 role he seemed to just take too many touches, or not react quickly enough. How do you not take a back up target man? + honestly, despite his miss, Wondo was a much better option up there. IMO this was Klinsmann's biggest mistake. Yeah we maybe could've used Donovan for end of game heroics, but one of Terrence Boyd or even Eddie Johnson needed to be in the squad. 100% with this. I think our biggest flaw (and credit to how we still made it this far) was that we had 20 minutes of our 1st choice CF, Dempsey was then placed in that role which he's not suited for, and Bradley ALWAYS has looked better as a deep playmaker or box-to-box. Similar to comments about Cabaye looking better deeper as he's not the control or finesse to dribble around the box or create space to shoot. I think going forward our team has to use its pace in Yedlin, Fab Johnson, Chandler etc - tighten up the CM with Bradley sitting and getting a runner or another battler like Jones, Mix in the #10 playmaker role and have to get Green - Jozy - Johannson into a system that works. But yes, I'm still livid at Wondo, that miss man - could have fluffed the shot to Dempsey too! But we needed another big body target man to get the best out of Dempsey and think that was a miss on Klinsy's part. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hughesy Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Is there any reason why the Costa Rican national team (both present and past) has such a mixture of names? Seem to be majority 'Hispanic' names with a smattering of old school British names. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toon Hoser Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 The game in the U.S. is on a meteoric rise and will only continue to become more popular. The U.S. will win a World Cup in my lifetime and they'll do it before England win it again. It's funny seeing the same tired articles trotted out by the UK press every four years. "Will football ever become mainstream in America?" "Are Americans finally embracing soccer"? etc etc. Literally the same article re-printed every four years since USA 94. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanj Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 4 years ago there wasn't over 10,000 people crammed into a small "block party" that required overflow into an adjacent park in Orlando. 4 years ago, Dallas Cowboys didn't open their stadium for watch party. 4 years ago, TV markets and viewership was not even close to being this high. It's absolutely growing and it's fantastic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 It's dangerous to assume that football will become mainstream just because the World Cup was incredibly popular this time around. The WC is more about nationalism than it is about football. For football to really take off you need a healthy domestic league, but it's difficult to sell the MLS when anyone who's into the game knows that a vastly superior product exists in Europe. Massive amounts of money helps, so I'm not saying it's impossible, but there are limits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Belgium will definitely beat Argentina IMO. I agree, I think the European teams left in the tournament have shown a bit more than the South American big guns. Argentina play too slowly and Brazil are playing long ball when it's not natural to their game. Columbia are the exception, they've been the best team from that part of the world IMO. Don't see what Belgium have shown. They were average in the group and struggled to beat USA They flattered to deceive in the groups but were impressive last night imo, created a ton of chances. From an attacking perspective, Argentina haven't shown that sort of penetrative quality yet - imo it's mostly been hopeful give and go's just outside the penalty area that lead to nothing more often than not. Probably because basically every team Argentina has played as stuck 10 men in the box, while Belgium will be aware of Argentina's threat they will try and take the game to them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 They wouldn't have won at a canter either because even if they had have got one goal in normal time, they would have retreated and let USA have the ball like they did in extra time So for you fatigue doesn't come into it. Why Belgium sat back in the second period of extra time. Youre stating stuff as fact despite the circumstances not occurring. Belgium would've sat back had they scored. [emoji1] I'm not criticising the US team here. They worked their bollocks off and with a little bit of luck could even have won it. But it would be silly to say Belgium didnt deserve it after being dominant for most of the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 It's dangerous to assume that football will become mainstream just because the World Cup was incredibly popular this time around. The WC is more about nationalism than it is about football. For football to really take off you need a healthy domestic league, but it's difficult to sell the MLS when anyone who's into the game knows that a vastly superior product exists in Europe. Massive amounts of money helps, so I'm not saying it's impossible, but there are limits. MLS is healthy, just small. It helps that the league just signed their first massive TV deal. As long as the money keeps flowing, the league will continue to improve. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Incidentally, this doesn't mean I think Argentina are going to facerape them or owt. I think half the reason this WC has been class is that the TOP teams have had flaws, and it's made every game a toss up. It's class. Such a difference from Man City vs Cardiff etc. Argentina and Belgium have had pretty identical tournaments so far. I do think that Switzerland are a good bit better than USA though I'd rather have the US back 4 and keeper. Neither side has a good striker and the Swiss are better in midfield. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 They wouldn't have won at a canter either because even if they had have got one goal in normal time, they would have retreated and let USA have the ball like they did in extra time I was, quite obviously, not being serious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
triggs Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Incidentally, this doesn't mean I think Argentina are going to facerape them or owt. I think half the reason this WC has been class is that the TOP teams have had flaws, and it's made every game a toss up. It's class. Such a difference from Man City vs Cardiff etc. Argentina and Belgium have had pretty identical tournaments so far. I do think that Switzerland are a good bit better than USA though I'd rather have the US back 4 and keeper. Neither side has a good striker and the Swiss are better in midfield. You'd have Damarcus Beasley over Rodriguez? That's like the best left back in the world cup against the worst. USA have a better keeper I agree. Switzerland have a way better midfield and Drmic despite not being much of a goalscorer is better than clint Dempsey as a striker........ On Belgium winning at a canter. It simply wouldn't have happened. They were taking so many shots because they had USA pegged back. If they scored they would have sat back more and let USA into it. Its just the way football goes unless one team is way better than the other. Its a bit like saying in the Iran Argentina game that Iran could have hammered Argentina because they had a lot of chances Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now