Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It isn't about FIFA in this case.

http://www.football-oranje.com/world-cup-1978kidnapconspiraciesand-another-dutch-final-defeat/

Actually, I think Scotland had some sort of memorable game as well.

Quote

The game against Scotland is still remembered as one of the all time classic World Cup games, thanks to Archie Gemmills jinking run and finish, while Johnny Reps blast from 30 yards into the top corner wasn’t too bad either.

But a good article, one can believe what they want. I think it was a pretty awful World Cup where Peru threw a match for Argentina to advance. Lots of articles on it and all world cups.

...

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

He has a couple of lines through the rest of the article On Alf Ramsay: ’He didn’t know the players like Walter Winterbottom, he was a bit naive at first. To be honest, the lads took the pis

Great piece in The Times today talking to England players from 1954 until 2014. Bryan Douglas talks about ‘58 and ‘62. It’s probably behind a paywall, so:      

Bullshit. They were nasty and tried every dirty trick in the book. Got what they deserved - out. 

Posted Images

6 minutes ago, Audax said:

So, I'm sure one has read up or remembers how Argentina made the Dutch wait for the National Anthem.

Accusations of speed use by the Argies, that's pretty well known.

Throwing games for Argentina to advance, grain shipments from Peru, call it a great World Cup. We can all read up on it ourselves.

By the way, this is why they play these games at the same time now, so no one can cheat.

 

 

 

 

I thought that was because of 1982 when West Germany and their neighbours Austria passed the ball to each other with no shots  for 90 minutes to knock Algeria out , who had played the previous day

EDIT:  It was that game that prompted the same day for games 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/jun/13/1982-world-cup-algeria

Edited by perthblue02
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Argentina 78 was pretty good, unless you come from Jockland.

The Peru game against Argentina was iffy to say the least. And is disliked it when in 74 & 78 you had no knock out stages and instead had another group stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ewood Ace said:

For me this World Cup already ranks alongside 1970 as the best World Cup I have seen. And I think it is going to get even better when the knock out stages commence.

I was too young to remember 1966 but for me the 1970 tournament will never be beaten. Pele, the incomparable Brazil side, the best England team we've had and the first tournament in colour under glorious sunshine.

I Don't think the tournament this year is particularly high on quality but the intrigue comes from the fact that none of the fancied sides have particularly impressed to date. So it's extremely open.

Hate to say it but England have a puncher's chance but only if we can keep Kane fully fit and firing. Still Don't expect us to win it yet though.

Edited by RevidgeBlue
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Baz said:

Also assuming Brazil top their group, we have to lose to Belgium, it's a much easier route to the semi-finals.

I'm of the opposite opinion. A win builds momentum, something that England never get at tournaments. Most fans complain about England's defence. Another game playing together will do them good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, speeeeeeedie said:

I'm of the opposite opinion. A win builds momentum, something that England never get at tournaments. Most fans complain about England's defence. Another game playing together will do them good.

Also, if you're going to win it you're going to have to meet the best at some stage anyway. Might as well get it out of the way early.

Link to post
Share on other sites

France, Argentina, Uruguay, Portugal, Brazil and possibly Colombia versus Russia, Spain, Croatia, Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland and Japan. Is very possible (and we kick off last of all the group's, so we'll know for certain). 

Understand the you have to beat the best  to win it argument, but one poor game against the first lot and we're home, poor game versus some in the second half (bar Spain), and you could still progress.

Let the other side of the draw knock each other out, pick up suspensions etc. 

If it was Rovers in the FA Cup would you sooner beat United, City and Spurs and get to the quarter final, or play Barnsley, Oxford, Brentford, Luton etc and beat Southampton in the final?

Edited by Baz
.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Switzerland aren't being stupid. They are playing for 2nd place (and that right side draw).

Serbia appear to have a duff striker than couldn't even score against Rovers ?

Edited by Husky
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Husky said:

Switzerland aren't being stupid. They are playing for 2nd place (and that right side draw).

Serbia appear to have a duff striker than couldn't even score against Rovers ?

Serbia look technically proficient with little end product. They knock it around well but have to lump it high for Mitrovic as he can't do anything else.

Brazil haven't impressed either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ewood Ace said:

Brazil have basically spent the last 20 minutes passing to Neymar so he can score, the problem is Neymar is not as good as he is hyped up to be and is not in the same class as Coutinho.

For me Neymar is rather like Raheem Sterling in being a player I just Don't get.

They must play well at times when I'm Not watching them but whenever I watch them live I'm left wondering what all the fuss is about.

Messi on the other hand is the complete opposite. An absolute genius on a completely different plane to his team mates even in sides as good as Barcelona or Argentina.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

We have to play to win. We need to build a head of steam, and I could see anyone knocking us out, so I wouldn't get too clever in trying to pick which half of the draw we are in.

You don't need to be 'clever', - as the last game to kick off, and at zero risk of elimination, we are in the perfect position to choose, because of the last 2 performances.

If Belgium are already talking about resting half their team, why wouldn't we follow the same logic?  How much credit / impetus can you take from winning the game if the Belgians are happy for second place anyway?

The only thing resting on tomorrow's game is if we finish top or second. An opportunity to give tired players, those with knocks, those on a booking a game off, and some who haven't had a game a run out.

The competition is about who's there at the end, and winning the thing. No one will care if we avoid the tough half of the draw, and in just a couple of years no-one will even remember. League cup for example -Spurs routed Chelsea in a pulsating derby, there first win over them in years at the time, we played a poor Sheff Weds team from the league below, and just edged it. Who cares, we won the final.

We could even draw, and still finish second if we pick up 2 more yellows than them.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Baz said:

You don't need to be 'clever', - as the last game to kick off, and at zero risk of elimination, we are in the perfect position to choose, because of the last 2 performances.

If Belgium are already talking about resting half their team, why wouldn't we follow the same logic?  How much credit / impetus can you take from winning the game if the Belgians are happy for second place anyway?

The only thing resting on tomorrow's game is if we finish top or second. An opportunity to give tired players, those with knocks, those on a booking a game off, and some who haven't had a game a run out.

The competition is about who's there at the end, and winning the thing. No one will care if we avoid the tough half of the draw, and in just a couple of years no-one will even remember. League cup for example -Spurs routed Chelsea in a pulsating derby, there first win over them in years at the time, we played a poor Sheff Weds team from the league below, and just edged it. Who cares, we won the final.

We could even draw, and still finish second if we pick up 2 more yellows than them.  

So what do you suggest if we look like We're in danger of drawing and finishing top  then? Instruct the team to start kicking lumps out of the opposition?

I understand the need to make a few changes to give one or two players a game but all this talk in the media today of it being maybe advantageous to finish second to go into the easier half of the draw is complete nonsense imo.

If we lose then it will be a real momentum and confidence killer no matter which combination of players are put out. If we win the camp will be absolutely bouncing after topping the group with three wins out of three.

For me, play your normal game and just beat whoever is put in front of you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Baz said:

Haven't seen the first Korean goal, but on radio they said without VAR wouldn't be given?

 

And then we all know the Germans would have nicked one.

So maybe it's actually going to work?

This is why I like VAR. In the last a dodgy decision from a weak linesman would have given the ‘bigger’ side and advantage. Probably leading to them winning. It seems more objective now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stuart said:

This is why I like VAR. In the last a dodgy decision from a weak linesman would have given the ‘bigger’ side and advantage. Probably leading to them winning. It seems more objective now.

And that is where VAR is infallible when dealing with matters of fact. The wider aspect which involves the opinions of several people is the problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, arbitro said:

And that is where VAR is infallible when dealing with matters of fact. The wider aspect which involves the opinions of several people is the problem.

Indeed. The weak point in most systems is human beings. Some of the VAR officials don’t seem to be competent. Or because of the “beauty” of football opinions, one person could be adamant that an incident is a penalty when everyone else in the room disagrees. This creating doubt and removing the  “clear and obvious error” elements.

It has been more successful than I expected. The reaction from the Korean players awaiting the outcome was the other positive of the system. And it was the right outcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stuart said:

This is why I like VAR. In the last a dodgy decision from a weak linesman would have given the ‘bigger’ side and advantage. Probably leading to them winning. It seems more objective now.

How was the linesman weak, he saw offside, he could not see the, very good lol, pass from a German. VAR certainly saved the day on this one and I'm warming to it.

Human error will always be it's weakness and it's point/ reason for application needs clarity.

A firm decision on whom is finally in control of it - the onfield Ref or VAR as at present I cannot work it out and it seems to change on type of incident.

Correctly applied there will be penalties every game until holding/pushing in the box fades away. Ideally I want a foul in the box viewed in the same way as if it occurred anywhere else on the pitch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.