2006 FIFA World Cup

[Daaave]

Yeah, it was harsh on West Ham, I was rooting for them as well, just really unlucky. If that ball in extra time had fallen to anyone other than Harewood it would have been smacked in the back of the net and West Ham would be celebrating winning the FA Cup now.

[Guest The Architect]

Ah, am I the only one that thought that the FA Cup Final wasn't a very good game? Sure, I agree it was very entertaining, it was action-packed and full of drama but some of the skills demonstrated from both teams were just awful, especially the defending, sure it was good 'eye-candy' open attacking soccer but it was by no means a very 'professional' match, that match reminds me of our lunch-time (school) muck around soccer, where everything is just random, laid back and lazy but when it comes down to the real-thing, the proper games you pull your head in, focus and play some good soccer, not confused, all-over-the-place, schoolboy backyard amateur garbage.

 

I don't expect many people to agree with me, but yes, that FA Cup Final was very exciting, but as far as demonstrating a high skill level goes, nope, it wasn't a very skilled game of soccer, there was a lot of confusion and communication problems from both teams in that match, it was high-scoring because both teams were not very well organized and naturally were going to pay the price by them both having goals scored against them. By the way, four of those six goals were bloody bizarre, but Gerrard's two goals were brilliant.

Edited May 14, 2006 by The Architect

[Atreides]

Yeah, besides Gerrard's strikes which takes good technique there wasn't much genuine quality on show.

[jaguars4ever]

Theo Walcott is definitely one to watch out for. He's indisputably the fastest footballer around. I believe he ran the 100m in 10.9 seconds, and that was with him casually slowing down towards the end. Also, that was around a year or so ago, and he's a much quicker and refined player now.

 

But not only does he have extreme pace, but he

[Atreides]

Cool. Then why didn't Wenger cap him?

[jaguars4ever]

Well, despite Arsenal being on the verge of becoming European Champions in their best ever European campaign, their domestic season has been their worst in 10 years. Arsenal only just managed to secure a Champions League position on the very last day (with some bad luck from Tottenham who slipped from 4th after being there for 5 months).

 

According to Wenger,

 

"I was never in a situation where we could take a risk with him because we always needed the points. We were eight points behind Tottenham and in a knock-out situation in the Champions League."

 

--

 

But I never thought he'd actually be quicker than Thierry Henry!

 

It looks like Sven's going to at least use him as a Super-Sub, if not a first team starter.

Edited May 14, 2006 by jaguars4ever

[Atreides]

So basically Wenger couldn't risk him because the games were hugely important. What more the World Cup.

 

With huge risks you'll need huge expected/potential payoffs, which is why Sven's taking Walcott along. With the crappy strikers England has now that's probably not a bad idea but I'm seeing Walcott as a last gamble if they're losing the game etc. A kind of "can't get any worse so might as well try it" situation.

[Tigranes]

Pretty much what jags has said. Also, just when Wenger decided to use Squad Rotation and Walcott might have got a game in, he... uh.. got an injury. meaning he only played 3-4 reserve games.

 

That said, it does sound reckless to take him, but how much game time is he going to get, really? especially if Rooney and/or Owen are subtitued for Defoe after watching the injury progress? (they can do so until june 8.)

 

Of course, considering that Arsenal played for over a month with 7-11 first team players injured, he had to get a knock at some point.

Edited May 14, 2006 by Tigranes

[jaguars4ever]

Sven seems to favor contingency options. To say that Peter Crouch is far from a World Class player is a gross understatement. But being one of the tallest players in the world at 6'7", he offers England a target man, should Sven opt for a long ball stratagem. Similarly, Walcott's blistering pace will simply skin players - leaving them no chance if he gets goal side of them - especially in the latter stages of a game when the opposition has tired legs.

Edited May 14, 2006 by jaguars4ever

[Baley]

He's indisputably the fastest footballer around. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obafemi_Martins

[Tigranes]

Walcott: 10.9s, with casually slowing down at the end.

[Baley]

Can you back up that statement?

 

I can only find 11.52s as a record 100 metres.

 

Look, you guys are over-glorifying him way too early, he's young and he's fast, but making statements like him being the indisputably fastest footballer around are gratuitous.

 

Hype

Edited May 14, 2006 by Baley

[jaguars4ever]

Martins is a good (albeit disreputable) player, but I wouldn't believe everything you read in Wikipedia since anyone can edit it. Also, if the man himself made this claim I'd take it with a pinch of salt - as he and his agent have been investigated in the past of LYING about his age (for higher player valuation) and his nationality (for international football eligibility)

 

Further, Nigeria aren't even in the World Cup. So for purposes of this discussion, it would not be inaccurate to say that Theo Walcott is the fastest player featuring in this tournament - a tournament not famous for its tight marking. Skeptics such as yourself are too quick to write him off. For zonal marking seems to be ineffectual against Walcott, as he gets in the space between defenders before surging past them. If England's opposition fail to utilize man-marking against Theo, it will be to their determent.

Edited May 14, 2006 by jaguars4ever

[Baley]

I've seen Martins play. He's incredibly fast. I was browsing wikipedia at the time and that's why I posted the link. A photo would have sufficed, it was meant to show that the adverb "indisputably" is horribly gratuitous. I believe the accusations brought against Martins have proved to be false, but thank you for attacking his character.

 

And you did not claim that Walcott is the fastest player at the world cup (Henry and Carlos are there too, so it's gonna be a tough one to prove) you claimed that he is the indisputably fastest around.

 

I'm waiting for proof on the 10.9s run.

[Atreides]

What makes you think Walcott will have the space to accelerate into? World Cup games are quite pragmatic.

[Tigranes]

Well, I personally don't care too much about who's the fastest: so dispute my statistic if you will, but I think the more important point is that he is going to be one of the fastest footballers around, and probably a good deal faster than anybody he'll come up against in the WC (if he plays at all).

 

Robert Pires, among others, have released the information from the club that Walcott beats Henry in many of the training sprints. Again, this could be disupted to no end, but there's no dobut that he is very very fast, notably more than others.

 

Atreides: that's like saying pragmatic / well-defended teams render fast players useless. This is not true, or we'd see 0-0 games every day. It's impossible to cover Walcott, or Henry, or Martins, or whoever perfectly, or even very well.

Edited May 14, 2006 by Tigranes

[Atreides]

Ok, so this is an Arsenal thing now. Makes more sense.

[Tigranes]

Ok, so this is an Arsenal thing now. Makes more sense.

 

Ey? Walcott = Arsenal player. Thus Walcott stats/info will be related to Arsenal.

[jaguars4ever]

I've seen Martins play. He's incredibly fast.

I've seen them both play, but I'd say Theo's acceleration is slightly quicker.

 

--

 

I believe the accusations brought against Martins have proved to be false, but thank you for attacking his character.

I understand English isn't your first language, but you really ought to understand the meaning of "attacking" before you accuse me of it. Regardless, Martins reputation in the footballing world is marred. Thus, claiming he's 'disreputable' is not 'attacking his character'. Moreover, I said he was 'investigated in the past for lying' - which is true, as if there was no doubt of whether he lied, there wouldn't be an investigation. I never claimed that he did lie.

 

--

 

And you did not claim that Walcott is the fastest player at the world cup

Yes I did. Re-read my last post, dear Baley. I understand your confusion, since in English we call it a 'double-negative'.

 

--

 

Henry and Carlos are there too, so it's gonna be a tough one to prove

We need to reevaluate and be realistic about our concept of proof. We could shift the burden of proof on the journalists, coaches or players themselves (which would hardly net us any usable information), or we can accept the reports we're given at face value. Choosing the latter, the Arsenal staff have already stated that Walcott's acceleration is faster. This article even states that,

 

"A slight upper body is still catching up with the legs that propel Walcott faster than Henry over 15 yards, although the more powerful Frenchman has the upper hand over longer sprints."

 

But by your exclusionary definition none of this is considered proof, right? Hmm, using that logic I guess Martins wasn't proven 'innocent' afterall, but was proven to have the better (perhaps more expensive) lawyers, no?

 

As for Roberto Carlos, he's in the advanced stages of his career and has lost some of the pace he used to have. If you watched him in the Champions League Quarter-Final against Arsenal, you may have noticed players like Hleb and Eboue left him in the dust.

 

--

 

I'm waiting for proof on the 10.9s run.

I read this from an article from last week's newspaper. Incidentally, would you be so kind as to link me to reliable (non-Wiki) source for Martins' run? If you can't, then don't worry about it. But thanks in advance.

[Baley]

I've seen them both play, but I'd say Theo's acceleration is slightly quicker.

 

I've seen them both play, but I'd say Martins' acceleration is slightly quicker.

 

I understand English isn't your first language, but you really ought to understand the meaning of "attacking" before you accuse me of it.  Regardless, Martins reputation in the footballing world is marred.  Thus, claiming he's 'disreputable' is not 'attacking his character'.  Moreover, I said he was 'investigated in the past for lying' - which is true, as if there was no doubt of whether he lied, there wouldn't be an investigation.  I never claimed that he did lie. 

 

at

[Aponez]

The winner of the World Cup will be Espa

[Baley]

We're going to keep this going, aren't we?

 

Look, my point was that you shouldn't use the adverb indisputably so freely. It's hardly fact. That's all I'm saying.

[Tigranes]

Who cares? Geez, don't get the thread closed.

[Baley]

Wanna bet he'll insult my English again?

[jaguars4ever]

at