2006 FIFA World Cup

[Ellester]

what everyone is really watching during the world cup matches

 

world cup babes

 

Go Brasil!

Edited July 7, 2006 by Ellester

[Atreides]

Ok, here's my World Cup XI from what I've seen so far.

 

I'll go 4-3-3

 

GK: Lehman

- Buffon could be here but Lehman's got more chances to show what he can do. Saved a few penalties too.

 

RB: Trabelsi - from Tunisia.

CB: Cannavaro - 'nuff said

CB: Marquez - tough as nails and great decision making and leadership

LB: Grosso - could be Sorin but Grosso's solid in the back and supports well plus he comes up with important goals (or penalties).

 

CM: Riquelme - classy creative attacker

DCM: Pirlo - deep playmaker and setpiece taker

CM: Zidane - still as classy as ever but losing pace

 

RF: Kaka - one of the few Brazilian players that sparkled

Striker: Klose - classic goalpoacher that works hard

LF: Torres - pace, skill and strength

Edited July 7, 2006 by Atreides

[Guest The Architect]

Nice World Cup XI. My World Cup XI goes like this...

 

3-4-1-2

 

GK Buffon

RCB Sagnol

CB Cannavaro

LCB Neill

RM Emerton

RCM Pirlo

LCM Zidane

LM Riquelme

CAM Deco

RS Klose

LS Crespo

Edited July 7, 2006 by The Architect

[Lucius]

what everyone is really watching during the world cup matches 

 

world cup babes

 

Go Brasil!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not really no.

[Atreides]

I would have picked Zabrotta for RB (perhaps obvious choice) but I think Trabelsi ran the Tunisian team. Plus love him or hate him, there is no denying Cristiano Ronaldo is a fabulous player.

[mkreku]

My World Cup XI:

 

Classic 4-4-2

 

Goalkeeper:

 

Jens Lehman - He's dominated his penalty area in every game.

 

Defense:

 

Fabio Cannavaro - He can do it all.

Philipp Lahm - Unexpectedly good and mature in his game.

Gianluca Zambrotta - Those Italians sure know their defense.

Willy Sagnol - He keeps on running and creating chances for the offense.

 

Midfield:

 

Zidane - He's like a king among pawns.

Michael Essien - Powerful, fast and intelligent.

Michael Ballack - And he is still getting better..

Patrick Vieira - Strong and skillful and can be defensive.

 

Forwards:

 

Miroslav Klose - Deadly in front of the goal.

Andriy Shevchenko - Took Ukraine on his back and went far.

[metadigital]

I was in Naples for the Italy 3, Ukraine 0 match ... and still in Italy for the Italy 2, Germany 0 match ... incomparable experience ...

[J.E. Sawyer]

Pretty terrible game from Portugal. Two goals from Schweinsteiger with an own goal in between. Gomes makes a nice late game header but then follows it up with a dive in the penalty box in the 90th minute. To top it all off, Portugal now has the record for most yellow cards in WC history.

[Lucius]

Great performance by Germany, I loved this match! They didn't even have Ballack... =D

[Gromnir]

every time we sees a stretcher come on the field and take a guy off, a guy who miraculously springs to his feet after he reaches sidelines, we recalls #'s comments 'bout "footballer" toughness. somebody gots to send us a crate of that magic spray the world cup medical personel gots access to. a world-class athelete, writhing in agony one moment, leaps up and runs back onto field w/o so much as a limp after some clown sprays his shin with some sorta magic concotion? amazing stuff.

 

the fact that cheating bastards like the portugese team could makes the semi's in this tourney, along with having any world cup game decided on penalty kicks, not to mention the seemingly arbitrary manner in which time is kept on the field, pretty much killed whatever interest we were trying to drum up for this thing...

 

though we does admit that the absence o' commercials is a nice change... but by the same token we finds it disturbingly easy to multi-task whilst watching a soccer match. is kinda like watching golf. just give us the espn 30 second spot.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited July 8, 2006 by Gromnir

[Lucius]

As opposed to padding yourselves up with 7 inches of kevlar and a helmet... yeah okay you guys are so much more macho! LOL @ Grommie!

[Gromnir]

american football is violent enough that w/o such padding, people would become seriously injured and even die. is not like rugby where people is constantly moving. i am not sure why euros always bring up padding. no doubt all those knights in plate were candy-arses 'cause they chose to wear armour 'stead o' simply toughing it out like Real men.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Lucius]

Well, despite the fact that such a comparison is rather outrageous in itself, the knights didn't get commercial breaks every 30 seconds.

[Enoch]

though we does admit that the absence o' commercials is a nice change... but by the same token we finds it disturbingly easy to multi-task whilst watching a soccer match.  is kinda like watching golf.  just give us the espn 30 second spot.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Reminded me of this ESPN opinion piece. Excerpt:

 

Soccer, it turns out, is the perfect sport to watch while you're doing other things. Maybe it's that constant soothing sound, a never-ending din of cheering and singing in strange languages. Maybe it's that you only have to glance at the TV every so often. Whenever something seems like it might happen, the play-by-play guy warns you with the rise in his energy level. There's always time to catch a play before it unfolds

[Gromnir]

Well, despite the fact that such a comparison is rather outrageous in itself, the knights didn't get commercial breaks every 30 seconds. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

is not an outrageous comparison. both activities is ones in which the participants wore/wear protective garb to prevent, as much as possible, serious bodily injury. if football players could wear more protection w/o it detracting from their performance we would happily endorse such a thing. am not sure how the sport that requires less protective garb somehow gets considered more macho by lucius, but we guess that is the euro pov for you.

 

as to the enoch link...

 

*chuckle*

 

thanks

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Lucius]

Well, despite the fact that such a comparison is rather outrageous in itself, the knights didn't get commercial breaks every 30 seconds. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

is not an outrageous comparison. both activities is ones in which the participants wore/wear protective garb to prevent, as much as possible, serious bodily injury. if football players could wear more protection w/o it detracting from their performance we would happily endorse such a thing. am not sure how the sport that requires less protective garb somehow gets considered more macho by lucius, but we guess that is the euro pov for you.

 

as to the enoch link...

 

*chuckle*

 

thanks

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is, one is war, the other is a sport in which the players stop everytime they've managed to run a short distance.

At any rate, I didn't say football was macho, or more so than American football, that was the little chorus of voices known as Gromnir who uttered those words. I just said I hardly find anything macho about the before mentioned players. The male-male buttslapping also deducts a few macho points btw.

Oh and I'd prefer if you'd call me a Scandinavian next time you wanna stereotype. )

[Gromnir]

am gonna assume that you is being purposefully obtuse. Gromnir did not compare american football to war. we compoared the need for protection in both activities and noted that machismo did not suffer comensurate with amount o' protection. jousting, for instance, were not war. it were a sport. regardless, the point is that knights, whether in practice, sport, or actual combat, wore considerable padding so as to prevent serious bodily injury. clearly the addition o' armour did not detract from the machismo o' knightly pursuits.

 

furthermore, euro footabllers often use padding, but they not need near as much as American Footballers or knights... they gots a little slip o' plastic to protect their shins, 'cause that is all that is required.

 

hockey, whatever its shortcomings, typically does not suffer from a lack o' machismo. lack o' teeth? perhaps, but lack o' machismo? goalies can barely move with all their accumulated padding.

 

again, the claimed relationship 'tween diminishing machismo and increased padding (which were your claim,) clearly has no credible basis save for a a rather milksop attempt at defending euro football. also, Gromnir did not bring up American Football... you did... as a direct comparison 'tween machismo in euro v. American Football.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gorth]

every time we sees a stretcher come on the field and take a guy off, a guy who miraculously springs to his feet after he reaches sidelines, we recalls #'s comments 'bout "footballer" toughness.  somebody gots to send us a crate of that magic spray the world cup medical personel gots access to.  a world-class athelete, writhing in agony one moment, leaps up and runs back onto field w/o so much as a limp after some clown sprays his shin with some sorta magic concotion?  amazing stuff.

Potion of Extra Healing.

 

 

[Atreides]

Lol @ Schweinsteiger's shots. If only football was so easy. Pauletta's looked isolated up front for the whole tournament.

[Lucius]

am gonna assume that you is being purposefully obtuse.  Gromnir did not compare american football to war.  we compoared the need for protection in both activities and noted that machismo did not suffer comensurate with amount o' protection.  jousting, for instance, were not war.  it were a sport.  regardless, the point is that knights, whether in practice, sport, or actual combat, wore considerable padding so as to prevent serious bodily injury.  clearly the addition o' armour did not detract from the machismo o' knightly pursuits.

 

furthermore, euro footabllers often use padding, but they not need near as much as American Footballers or knights... they gots a little slip o' plastic to protect their shins, 'cause that is all that is required. 

 

hockey, whatever its shortcomings, typically does not suffer from a lack o' machismo.  lack o' teeth?  perhaps, but lack o' machismo?  goalies can barely move with all their accumulated padding. 

 

again, the claimed relationship 'tween diminishing machismo and increased padding (which were your claim,) clearly has no credible basis save for a a rather milksop attempt at defending euro football.  also, Gromnir did not bring up American Football... you did... as a direct comparison 'tween machismo in euro v. American Football.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From what I gathered from your post (can be hard to read) you're still making the absurd comparison between a dark age knight and a US footballer who, as I said before, gets a small break almost constantly. If battle had commenced, there wasn't time to stop for a commercial break laddie! )

And no, I said it as a direct response to your whining about the behavior of SOME football players and their magical spraycan.

At any rate, it must be very time consuming to write in such a strange way as you do.

[Guest The Architect]

I've got another 'soccer conspiracy', this time, it's focused on Italy. Ever since '1970', Italy has made the World Cup Final every twelve years...

 

In 1970, they made the final and lost to Brazil...

In 1982, they made the final and beat West Germany...

1n 1994, they made the final and lost to Brazil again...

And now, in 2006, they've made the final against France...

 

If you look at this record, it has gone L,W,L and now '2006' should be 'win'. Now funny enough, in 1982, there was a match fixing scandal in the Italian League just before the World Cup and guess what? Italy won the World Cup! There has been a match fixing scandal in the Italian League this year so will history repeat itself meaning Italy will win?

 

Well, to me, it seems fitting. Who better for Italy than to play France? I see this World Cup Final as the revenge of Euro 2000, where France beat Italy. As most people know, Zidane is retiring from International and Club Football after the World Cup, and since Zidane is such a legendary player, well then it only seems fitting that he gets to play all the way up until the final, make Zidane go out in a memorable way, but for me, this time, I think France will lose, it is Italy's destiny to win this World Cup.

 

I'm predicting that the match will finish '1-1' after 90 mins, with France scoring first (Zidane will probably score if France do score) then Italy equalising (anyone's guess who will score, if Italy score).

 

Then I can see Italy winning '2-1' in extra time, a reversal of the score in Euro 2000, I'm betting that Italy's equaliser will be fairly late in the game too, say some time in the last 15 minutes of the match.

 

Lets see if I'm right, I should not have been naieve before and looked at Italy's history, I have Italian heritage, and know all too well about the corruption of the Italians, and was foolish to overlook the past and beleive that England was going to win, so my final prediction is a '2-1' win AET to Italy.

[Tigranes]

Right, then when Italy wins you're right, when France wins the evil conspiracy has been thwarted by the force of supraromanticism tha has bestowed its light on Zizou.

 

I'm on board, where do I sign?

[Baley]

 

Perfect 10?

[Tigranes]

Pirouette, check, Screaming agonised face, check, entire body in the air, check

 

Obscuring ref view, fail.

[J.E. Sawyer]

 

Perfect 10?

There are so many great things about this clip. First, Ronaldo doesn't even make contact with the defender. Second, the side of his body that could have touched the defender is not the side he grabs mid-air. Third, he's crying to the ref halfway through his leap. Fourth, he basically gave up an excellent position to shoot on goal so he could dive.

 

If anyone wonders why people hate Crynaldo and, by extension, Portugal, they just need to watch this video over and over again.