First time since 1958. No USA either, but if you can't manage a win against Trinidad and Tobago, you deserve to go home in shame. India, China, Italy, Canada and the US should have their own international football tournament of losers in 2018 to rival the World Cup. We'll see if the Aussies join them.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2744 ... =editorial
Italy out of world cup
Italy out of world cup
"The final straw actually involved my mortal enemy vladimir, who you may or may not know is an insufferable, overposting asshat."
- ផោមក្លិនស្អុយ
- Daylight, I need Daylight !?!
- Reactions: 686
- Posts: 4718
- Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 4:42 pm
Italy failing to qualify is a big deal, USA surprising but not a big loss to the competition.
It’s going to be weird to have a World Cup without Netherlands and Italy.
It’s going to be weird to have a World Cup without Netherlands and Italy.
-
- I have some social problems
- Reactions: 35
- Posts: 514
- Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 4:47 pm
ផោមក្លិនស្អុយ wrote:Italy failing to qualify is a big deal...
I agree, they have been pretty appalling though and really don’t deserve to be there.
Another 0-0 /1-0 aggregate score line, I hope that is not a reflection of the kind of football that will be played at the World Cup!
Only 1 game in the Europe qualifiers has had more than one goal and the last 4 all finished 0-0
- Miguelito
- Ordinary Schmo
- Reactions: 219
- Posts: 7053
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:19 pm
- Location: Penh's Hill
I am sure there are a few happy Frenchmen out there, and some absolutely devastated Italians -- opposite feelings from 2006.ផោមក្លិនស្អុយ wrote:Italy failing to qualify is a big deal, USA surprising but not a big loss to the competition.
It’s going to be weird to have a World Cup without Netherlands and Italy.
-
- Damn, I just saw my Internet Bill !
- Reactions: 3
- Posts: 4420
- Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 3:04 pm
I'm sure that Canada, the US, China and India are devastated about not being in a tournament most of their citizens don't give a shit about.
Kind of funny though that Italy won't make it. Football is boring enough as it is though, so as mentioned the world cup doesn't need any extra 0-1 games. I'm happy Sweden is in. Less Latin flailing arms drama and injury faking, more actual playing.
Kind of funny though that Italy won't make it. Football is boring enough as it is though, so as mentioned the world cup doesn't need any extra 0-1 games. I'm happy Sweden is in. Less Latin flailing arms drama and injury faking, more actual playing.
- ផោមក្លិនស្អុយ
- Daylight, I need Daylight !?!
- Reactions: 686
- Posts: 4718
- Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 4:42 pm
I suppose you are right if you only equate excitement with goals. You are kind of dumbing down the game.LexusSchmexus wrote: Kind of funny though that Italy won't make it. Football is boring enough as it is though, so as mentioned the world cup doesn't need any extra 0-1 games
Italy have been renowned for tactical brilliance and innovation and were one of my favourite teams to watch in the last euros. They were a tad unfortunate to get drawn on the (France/Germany)side of the knockout stage. Could well have been finalists/winners with a kinder draw.
-
- Damn, I just saw my Internet Bill !
- Reactions: 3
- Posts: 4420
- Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 3:04 pm
I do equate excitement with goals, or at the very least a back-and-forth game with close calls. 90 minutes of passing, grown men falling like bowling pins from a slight brush, and the occasional shot from way out that goes 5m to either side of the goal isn't what I call exciting. Italy has long played a defensive game, which I've always found annoying to watch. You might call it tactical, I call it plain boring. Gimme the Dutch over the Italians any day. At least they play exciting, more explosive and aggressive football. If it were up to me, I'd make the goals a meter wider and 30cm taller, but what does a Russo-Scot know about Football? Can't say I grew up in an environment that really cared about the sport, though I did play a bit as a youth. They seriously need to get rid of lame injury faking and the corrupt joke of an entity that is FIFA.
- Miguelito
- Ordinary Schmo
- Reactions: 219
- Posts: 7053
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:19 pm
- Location: Penh's Hill
And when it comes down to it, goals are the only thing that matter. A team could have brilliant passes and control the field for 89 minutes of the game, but if they other team scores more in that one other minute that's all that matters.LexusSchmexus wrote:I do equate excitement with goals, or at the very least a back-and-forth game with close calls. 90 minutes of passing, grown men falling like bowling pins from a slight brush, and the occasional shot from way out that goes 5m to either side of the goal isn't what I call exciting.
I know that most would disagree, but American football is way more strategic and therefor more entertaining for me to watch. Some call it slow, with all the breaks, but every single play has so much nuance to it. If football (soccer) is the beautiful game, American football is the chess match. There's a reason it's growing in popularity to watch in both Europe and Mexico/Latin America.
- ផោមក្លិនស្អុយ
- Daylight, I need Daylight !?!
- Reactions: 686
- Posts: 4718
- Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 4:42 pm
Are you contradicting yourself here Migs.
You seem to promote goals as the most entertaining thing in football then say you prefer American footballs as it is much more strategic and therefore entertaining.
Can’t you appreciate the strategy/tactics contained within a football match? Or do you just want to see the ball stuck in the net?
American football isn’t for me. It too long, too stop/start, and too specialist (with regard to positions). There are two teams within a team - offence and defence.
I’m not actually sure American football is more strategic. I would say football is more fluid, less defined and perhaps much more difficult to notice strategy.
With American football the short snippets of play allows you to easily identify strategic plays.
With football it is more difficult to see things like a passing sequence with dummy runs which drags defenders out of position to create space for a teammate. Play doesn’t stop when a move breaks down and one move flows into the next.
You seem to promote goals as the most entertaining thing in football then say you prefer American footballs as it is much more strategic and therefore entertaining.
Can’t you appreciate the strategy/tactics contained within a football match? Or do you just want to see the ball stuck in the net?
American football isn’t for me. It too long, too stop/start, and too specialist (with regard to positions). There are two teams within a team - offence and defence.
I’m not actually sure American football is more strategic. I would say football is more fluid, less defined and perhaps much more difficult to notice strategy.
With American football the short snippets of play allows you to easily identify strategic plays.
With football it is more difficult to see things like a passing sequence with dummy runs which drags defenders out of position to create space for a teammate. Play doesn’t stop when a move breaks down and one move flows into the next.
- Miguelito
- Ordinary Schmo
- Reactions: 219
- Posts: 7053
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:19 pm
- Location: Penh's Hill
Miguelito wrote:And when it comes down to it, goals are the only thing that matter. A team could have brilliant passes and control the field for 89 minutes of the game, but if they other team scores more in that one other minute that's all that matters.LexusSchmexus wrote:I do equate excitement with goals, or at the very least a back-and-forth game with close calls. 90 minutes of passing, grown men falling like bowling pins from a slight brush, and the occasional shot from way out that goes 5m to either side of the goal isn't what I call exciting.
I know that most would disagree, but American football is way more strategic and therefor more entertaining for me to watch. Some call it slow, with all the breaks, but every single play has so much nuance to it. If football (soccer) is the beautiful game, American football is the chess match. There's a reason it's growing in popularity to watch in both Europe and Mexico/Latin America.
I certainly appreciate football, but it is very frustrating when your team loses after playing better most of the game due to one lucky goal. True, this can happen in any sport, but in a sport that has scores so low it seems to happen more frequently. If the final outcome is looking to be 0-0, 0-1, or 1-1 (for example), one simple mistake can drastically change the entire outcome.ផោមក្លិនស្អុយ wrote:Are you contradicting yourself here Migs.
You seem to promote goals as the most entertaining thing in football then say you prefer American footballs as it is much more strategic and therefore entertaining.
Can’t you appreciate the strategy/tactics contained within a football match? Or do you just want to see the ball stuck in the net?
I also understand the point you make about the tactics in football that often go unnoticed, and that the fluidity of the play is part of the challenge. I like and watch both games, don't get me wrong.
One of the things I like about American football is the salary cap for players. It's way too confusing with all of the nuances (guaranteed payments, etc) for me to understand completely, but it makes the league more competitive as a whole. What it has also done, inadvertently, is make one team a powerhouse (Patriots), because their players are willing to individually make less money for the sake of surrounding themselves with better teammates. Could you imagine if footballers acted that way?
- ផោមក្លិនស្អុយ
- Daylight, I need Daylight !?!
- Reactions: 686
- Posts: 4718
- Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 4:42 pm
Actually, that’s one of the reasons why I love it. Organisation, endeavour and luck can lead to a giant killing. It doesn’t happen as often as it seems because when it does happen it gets a lot of publicity.Miguelito wrote: I certainly appreciate football, but it is very frustrating when your team loses after playing better most of the game due to one lucky goal.
Would you rather the little teams get steamrollered every time? Surely that would be more boring.
- ផោមក្លិនស្អុយ
- Daylight, I need Daylight !?!
- Reactions: 686
- Posts: 4718
- Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 4:42 pm
Nope. Can’t imagine it. In practice though how could that work?Miguelito wrote: One of the things I like about American football is the salary cap for players. It's way too confusing with all of the nuances (guaranteed payments, etc) for me to understand completely, but it makes the league more competitive as a whole. What it has also done, inadvertently, is make one team a powerhouse (Patriots), because their players are willing to individually make less money for the sake of surrounding themselves with better teammates. Could you imagine if footballers acted that way?
American football is largely within one country with one overseeing body (AFAIK).
Football competition is worldwide, with oversight from individual Fa’s UEFA, CONCACAF etc and FIFA.
If one country implements a wage structure then all the top players will go somewhere which doesn’t have the same restrictions.
It’s not as if American football players have many other options of places to play. Do you think so many would stay and play in USA if there was suddenly a Chinese super league started up which was paying astronomical salaries?
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
-
Unexpected detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the prepandemic period in Italy
by Fred Edwards » Wed May 05, 2021 5:37 am » in Cambodia Speakeasy - 7 Replies
- 1263 Views
-
Last post by v12
Wed May 05, 2021 1:56 pm
-
-
-
Foreigners banned from entry: Italy, Germany, Spain, France and the United States
by GMJS-440 » Sat Mar 14, 2020 9:16 am » in Cambodia News - 164 Replies
- 25320 Views
-
Last post by v12
Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:29 pm
-
-
- 1 Replies
- 216 Views
-
Last post by Mike Farce
Fri May 12, 2023 10:39 am
-
- 14 Replies
- 1564 Views
-
Last post by Orichá
Mon Aug 30, 2021 1:00 pm