This is what I think will happen in SA2010
in [World Football]
|
Prev: Bundesliga 24
Next: MAN U, Argentina or Brasil
From: Google Beta User on 5 Mar 2010 18:17 On Mar 5, 5:32 pm, Lleo <lleo...(a)lycos.com> wrote: > I think so too but my conclusion is different than yours. I think this > will be Argentina's cup. They have an easy enough first round group to > fine-tune the rougher edges (like Brasil in 2002?) and when they > click, it'll be plain sailing. After all, this is a cup, you may need > no more than a decent squad with one or two great players to carry you > all the way, as Argentina itself has demonstrated in 1986. Sure, Messi > is not Maradona, but he doesn't really need to be. Anyone knows Argentina's starting lineup? Curious where Higuan, Tevez and Messi figure. 1. Someone that can kick opposing creators, or shackle opposing playmakers. 2. A superstar level player that can create something out of nothing. 3. A proper defense. 4. A proper coach. The team that has those three elements IMO will have a strong chance of winning. Thinking of the past world cups, it's all well and good to call it a cup, but I don't remember any fluke finalist, in the past couple of years (though I'm still in disbeleif that ITaly managed to beat France). I beleive the last first time finalist was in 1978? > OTOH, although things look good for Brasil right now, it wouldn't > surprise me to see a first round exit here (like Argentina in 2002?). > It's a very even group, if it comes down to goal difference both > Portugal and Ivory Coast will play NK after us, How disciplined are the two teams? Portugal don't have a good DM so there's the potential of being hit on the counterattack. I can see a 2-4 type score. Cote D'Voire have Yaya toure, but is it true their coach played him as a PLAYMAKER?
From: milivella on 5 Mar 2010 18:48 MH: > I would be interested to hear what other's recollections of what their > sense of who the favourites were in various years would be. It is so > easy to be influenced after the fact by results. Nice idea. But my memories are pretty useless, so I go with Elo-leader- the-day-before-the-World-Cup instead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Football_Elo_Ratings_leaders 1970: England (leader since 1966) 1974: Brazil (since February 1973) 1978: West Germany (since 1975; if you scrap 4 days of Poland's leadership, since 1974) 1982: West Germany (since October 1981) 1986: France (since February; if you scrap 41 days of Soviet Union's/ West Germany's leadership, since 1984) 1990: Netherlands (since 1988) 1994: Germany (since 1993) 1998: Brazil (since June 1997) 2002: France (since 2000) 2006: Brazil (since October 2005) So: 1. The leader of the ranking (and so in some sense favorite) always is the current holder of either the WC or the EC. (This term we could have an exception, since Spain has 2078 points but Brazil has 2085. But I guess that the pre-WC friendlies could still change something.) 2. This team never wins! OK, I know that the favorite can't always win, but how many chances there are that it wins 0 out of 12 tournaments? Weaufx gods, I repent of all my past doubts about your existence and power! -- Cheers milivella
From: milivella on 5 Mar 2010 18:55 milivella: > 2. This team never wins! OK, I know that the favorite can't always > win, but how many chances there are that it wins 0 out of 12 > tournaments? Actually 10, sorry. (11, if you add Brazil 1966.) (12, if I'll win my bet against Voros McCracken.) -- Cheers milivella
From: Enzo on 5 Mar 2010 21:06 On Mar 5, 11:48 pm, milivella <milive...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > MH: > > > I would be interested to hear what other's recollections of what their > > sense of who the favourites were in various years would be. It is so > > easy to be influenced after the fact by results. > > Nice idea. But my memories are pretty useless, so I go with Elo-leader- > the-day-before-the-World-Cup instead:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Football_Elo_Ratings_leaders > 1970: England (leader since 1966) > 1974: Brazil (since February 1973) > 1978: West Germany (since 1975; if you scrap 4 days of Poland's > leadership, since 1974) > 1982: West Germany (since October 1981) > 1986: France (since February; if you scrap 41 days of Soviet Union's/ > West Germany's leadership, since 1984) > 1990: Netherlands (since 1988) > 1994: Germany (since 1993) > 1998: Brazil (since June 1997) > 2002: France (since 2000) > 2006: Brazil (since October 2005) > > So: > 1. The leader of the ranking (and so in some sense favorite) always is > the current holder of either the WC or the EC. (This term we could > have an exception, since Spain has 2078 points but Brazil has 2085. > But I guess that the pre-WC friendlies could still change something.) > 2. This team never wins! OK, I know that the favorite can't always > win, but how many chances there are that it wins 0 out of 12 > tournaments? Weaufx gods, I repent of all my past doubts about your > existence and power! Another marvellous observation! Now you could see both Brasil and Spain try to lose all their remaining friendlies to avoid the voodoo. And also, of course, to make everyone complacent ( not that Spain has much to gain - they wont win anyway ). > > -- > Cheers > milivella
From: Enzo on 5 Mar 2010 21:08
On Mar 5, 7:30 pm, FF <FAIRFOOTBALL....(a)domainsbyproxy.com> wrote: > Alkamista wrote: > > On Mar 4, 8:51 pm, Enzo <s_debgu...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Mar 4, 8:40 pm, Alkamista <alkami...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > It seems like RSS has weauxfed the living daylights out of Brazil and > > > > Spain over the last few months, just like we had done with Argentina > > > > and France in 2002 and Brazil and their Fab 5 in 2006. So I am almost > > > > convinced that neither of these teams will reach the final, much less > > > > win the cup. > > > > Also, the "this may finally be Africa's cup" has gone overboard. > > > > Therefore it is almost guaranteed that all their teams will implode, > > > > with Eto'o and Drogba throwing some hissy fits against their coaches > > > > and SA going out in the group phase with their coach and some > > > > Scandanavian referee having to be placed under military protection. > > > > Next England, who had already been weauxfed out a year ago by their > > > > tabloids, as well as Jellore and Higgs. > > > > Holland will never win the WC in their entire existence so that leaves > > > > the usual boring suspects, i.e. Italy, Germany, France, and > > > > Argentina. > > > > To get to the semi's, Lippi will probably resort to catenaccio against > > > > Brazil and Spain and eliminate both on penalties after 0-0 draws > > > > (followed by Benny denouncing all allegations of catenaccio by saying > > > > that we are biased and out of touch). Germany will probably get a key > > > > goal every game from Klose and see out the rest of the game like > > > > robots and advance. Freakshows Maradona and Domenech will probably > > > > pull some unbelievable luck out of their behinds and advance to the > > > > SFs (god save us from Bob then). > > > > After that, it's a random crapshoot. I predict that either Italy or > > > > Argentina will win the cup. > > > > Nothing of this sort will happen. The top teams are now even > > > more isolated at the top than in recent world cups. Brasil has > > > not lost a game in ages, Spain is close by. Since Spain will > > > not win two major tournaments in succession, > > Who knows ? Besides, the Euro is *not* a major tournament. If > anything, Spain probably views that win as good practice for the real > thing. > I'd say Spain are in better shape now than they were at the Euro, and > probably will be even better come the WCup. Provided they don't have > major health problems. > (A bit more food fore those weauxf gods, heh ?) > > > > and since the > > > only other outfit that can challenge Brasil ( England ) will probably > > > fail a pk contest somewhere down the line, I think the conclusion > > > is foregone. > > > It's a cup, not a league. And it's not even two-legged in the > > knockouts. Any one of 6-7 teams can win it. > > While this is certainly true, I think Brazil and Spain combined do > have a good shot this time. > > > We've heard the same > > invincible argument many times in the past, and not least in '06. > > Yes but in 06 Parreira acted like a clown and bowed to public pressure > and kept fat Ronaldo in the team, as well as Adriano who IIRC was in > terrible shape. Therein imo lies the difference. Dunga is a monster. I dont think I have seen a better strategist/manager in my lifetime. Argentina should call up Diego Simeone and see if he can create a proper football team for the albiceleste's like Dunga has done, not a bunch of clowns. |