England beatable by US?
in [World Football]
|
From: Paul C on 6 Jun 2010 09:49 "higgs" <kenhiggs8(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:7380350f-b293-4dbd-80c4-faa4934591ef(a)34g2000prs.googlegroups.com... On Jun 6, 5:39 pm, "Paul C" <p...(a)thersgb.net> wrote: > "higgs" <kenhig...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:b05c7ec9-1afa-4489-af41-429f9e3cd52d(a)n37g2000prc.googlegroups.com... > On Jun 6, 12:12 am, "Paul C" <p...(a)thersgb.net> wrote: > > > "higgs" <kenhig...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > >With that sort of an atitude, no wonder Scotland rarely feature in > >World Cups....... > > Scotland has featured multiple times in the World Cup, including occasions > when the mighty England with x10 Scotland's footballing resources failed > to > make it. >Indeed, Scotland has featured in 8 of the 19 World Cups, sadly never >making it past the 1st round. >The last time Scotland qualified for the WC was 1998 (Coincidentally, >England were there too). >So, Scotland appear infrequently in WCs. I think the word you used was "rarely". Qualifying 9 times and participating 8 times in 16 competitions doesn't make qualifying a rare event. >I think I was quite correct ion pointing out that 1950 was yet another >WC where the only Scotish representation was via a 3rd party. And I was correct in pointing out that Scotland qualified for the 1950 WC.
From: gsn on 6 Jun 2010 13:34 On Jun 6, 5:30 am, higgs <kenhig...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 6, 5:39 pm, "Paul C" <p...(a)thersgb.net> wrote: > > > "higgs" <kenhig...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > >news:b05c7ec9-1afa-4489-af41-429f9e3cd52d(a)n37g2000prc.googlegroups.com... > > On Jun 6, 12:12 am, "Paul C" <p...(a)thersgb.net> wrote: > > > > "higgs" <kenhig...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > >With that sort of an atitude, no wonder Scotland rarely feature in > > >World Cups....... > > > Scotland has featured multiple times in the World Cup, including occasions > > when the mighty England with x10 Scotland's footballing resources failed to > > make it. > > Indeed, Scotland has featured in 8 of the 19 World Cups, sadly never > making it past the 1st round. > > The last time Scotland qualified for the WC was 1998 (Coincidentally, > England were there too). > > So, Scotland appear infrequently in WCs. > > I think I was quite correct ion pointing out that 1950 was yet another > WC where the only Scotish representation was via a 3rd party. I think Paul C is quite right about Scottish influence in WC wins. Considering that Brazil has most championships and the origins of Brazilian football (as well as style of play) are inspired/influenced by Scots.
From: El Kot on 6 Jun 2010 14:36 gsn wrote: > > I think Paul C is quite right about Scottish influence in WC wins. > Considering that Brazil has most championships and the origins of > Brazilian football (as well as style of play) are inspired/influenced > by Scots. Wha? Since when do the Hungarians have Scottish origins? :) -- No, no, you can't e-mail me with the nono.
From: Binder Dundat on 6 Jun 2010 16:36 On Jun 6, 2:36 pm, El Kot <nono.black.e...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > gsn wrote: > > > I think Paul C is quite right about Scottish influence in WC wins. > > Considering that Brazil has most championships and the origins of > > Brazilian football (as well as style of play) are inspired/influenced > > by Scots. > > Wha? Since when do the Hungarians have Scottish origins? > :) > > -- > No, no, you can't e-mail me with the nono. The USA beat Spain last year so they could beat England (or anyone) as well.
From: MH on 6 Jun 2010 16:56
Bruce D. Scott wrote: > MH (MHnospam(a)ucalgary.ca) wrote: > : Mark V. wrote: > > : > perhaps more than CZE-GHA '06. > > : I hesitated about that one, but the Czechs were so good in Euro 04 (and > : would have been worthy winners) and had just taken the US apart in the > : first game, so this was quite a big surprise to me. Ghana had looked > : so-so against a very indifferent Italian team. > > But that's deceptive... the US entered the first match mentally > unprepared, scandalously so (I was at the match, could see the whole > field). Besides we couldn't defend against good wing play anyway. > Then, Koller pulled his hamstring. So I think it was a combination of > CZ looking better than they were against a USA side who were playing > worse then they were in that match, and also CZ being seriously weakened > before the Ghana match. Ghana were playing to their maximum potential > in all three matches, so I agree with Mark that the GHA-CZ victory was > not that great an upset, even if it was a mild one. The Czechs were ranked no 2 in the world in the 2006 May FIFA rankings. Ghana had never won a WC match, though they had a decent tradition at junior level and ANC. > > The USA over England would be a pretty big upset, but not among the > really shocking ones. No more so than over Portugal in 2002. Just in > the present circumstances... England are a lot more resilient under > Capello than recently otherwise. > > -- > ciao, > Bruce > > drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/ |