World Cup 2010

Originally posted by Palynka
If you look at the continent of host and continent of the winner then there's actually a pretty high correlation. I agree this seems like a strange fact, but there it is. Maybe it's jet lag, maybe it's something else or maybe it's just coincidence. But it's not outlandish to say that African nations have maybe an extra motivation for this one.

At least th ...[text shortened]... ow, not the best source) but also some player interviews which agree with this perception.

It is quite an interesting point of discussion about teams doing well in their own continent. We can understand why they'd do well in their own countries, but beyond that, I can only speculate. Could it be the relative ease with which supporters from nearby countries can travel to games? Familiar infrastructures and climates? Because they play most of their club football in clubs on the same continent? Why do European teams only win in Europe? Why?!

Another point worth bringing up is England. Many English supporters and some non English supporters believe that this is going to be a successful campaign for them. I've been watching some old replays and something interesting became apparent. In my opinion, the team for the 1998 world cup was better than this current team. They had Scholes, Shearer, Michael Owen (who was on fire), David Seaman, and Beckham. They made it as far as the Round of 16 where they were unlucky enough to draw Argentina and lost on pens (thanks to that infamous Batty penalty). The only player in the current England squad who stands out is Rooney and if he is injured then there's no hope. There's a very, very small margin for error.

Originally posted by damionhonegan
Quite frankly, I don't think the African teams are going anywhere.

Then you have probably never heard of Nigeria.

Originally posted by barstudd
I suppose you would have laughed at Australia making the Qtr finals last world cup? they were only ripped off by a fake dive and a shonky decision...

ok so there is some wishful thinking on my behalf that they top the group with Germany in it, but in saying that its still not beyond them...so he who laughs last will laugh loudest.

and oh yeah...and Se ...[text shortened]... eaten teams like France, England and Netherlands, So they are quite capable of causing an upset.

As much as that WAS indeed a fake dive which gave Italy the penalty, upon a second (less emotional) viewing of that game, I believe Italy were deserved winners.
But yes, physically and defensively , Australia was upto world class level. Similar to the difference between a good chess player and a great chess player, Australia had all the right tactics and positions. Its the attacking flare that they lacked that makes me say Italy looked the better team and deserved their win.

C'mon Aussies! dig deep and cause a few upsets! And the only way that team will do that is to push an extra player forward and risk being caught on the counter attack...

Originally posted by damionhonegan
If you count North and South America as one region (Americas) then only Brazil have won outside of its continent - Korea/Japan 2002.

If counted separately, only Brazil (Sweden '58, Mexico '70, USA '94, Korea/Japan '02) and Argentina (Mexico '86) have won outside of their continent.

Get an atlas.

Originally posted by hopscotch
In my opinion, the team for the 1998 world cup was better than this current team. They had Scholes, Shearer, Michael Owen (who was on fire), David Seaman, and Beckham. They made it as far as the Round of 16 where they were unlucky enough to draw Argentina and lost on pens (thanks to that infamous Batty penalty). The only player in the current England squad ...[text shortened]... Rooney and if he is injured then there's no hope. There's a very, very small margin for error.

look at greece at euro 2004, it's not about what star players you have but how the team performs as a group. the manager has a lot to do with this, this year they have a turly world class coach, in 98 they had a head case. plus look at the draw they would've had in 98 if they had beaten argentina, holland in the last 8, then brazil in the semis and france in the final, not a chance in hell with that coach. this year they could get to the semis without playing any of the top sides. and wih the weather suiting them more i really wouldn't be shocked to see england in the final. Reveal Hidden Content

Originally posted by barstudd
I suppose you would have laughed at Australia making the Qtr finals last world cup? they were only ripped off by a fake dive and a shonky decision...

ok so there is some wishful thinking on my behalf that they top the group with Germany in it, but in saying that its still not beyond them...so he who laughs last will laugh loudest.

and oh yeah...and Se ...[text shortened]... eaten teams like France, England and Netherlands, So they are quite capable of causing an upset.

diving is football, they deserved to lose to italy. they might nick second in the group but they're not strong enough to win it imo, that one of the toughest groups to get out of (if not the toughest).

Originally posted by trev33
diving is football, they deserved to lose to italy. they might nick second in the group but they're not strong enough to win it imo, that one of the toughest groups to get out of (if not the toughest).

Diving is a water sport....Football is something entirelly different, it is a ball game, they are nothing alike.

Yep in the pool Australia would deserve to lose to Italy based on what we had all seen last world CUP.

Originally posted by barstudd
Diving is a water sport....Football is something entirelly different, it is a ball game, they are nothing alike.

Yep in the pool Australia would deserve to lose to Italy based on what we had all seen last world CUP.

don't blame italy, if they're going to get away with it they're going to try it. you think diving in football is the only way people try to con a ref in sports? of couse not, it's just part of the game. suck it up. at least you guys are/where in the world cup...

Originally posted by Crowley
Get an atlas.

I made a mistake. I meant if North and South America was counted as one continent then Brazil would be the only team to win outside of its contintent - Korea/Japan '02 AND Sweden '58. I forgot to put Sweden.

Originally posted by Helder Octavio
[b]Group winners (1st/2nd):

A: France/Mexico;
B: Nigeria/Argentina;
C: England/USA;
D: Germany/Ghana;
E: Netherlands/Cameroon;
F: Italy/Paraguay;
G: Brasil/Portugal;
H: Spain/Chile.[/b]

Nigeria over argentina?

i would have put ivory coast somewhere in that list.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
As much as that WAS indeed a fake dive which gave Italy the penalty, upon a second (less emotional) viewing of that game, I believe Italy were deserved winners.
But yes, physically and defensively , Australia was upto world class level. Similar to the difference between a good chess player and a great chess player, Australia had all the right tactics ...[text shortened]... will do that is to push an extra player forward and risk being caught on the counter attack...

Is Kewell fit for once?

Originally posted by barstudd
Diving is a water sport....Football is something entirelly different, it is a ball game, they are nothing alike.

Yep in the pool Australia would deserve to lose to Italy based on what we had all seen last world CUP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamesmanship

Originally posted by hopscotch
It is quite an interesting point of discussion about teams doing well in their own continent. We can understand why they'd do well in their own countries, but beyond that, I can only speculate. Could it be the relative ease with which supporters from nearby countries can travel to games? Familiar infrastructures and climates? Because they play most of thei ...[text shortened]... oney and if he is injured then there's no hope. There's a very, very small margin for error.

But they have they have a great coach, a favourable draw and, most importantly, Portugal is in poorer form. 😀

Originally posted by arterioes
Nigeria over argentina?

i would have put ivory coast somewhere in that list.

Maradona don´t have tactical scheme, and Messi cannot to do miracles alone.

In my fantasy Cup, the Argies fall in the round of 16. 😀

Originally posted by damionhonegan
If you count North and South America as one region (Americas) then only Brazil have won outside of its continent - Korea/Japan 2002.

If counted separately, only Brazil (Sweden '58, Mexico '70, USA '94, Korea/Japan '02) and Argentina (Mexico '86) have won outside of their continent.

Argentina won the 90 cup in Italy. So truly only Brazil and Argentina have won outside their continents.