Nick Against the World (40 Viewers)

[IncuboRossonero]

Ok we know what the best hip hop album is...

the big question is:

what is the best Charity song ever made??!!!

(how about that for trivia)

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Geof]

++ [ originally posted by Fliakis ] ++


watch it...

ooops; Lithuania. Capital Vilnius. Population:3,596,617.

conventional long form: Republic of Lithuania
conventional short form: Lithuania
local long form: Lietuvos Respublika
local short form: Lietuva
former: Lithuanian Soviet Socialist Republic


excuse me.

 

[Respaul]

++ [ originally posted by IncuboRossonero ] ++



England didn't qualify in 1994 ... were they really missed??
Spain not qualifying....when is the last time they made the final or actually had a chance of winning it?? i.e. sometimes their presence isn't even felt.

Using 94 as an example isnt the best choice Nick... Afterall... using the widely recognised wosrst world cup in history doesnt really cut it...
Fvck me... Ive had more exciting times at a morgue than at that world cup..

Were we missed... Overall... Who knows... Lots of people missed us as shown by the amount of column inches around the world spent on mentioning our abscence....

Did the tournament miss us... maybe maybe not... Its impossible to say whether we would have made a difference in that year...

Of course whoever may be missing the tournament goes on and it doesnt really matter... whether that be england , italy, france, argentina , spain brazil etc etc

As for spain not being missed... On a people front... yes i think so... whether thay get to the final or not has no bearing... Theres allways a buzz about the main nations and as such i and most others would prefer them to be there every time...

Whether thay continually fail or not, like it or not, spain allways have a team capable of challenging... as such imo a better tournament is had if they are there...

Same goes for england, italy, brazil, holland, argentina, france etal... They all when they click are capable of getting to the final...

Does it really matter if any of them are missing... Not really... Would it be better if they were all there... Most definately...

 

[Respaul]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++

three-time World Cup winners Italy have made the Finals within the last 11 years in two respective big tournaments.

Frstly... why make te point of 3 times world cup winners... The only point i see is to say italy won 3 and england only 1... as though that proves anything....

Why not look at those early wins... Many football historians around the world dont even recognise those tournaments as so many of the big footballing nations of the time did not participate...

You also have to look that those wins were over 70 years ago... not exactly impressive....
If you wanna put that against england then how can you hold the record up in years when england (and many other nations) did not even attempt to qualify as they had no interest in the tournament....

So in the time england has attempted to qualify... how many more world cups have italy won ??

Oh yes... none... they both have won just once....

Are their records that much different... Not really... look at the results... Italy's record isnt much better at all...


You also have this hang up with reaching finals... What difference does that make... Teams have different draws... some easy, some difficult, some similar....

Once you're in the knockouts... theres little difference in getting knocked out in the quarters to the final itself...

Also... tell me.... by that logic...

Team B loses to team A on penalties in the semi final...
Team A then beats team C 4-0 in the final...

Can you really tell me that team C are better than team B because they made the final.... Of course not... Reaching the final means little, unless you all play the same teams... which of course cannot happen


Looking at eng and italy's last 5 world cup eliminations....

England lost to... Didnt lose (eliminated in quarter final group with germany and spain) , Argentina, Germany, Argentina and Brazil

Italy lost to... France, Argentina, bulgaria, France and korea

Both italy and england have poor euro records.... last 7 tournaments...

80, Both failed to reach final
84, Both failed to qualify
88, Eng lost in group, Ita lost one game later in semi
92, Eng knocked out in group, Ita didnt qualify
96, Eng lost in semi, Ita lost in group
00, Eng lost in group, Ita lost in final
04, Eng lost in quarters, Ita lost in group

Both average records and not much between them...

As Nick stated England did not qualify for 1994 and Spain has never really accomplished anything in the tournament before so their abscense would not matter that much. I don't see how those countries add so much that the tournament would be a complete joke without them. Same thing with Holland missing in 2002.

On that note... With the way they play (as in not a very popular mode4 of play around the globe) and the lack of world wide fanbase compared to the likes of england.... Can you really say italy would be missed... With their percieved negative play and conspiracy theories, Half the world was delighted when they were knocked out of the euros...

Or with their record in the last 3 tournaments... would they be missed... no more than any of the others and probably less...

 

[Zlatan]

++ [ originally posted by Fliakis ] ++



cant be bothered to reply to all of it now but **** me, better then us in bosnia? thats rubbish, you got 4 points from us and thats 4 more than you deserved. we outplayed you both in sarajeve and bosnia.

4 more than we deserved? Yeah right

 

[Respaul]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++


I just got home from soccer practice and I just watched Sky Sport News. England lost to Northern Ireland.


Hahahahaa

We lost to the current british champions in a derby game... Big deal

N.I may not currently be a particularly good team... but in a derby game, a game that is as big to them as the world cup itself.... Is it a surprise that they put up the game of their lives and deservedly won... Of course not.... These games against the wales and N.I are not like normal matches and the same rules dont apply.... We were allways gonna lose at least one of these matches...

Does it affect our group... not really, Its still in our hands, If we win both games we still win the group and unless we lose both we will qualify as one of the highest point scoring runners up anyway... So it doesnt matter...

Its also absolutely ridiculous and naive in the extreme to think that these games now , right at the season start when not one player is fully fit or upto speed have any relevance on how we will perform or our chances in the world cup next year...
If these games were in march or so then i could understand the comments but to talk about performances in september is completely laughable...

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by Shadowfax ] ++


Frstly... why make te point of 3 times world cup winners... The only point i see is to say italy won 3 and england only 1... as though that proves anything....

Why not look at those early wins... Many football historians around the world dont even recognise those tournaments as so many of the big footballing nations of the time did not participate...

You also have to look that those wins were over 70 years ago... not exactly impressive....
If you wanna put that against england then how can you hold the record up in years when england (and many other nations) did not even attempt to qualify as they had no interest in the tournament....

So in the time england has attempted to qualify... how many more world cups have italy won ??

To be honest I'm not sure where you found this was an Italy vs. England debate as I was not comparing the two Nations. But if you want to play it this way...reaching the Final is better than going out in the Quarterfinals as far as I'm concerned. England has not been in any International Final since 1966 when they won the Cup in London while Italy won in 1982 and were finalists in 94 and 2000 at the Euros.

As for pundits saying the first few World Cups don't mean anything...that's their opinion. If those countries that said they did not want to participate perhaps they would have challenged Italy or perhaps they wouldn't have...fact of the matter is so many people use these excuses in football about how Real Madrid's first few CL titles aren't worth much cuz of lack of competition or during the Cold War this and that country backed out of tournaments...it doesn't matter cuz the facts remain.

You also have this hang up with reaching finals... What difference does that make... Teams have different draws... some easy, some difficult, some similar....

Once you're in the knockouts... theres little difference in getting knocked out in the quarters to the final itself...

It's not so much about what side is better on the pitch or on paper, I'm talking about the impact they had on the tournament themselves and the traditions that stem from the victories or losses. Fact of the matter is you create more waves in tournaments when you go far, reaching the final, than crashing out in Quarterfinals. People don't remember the names of sides that played good football but did not reach the finals...the fans remember who reached the finals and that one respective game lives in memory more than any one else. It's indeed hard to judge what side is better if the two don't play each other, however comparing the impact two sides had on a tournament is easy...just look at what level they reached.

From this I would have to say Italy and Brazil would be much more of a loss than England and Spain...I think that is pretty obvious. And like I said this wasn't about who is better England or Italy however I would have to say Italy would be missed more because of the impact they had on the more recent tournaments since 1994. This is obviously more opinion than anything else and I doubt once the tournament begins one respective country would be missed unless you're indeed a fan of that country.

On that note... With the way they play (as in not a very popular mode4 of play around the globe) and the lack of world wide fanbase compared to the likes of england.... Can you really say italy would be missed... With their percieved negative play and conspiracy theories, Half the world was delighted when they were knocked out of the euros...

Or with their record in the last 3 tournaments... would they be missed... no more than any of the others and probably less...

England wouldn't be missed either except for their real supporters and gloryhunting fans. Like I said, you would only miss a side if your side is out of the tournament.

And wait a minute...lack of worldwide fanbase? Are you serious Paul? Correct me if I'm wrong, however don't those in Japan and other oriental countries like Italy just as much as England if not more? England might have more fans overall in this world however I would have to say Italy is up their as well...certainly more than France, Spain, and many other usual world cup contenders.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

Oh please China will be missed the most lol Since there's argument over detail, Technically England didnt win that world cup against germany since the sealing goal was furtive.

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by Shadowfax ] ++


We lost to the current british champions in a derby game... Big deal

N.I may not currently be a particularly good team... but in a derby game, a game that is as big to them as the world cup itself.... Is it a surprise that they put up the game of their lives and deservedly won... Of course not.... These games against the wales and N.I are not like normal matches and the same rules dont apply.... We were allways gonna lose at least one of these matches...

Does it affect our group... not really, Its still in our hands, If we win both games we still win the group and unless we lose both we will qualify as one of the highest point scoring runners up anyway... So it doesnt matter...

Its also absolutely ridiculous and naive in the extreme to think that these games now , right at the season start when not one player is fully fit or upto speed have any relevance on how we will perform or our chances in the world cup next year...
If these games were in march or so then i could understand the comments but to talk about performances in september is completely laughable...

Thanks for the pep talk Paul and of course this doesn't have much bearing on what will happen 9 months from now, however you know I enjoy seeing England lose just to spite all their fans I know in the US. After weeks and weeks hearing about "England the favorites" from friends, fans, and media alike, this loss is just a nice little wake up call.

And Paul, what do you think of Sven? Should he be fired? I have many ideas for tactics but Sven seems to be fiddling with everything a bit too much.

 

[IncuboRossonero]

++ [ originally posted by Shadowfax ] ++


Frstly... why make te point of 3 times world cup winners... The only point i see is to say italy won 3 and england only 1... as though that proves anything....

Why not look at those early wins... Many football historians around the world dont even recognise those tournaments as so many of the big footballing nations of the time did not participate...

You also have to look that those wins were over 70 years ago... not exactly impressive....
If you wanna put that against england then how can you hold the record up in years when england (and many other nations) did not even attempt to qualify as they had no interest in the tournament....

So in the time england has attempted to qualify... how many more world cups have italy won ??

Oh yes... none... they both have won just once....

Are their records that much different... Not really... look at the results... Italy's record isnt much better at all...


You also have this hang up with reaching finals... What difference does that make... Teams have different draws... some easy, some difficult, some similar....

Once you're in the knockouts... theres little difference in getting knocked out in the quarters to the final itself...

Also... tell me.... by that logic...

Team B loses to team A on penalties in the semi final...
Team A then beats team C 4-0 in the final...

Can you really tell me that team C are better than team B because they made the final.... Of course not... Reaching the final means little, unless you all play the same teams... which of course cannot happen


Looking at eng and italy's last 5 world cup eliminations....

England lost to... Didnt lose (eliminated in quarter final group with germany and spain) , Argentina, Germany, Argentina and Brazil

Italy lost to... France, Argentina, bulgaria, France and korea

Both italy and england have poor euro records.... last 7 tournaments...

80, Both failed to reach final
84, Both failed to qualify
88, Eng lost in group, Ita lost one game later in semi
92, Eng knocked out in group, Ita didnt qualify
96, Eng lost in semi, Ita lost in group
00, Eng lost in group, Ita lost in final
04, Eng lost in quarters, Ita lost in group

Both average records and not much between them...




On that note... With the way they play (as in not a very popular mode4 of play around the globe) and the lack of world wide fanbase compared to the likes of england.... Can you really say italy would be missed... With their percieved negative play and conspiracy theories, Half the world was delighted when they were knocked out of the euros...

Or with their record in the last 3 tournaments... would they be missed... no more than any of the others and probably less...

Paul ever heard the famous quote about three types of lies: "lies, damn lies and statistics".

You can compare till next year and you will not convince me or most World Cup followers that England and Italy are on equal footing on the International stage.
England has not been a FORCE in any competition for too long...they have the players...they have the coach but can't get it together.
Italy won in 82, reached the semi's in 90, finals in 94, Euro finals in 2000 and recently have been unable to live up to expectation...all the while England has been stuck in mediocrity in these tournaments. I'm not speaking about the 3 World Cups because I agree about the first two plus it was such a long time ago coupled with some issues that it does not put Italy on par with Germany and Brazil. However, England is in that middle group of nations that just 'show up' and do not much else.

I remember the surprise of England not making it to World Cup in 94....problem is not many people gave a damn.
Think of the shock and awe of Italy not making it to the World Cup....just watch the 'shock and desbelief' headlines of sports pages around the world when they go down in the Quarters of these tournaments and you can get a sense of what the reaction would be if they didn't make it...

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by Altair ] ++
Oh please China will be missed the most lol Since there's argument over detail, Technically England didnt win that world cup against germany since the sealing goal was furtive.

Even though I concur, England still has their name in the history books.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

A little too big if you ask me, countries like Uruguay and Hungary achieved as much(in some cases more) and they're not "missed".

 

[Bjerknes]

:LOL:

http://www.petitiononline.com/nosven/petition.html

 

[Tifoso]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
:LOL:

http://www.petitiononline.com/nosven/petition.html

:LOL:

 

[Respaul]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++


"England the favorites" from friends, fans, and media alike, this loss is just a nice little wake up call.

Ive gotta say... I have never seen a single member of our media or person i know or any bookie say we are favourites... Plenty say we are capable of winning (which we are... as with several other nations) but none say we are favourites or will win it...

Every aspect of our media i have noticed, every person i know and every bookie over here says it will be brazil or argentina....

You have some strange people and strange cuts of our media in your country...

And Paul, what do you think of Sven? Should he be fired? I have many ideas for tactics but Sven seems to be fiddling with everything a bit too much.

Sven... Firstly i have never agreed with the idea of a foreign coach... i did not welcome him at the start and i do not welcome him now...

But besides that... he is a fool with no idea about coaching whatsoever...

He has ripped the passion out of our side... something throughout history we have thrived on... it is our driving force.... Not once since sven has been in charge have we played with the right attitude.... Something i personally blame for the loss to brazil in a game we were well in control of and then dramatically collapsed... The same can be said of our loss to france who we were in a very good position agianst but we fell apart and gave it away.... These things would never have happende under the likes of venables etal...

His tactics are a joke...
Firstly why fvck with something that works but jus needs refining...
Last years euro 4-4-2 worked perfectly well... Taking into account several players were carrying injuries we comfortably made the quarters which but for a dissalowwed perfectly good goal we would also have passed through... Under the circumstances a good result...

So why start messing with it now...

Why is he the only person in the country who cannot see that lampard and gerard cannot play togeather in the centre ?

Why does he insist on playing everyone out of position... I have never seen a team where so many people dont know where thay are meant to be than in these last few matches...

Why is he the only person in the country that cant see that the answer to our left sided problem may well lie in ashley ccole (a role he has played well on numerous occasions)... why wont he try it rather than wasting other peoples talents playing them out of place...

The guy is a joke...

But we are stuck.... If he is fired the fa is fvcked as it needs to pay him £10 mil (which it cant afford)... Due to him not being english, unlike keegan for example... he doesnt care about the country enough to resign when hes fvcking up... nSo we are lumbered with him

 

[Respaul]

++ [ originally posted by IncuboRossonero ] ++
Think of the shock and awe of Italy not making it to the World Cup....just watch the 'shock and desbelief' headlines of sports pages around the world when they go down in the Quarters of these tournaments and you can get a sense of what the reaction would be if they didn't make it...

When... shock and awe my arse... Very little of the world was in shoock when italy were knocked out of the last 2 tournaments...

They have failed to qaulify for the euros on several occasions without being noticed...

Most of the world with their negativity and their conspiracy theories weere laughing when italy were knocked out of the last euros... Did you actually look at the worlds press...

Pretty much the whole of europe were celebrating.... Not too mention similar responses around the globe...

Italy are no longer seen as a world power as they used to be... Niether are england for that matter... Its allways brazil, arg or france these days...

Look at the difference when france were eliminated to when italy were in the wc.... in peoples reactions... Most were critical of italy's p[lay and unsurprised whilst most were surprised that the tournament favs were kicked out early...

This all came from someone saying england wouldnt be missed and italy would... which simply today is untrue...

Personally i would miss england and italy greatly as well as arg, brazil, holland, germany etal

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by Shadowfax ] ++


Ive gotta say... I have never seen a single member of our media or person i know or any bookie say we are favourites... Plenty say we are capable of winning (which we are... as with several other nations) but none say we are favourites or will win it...

Every aspect of our media i have noticed, every person i know and every bookie over here says it will be brazil or argentina....

You have some strange people and strange cuts of our media in your country...

There are a couple shows in the US that have some expates from England running the show...and lets just say objectivity is not their forte when talking about England's chances. SKY Sports is not all that bad however I have seen bits from fans and former players that make me wonder but that's not that big of a deal. English football fans make up the majority of fans in the US who do not hold the US National team as their love and there are many fans who follow both the US and England and those people tend to be the few who tend to overrateEngland's chances. Not sure why but from what I have seen those "glory-hunters" as some might call them try to put England above the rest time and time again...whether that stems from lack of knowledge about the sport or their willingness to get on the nerves of others, I dont know.

His tactics are a joke...
Firstly why fvck with something that works but jus needs refining...
Last years euro 4-4-2 worked perfectly well... Taking into account several players were carrying injuries we comfortably made the quarters which but for a dissalowwed perfectly good goal we would also have passed through... Under the circumstances a good result...

So why start messing with it now...

Why is he the only person in the country who cannot see that lampard and gerard cannot play togeather in the centre ?

Yeah, I don't understand why he has not stuck with the 4-4-2...it was obvious from last year in Portugal that setup was working well.

As for Lampard and Gerrard not being able to play together in the center of the pitch...I concur. However, those two players are your two best players as far as I'm concerned. If I was Sven I would find a way to play them both in the same squad if at all possible. I also kinda like Carrick control in midfield as well. England's strengths are the midfield and defense...so it would make sense to play to those strengths.

Robinson

Ferdinand - Terry- Campbell - A Cole

Gerrard - Carrick

SWP - Lampard - J Cole

Rooney


Might look a bit outlandish however I like the strength of the defense and midfield. Ferdinand has the skill and prowess to play RB, and that move allows Terry and Campbell to fit in the squad, some of the best defenders in the world. SWP would have the right flank all to himself with Gerrard and Carrick holding in midfield. Lampard would be much further up the pitch and hover around the box where he could use his best weapon, his shooting. Yeah no Owen however you guys have speed down the wings and Lampard behind Rooney. Looks good to me and is similar to the 4-4-2.

 

[The Pado]

Paul, Northern Ireland the current British champions??? They couldn't be champions of, well, Northern Ireland. Hahaha.

Go make WHINE out of those sour grapes. So what, England has never lived up to it's potential as a footballing nation? Neither has Spain, or Italy for that matter. Please, you don't have to defend England - it's not your fault, and nobody should make a big deal about it.

 

[The Pado]

++ [ originally posted by IncuboRossonero ] ++


Pado, Sergio, Vin: any of you make it to the USA 94 games??

Well Jackass, I did attend:

Switzerland-Romania
Sweden-Russia
Ireland-Italy

But the big thrill was France-Italy at Mexico '86. A shitty Azzurri performance, a shitty result, but a great experience.

 

[Respaul]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++


Yeah, I don't understand why he has not stuck with the 4-4-2...it was obvious from last year in Portugal that setup was working well.

As for Lampard and Gerrard not being able to play together in the center of the pitch...I concur. However, those two players are your two best players as far as I'm concerned. If I was Sven I would find a way to play them both in the same squad if at all possible. I also kinda like Carrick control in midfield as well. England's strengths are the midfield and defense...so it would make sense to play to those strengths.

Robinson

Ferdinand - Terry- Campbell - A Cole

Gerrard - Carrick

SWP - Lampard - J Cole

Rooney

Interesting.... Firstly... campbell would never play another game for england under me... Woodgate when fit however would be straight in... In my view when on top of his game, our best cb...

Carrick is good but i would pick scotty parker... gives more options....

Rooney is not a loan striker, he needs to play off of someone else...

I agree it would be great if we could get stevie and lamps to play togeather (maybe another coach can) but i (as most others do) have major doubts....

As for leaving out becks... I know you dont like him and he has flaws... But i would not drop him... Even when playing badly, his workrate, his passion, his range of passing, his set plays , his direct freekicks are invaluable... If you look at all englands goals over the last years since he has been in the team... well over half of them come in one way or another from our captain... He is a def starter in my book....

Personally i would if we must change formation change to 3 at the back (terry, rio, woody/carragher) , this would then solve our left problem with ashley cole and allow phillips to play... also it would bring rooney into his best position and if they can find a way to play togeather allow stevie and lamps to play (or one of them plus scotty parker) ....