If the Dutch do get to the final, I'll nail my colours to the mast by making my missus strip off and stand at the front room window.
Where is it you live again Dave?I'm off out to walk the dog when the game finishes. And nailing my English colours to the mast, I'll come over, spend shitloads of money, and be heading home again before she's even got the lid back on the agar jelly!
I'm not. Haven't had a football get for a while so had a little nibble on him as anytime scorer on what I thought were generous odds. Never realised he plays behind the goalkeeper these days.
This game has penalties written all over it. Doubt the Germans are losing too much sleep whoever wins. Two very mediocre looking sides.
They both defend well though. No pushovers for a German side that is overall better than both of these but was flattered by a truly awful Brazil. Pens in the Final I reckon.
I'm not. Haven't had a football get for a while so had a little nibble on him as anytime scorer on what I thought were generous odds. Never realised he plays behind the goalkeeper these days.
Because those bloody Dutch invaded Chatham in 1667 and I'll NEVER forgive them. The worst defeat in Royal Navy history. How anyone could EVER consider supporting the Dutch is beyond me. Utter madness.
Poor game tonight which neither side really deserved to win. I have a sneaking feeling however that the Argies might just turn the Germans over on Sunday.
Because those bloody Dutch invaded Chatham in 1667 and I'll NEVER forgive them. The worst defeat in Royal Navy history. How anyone could EVER consider supporting the Dutch is beyond me. Utter madness.
What's your reasoning?
Half dutch buddy..
Isn't it time you half apologized for nicking our ships in the 17th century?
Really enjoyed last night's match. Two well organised teams playing well organised pacy technical football full of good tackling and closing down that in the end nullified each other. If you're American or don't really follow or understand top class football you would find the match the day before exciting and yesterday's boring. But, as Tony Cascarino says in his article today in the Times (printed below) the Brazil v Germany match was '...an embarrassment to the game.'
This was football returning to normality. This was earth to football. Brazil v Germany wasn’t football, it was oh-my-God grotesque, a sporting version of hara-kiri in which professionals abandoned any form of professionalism, and although Holland and Argentina served up something far less eye-catching, it was also a match in every form.
Where Brazil were naive and flailing, last night presented us with two proper teams who were well drilled, well honed and organised. It reminded me of a top European match, a Champions League game between leading clubs where both were conscious of their opponents’ strengths and flaws. In that sense, it was reassuring.
If the tournament has taught or reinforced anything it is that there is no scope to carry people in the modern game. Dirk Kuyt was almost playing as a right back for Holland — a man who was once a £10 million striker at Liverpool — but the point is that he is capable of playing to a system, with discipline and, in doing his job, can be relied upon to give his all. And both coaches are tactically astute.
If Luiz Felipe Scolari has to take the lion’s share of responsibility for the Brazilian debacle, a flipside followed; composed and sensible, a close encounter where both teams understood that the game could be decided by a piece of magic and doing their utmost to prevent it happening. To repeat: it was a match.
In a wider context, perhaps the Argentinians have given us an insight into how South American football will develop. The host continent has given us some electrifying moments; Chile were aggressive in style, Uruguay were hit and miss, but I’m not sure that any of them have quite been as organised as you have to be at the pinnacle.
Argentina have had that. They have given very little away in any of their fixtures and, as with Louis van Gaal, they have set their stall out first and foremost not to be opened up. When Arjen Robben ripped Spain apart, any coach worth his salt would have reacted, looked at ways of negating him and countering. By contrast, had Brazil taken any notice of Germany?
Lionel Messi attempted to find space all across the park, searching for an opening, which is exactly what Diego Maradona used to do, but he was also forced to do it. The days of man-to-man marking are gone, but teams now defend in numbers, building walls of players, and the Dutch have done that more as the competition has elapsed. Messi came up against team organisation.
When you examine the previous night, you have to focus on Brazil ahead of Germany simply because their dereliction of duty was so extreme, a once-in-a-lifetime implosion, impossible to take your eyes off but an embarrassment to the game.
Holland and Argentina were the epitome of modern sport, Rafael Nadal against Novak Djokovic, ceding nothing and waiting for the other to blink.
Really enjoyed last night's match. Two well organised teams playing well organised pacy technical football full of good tackling and closing down that in the end nullified each other. If you're American or don't really follow or understand top class football you would find the match the day before exciting and yesterday's boring. But, as Tony Cascarino says in his article today in the Times (printed below) the Brazil v Germany match was '...an embarrassment to the game.'
This was football returning to normality. This was earth to football. Brazil v Germany wasn’t football, it was oh-my-God grotesque, a sporting version of hara-kiri in which professionals abandoned any form of professionalism, and although Holland and Argentina served up something far less eye-catching, it was also a match in every form.
Where Brazil were naive and flailing, last night presented us with two proper teams who were well drilled, well honed and organised. It reminded me of a top European match, a Champions League game between leading clubs where both were conscious of their opponents’ strengths and flaws. In that sense, it was reassuring.
If the tournament has taught or reinforced anything it is that there is no scope to carry people in the modern game. Dirk Kuyt was almost playing as a right back for Holland — a man who was once a £10 million striker at Liverpool — but the point is that he is capable of playing to a system, with discipline and, in doing his job, can be relied upon to give his all. And both coaches are tactically astute.
If Luiz Felipe Scolari has to take the lion’s share of responsibility for the Brazilian debacle, a flipside followed; composed and sensible, a close encounter where both teams understood that the game could be decided by a piece of magic and doing their utmost to prevent it happening. To repeat: it was a match.
In a wider context, perhaps the Argentinians have given us an insight into how South American football will develop. The host continent has given us some electrifying moments; Chile were aggressive in style, Uruguay were hit and miss, but I’m not sure that any of them have quite been as organised as you have to be at the pinnacle.
Argentina have had that. They have given very little away in any of their fixtures and, as with Louis van Gaal, they have set their stall out first and foremost not to be opened up. When Arjen Robben ripped Spain apart, any coach worth his salt would have reacted, looked at ways of negating him and countering. By contrast, had Brazil taken any notice of Germany?
Lionel Messi attempted to find space all across the park, searching for an opening, which is exactly what Diego Maradona used to do, but he was also forced to do it. The days of man-to-man marking are gone, but teams now defend in numbers, building walls of players, and the Dutch have done that more as the competition has elapsed. Messi came up against team organisation.
When you examine the previous night, you have to focus on Brazil ahead of Germany simply because their dereliction of duty was so extreme, a once-in-a-lifetime implosion, impossible to take your eyes off but an embarrassment to the game.
Holland and Argentina were the epitome of modern sport, Rafael Nadal against Novak Djokovic, ceding nothing and waiting for the other to blink.
He makes some good points but the bottom line is that it has to be entertaining to people beyond the stats obsessed fraternity and Netherlands - Argentina was diabolical.
For me the World Cup has to be entertaining, you have to create something special (as Brazil did in 1970) to leave that great legacy of remembrance behind.
If all of this boils down to being 'well organised' and battling out 1-0 wins or penalty shoot-out wins then you have to ask if its worth it?
The World Cup is a chance to show what you can do, an opportunity to create unforgettable footballing memories, if it comes down to becoming so big that everyone is terrified of losing then it will have greatly lost its way because it should be about creating something not about avoiding defeat.
He might be right but I want to be entertained when I watch two sides (I dont support) in a semi-final of a world cup. That, for the neutral was was dull as dishwater.
Comments
Mainly admiring that good honest pro Dirk Kuyt.
And nailing my English colours to the mast, I'll come over, spend shitloads of money, and be heading home again before she's even got the lid back on the agar jelly!
Pens in the Final I reckon.
Just remembered that I predicted this final line-up eight weeks ago. Wish I'd put some money on it!
Understandable though, not like they have Messi in their......
This was football returning to normality. This was earth to football. Brazil v Germany wasn’t football, it was oh-my-God grotesque, a sporting version of hara-kiri in which professionals abandoned any form of professionalism, and although Holland and Argentina served up something far less eye-catching, it was also a match in every form.
Where Brazil were naive and flailing, last night presented us with two proper teams who were well drilled, well honed and organised. It reminded me of a top European match, a Champions League game between leading clubs where both were conscious of their opponents’ strengths and flaws. In that sense, it was reassuring.
If the tournament has taught or reinforced anything it is that there is no scope to carry people in the modern game. Dirk Kuyt was almost playing as a right back for Holland — a man who was once a £10 million striker at Liverpool — but the point is that he is capable of playing to a system, with discipline and, in doing his job, can be relied upon to give his all. And both coaches are tactically astute.
If Luiz Felipe Scolari has to take the lion’s share of responsibility for the Brazilian debacle, a flipside followed; composed and sensible, a close encounter where both teams understood that the game could be decided by a piece of magic and doing their utmost to prevent it happening. To repeat: it was a match.
In a wider context, perhaps the Argentinians have given us an insight into how South American football will develop. The host continent has given us some electrifying moments; Chile were aggressive in style, Uruguay were hit and miss, but I’m not sure that any of them have quite been as organised as you have to be at the pinnacle.
Argentina have had that. They have given very little away in any of their fixtures and, as with Louis van Gaal, they have set their stall out first and foremost not to be opened up. When Arjen Robben ripped Spain apart, any coach worth his salt would have reacted, looked at ways of negating him and countering. By contrast, had Brazil taken any notice of Germany?
Lionel Messi attempted to find space all across the park, searching for an opening, which is exactly what Diego Maradona used to do, but he was also forced to do it. The days of man-to-man marking are gone, but teams now defend in numbers, building walls of players, and the Dutch have done that more as the competition has elapsed. Messi came up against team organisation.
When you examine the previous night, you have to focus on Brazil ahead of Germany simply because their dereliction of duty was so extreme, a once-in-a-lifetime implosion, impossible to take your eyes off but an embarrassment to the game.
Holland and Argentina were the epitome of modern sport, Rafael Nadal against Novak Djokovic, ceding nothing and waiting for the other to blink.
For me the World Cup has to be entertaining, you have to create something special (as Brazil did in 1970) to leave that great legacy of remembrance behind.
If all of this boils down to being 'well organised' and battling out 1-0 wins or penalty shoot-out wins then you have to ask if its worth it?
The World Cup is a chance to show what you can do, an opportunity to create unforgettable footballing memories, if it comes down to becoming so big that everyone is terrified of losing then it will have greatly lost its way because it should be about creating something not about avoiding defeat.
That, for the neutral was was dull as dishwater.