Off Topic · U.S. to open against England at World Cup (page 2)

What I love about the rankings is that FIFA blatantly punished France for their cheating. And damn right too!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/...

Basically, if FIFA would have used 2008 rankings, 2009 rankings or November rankings (when the playoffs were finished) France would have been in the first pot of seeds. But, cunningly, they used the Nomber rankings, and France were down in the fourth pot. Justice served IMO.

with all due respect, jimimou, the rankings are highly suspect at best. croatia is @ 10 and they're not in the cup. not to say that they're not awesome, but 10 in the world not competing in the cup? either the qualification system is flawed or the ranking system is flawed.

orangeblobman wrote:with all due respect, jimimou, the rankings are highly suspect at best. croatia is @ 10 and they're not in the cup. not to say that they're not awesome, but 10 in the world not competing in the cup? either the qualification system is flawed or the ranking system is flawed.

What are you on? Qualification is a league format. If you dont finish 1st or 2nd in your league, you dont qualify for the World Cup. Rankings include other matches, historical data and World Cup, CON, CONF and UEFA Champ performance. Brazil nearly didnt qualify and their number 2! Portugal and France too! Rankings have nothing whatsoever to do with qualification.

firefly wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:with all due respect, jimimou, the rankings are highly suspect at best. croatia is @ 10 and they're not in the cup. not to say that they're not awesome, but 10 in the world not competing in the cup? either the qualification system is flawed or the ranking system is flawed.

What are you on? Qualification is a league format. If you dont finish 1st or 2nd in your league, you dont qualify for the World Cup. Rankings include other matches, historical data and World Cup, CON, CONF and UEFA Champ performance. Brazil nearly didnt qualify and their number 2! Portugal and France too! Rankings have nothing whatsoever to do with qualification.

that's what i'm saying. i just don't put much stock in rankings as a predictor.

i guess i just assumed their use as a predictor in this case, given the discussion so far.

but yea, i guess they are an accurate gauge of a team's overall body of work.

orangeblobman wrote:with all due respect, jimimou, the rankings are highly suspect at best. croatia is @ 10 and they're not in the cup. not to say that they're not awesome, but 10 in the world not competing in the cup? either the qualification system is flawed or the ranking system is flawed.

with all due respect obm, i dont really value your opinion on this..

jimimou wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:with all due respect, jimimou, the rankings are highly suspect at best. croatia is @ 10 and they're not in the cup. not to say that they're not awesome, but 10 in the world not competing in the cup? either the qualification system is flawed or the ranking system is flawed.

with all due respect obm, i dont really value your opinion on this..

you should really follow a discussion through before commenting, especially before commenting on the seedling of the discussion. I present to you, the ending:

that's what i'm saying. i just don't put much stock in rankings as a predictor.

i guess i just assumed their use as a predictor in this case, given the discussion so far.

but yea, i guess they are an accurate gauge of a team's overall body of work.

Rooney sucks, Kaka is better! Brasil all the way.

Silverfuel wrote:Rooney sucks, Kaka is better! Brasil all the way.

kaka is dynamite. him and ronaldo can figure out how to play together, real will dominate

Silverfuel wrote:Rooney sucks, Kaka is better! Brasil all the way.

Friendly side bet? Loser has to root for the Raptors. Or Germany!!!

Kaka BTW in my opinion is a little overrated. Ronaldo on the other hand can carry a team all on his lonesome. Kaka not looking so good in white. Then again Ronaldo looked better in red, but maybe thats me being biased.

firefly wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:Rooney sucks, Kaka is better! Brasil all the way.

Friendly side bet? Loser has to root for the Raptors. Or Germany!!!

Kaka BTW in my opinion is a little overrated. Ronaldo on the other hand can carry a team all on his lonesome. Kaka not looking so good in white. Then again Ronaldo looked better in red, but maybe thats me being biased.

the 3rd guy in this equation is mesi - he's gotta perform for argentina to make any noise in the cup. damn, cant wait another 175 days for this thing to start.

And Jimi, Real will never dominate with the pansy-ass defense they have, not to mention their deficiencies in midfield. Im a big fan of Xabi Alonso, but to be effective he needs a Mascherano next to him, not a Kaka. If it were me, Id play Ronny on the right, Kaka on the left, Xabi and Diarra or some big hard enforcer in the middle. Up front could be Fred and Earnie it doesnt matter, the goals are coming from the flanks. Oh, and dump their entire defense. Arbeloa?!?! Hah!!

Oh, now Leo Messi, I can dig. That kid as some serious serious talent.

But back to Rooney, you might be able to say that Ronaldo and Messi have slightly better technical ability and maybe Kaka has better vision, and maybe Torres as better goal-scoring nose, but for passion, commitment, power, raw desire to win PLUS no small amount of the above-mentioned talents, Rooney is as complete a football player as you could hope for. Like Stevie G on roids.

firefly wrote:And Jimi, Real will never dominate with the pansy-ass defense they have, not to mention their deficiencies in midfield. Im a big fan of Xabi Alonso, but to be effective he needs a Mascherano next to him, not a Kaka. If it were me, Id play Ronny on the right, Kaka on the left, Xabi and Diarra or some big hard enforcer in the middle. Up front could be Fred and Earnie it doesnt matter, the goals are coming from the flanks. Oh, and dump their entire defense. Arbeloa?!?! Hah!!

agreed, having kaka play this semi-sweeper/center-half role aint working....he roams way to much and imo, thats what hurts the defensive side of the ball for real. although he's got talent up the wazoo, he spends too much time with the ball on his feet trying to look the player rather than making plays. they need the young version of the beckham they used to have to be able to set these guys up for some goal scoring opps. remember when david played for real? he was damn good back then.

oh and btw firefly...you can BARELY tell youre a United fan from your posts

jimimou wrote:oh and btw firefly...you can BARELY tell youre a United fan from your posts

You know me, I try to infuse a degree of objectivity to my commentary

But thats the way it is. Im not really ashamed of it! If my kid comes home from school one day and tells me he's an Arsenal fan, I'll throw his ass out!!

Oh, to be a fan of a real team like Olympiakos!!!!

so my poor olympiakos hasnt been performing...thanks for reminding me

jimimou wrote:so my poor olympiakos hasnt been performing...thanks for reminding me

But they are a PASSIONATE team, very passionate.

More injuries for the US side. Cup hopes are dimming, not that they were that bright anyway...

Dempsey is the third front-line United States player to sustain an injury that could keep him out of the World Cup. It is only the latest injury worry for Bradley, who has been without the first-team central defender Oguchi Onyewu (knee) and the emerging striker Charlie Davies (a broken leg sustained in an auto accident) since late 2009. Onyewu is in his first season with A.C. Milan in Italy, and Davies is in his first with Sochaux in France.

If Dempsey is unavailable for the World Cup, it could reopen a door for DaMarcus Beasley. Beasley, who has been playing an increasingly important role for Glasgow Rangers in Scotland, fell out of favor at the Confederations Cup but offers Bradley speed and experience on the left flank. Other possibilities include Robbie Rogers, a naturally right-footed player who has played on the left side for the Columbus Crew, and Alejandro Bedoya, 22, who plays in Sweden.

Looks like the Brits will have a new captain since the former captain was sleeping with a girl who happened to be dating another team member...I can only hope this is the begining of the demise for the british side...

Personally, I don't see what the big deal is here...

March 5, 2010, 4:29 pm
World Cup With an Accent on TV in United States
By JACK BELL
Blimey! Perhaps the network known as ESPN (which began life as the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network) should change its name to the ENGLISH Sports Programming Network.

On Thursday, ESPN, which will carry all 64 matches of the 2010 World Cup in South Africa across its family of networks beginning on June 11, unveiled its announcing teams for the tournament. And from top to bottom, the gents’ voices are well known … in Britain. Ian Darke, Adrian Healey, Derek Rae and Martin Tyler will provide the play-by-play match commentary throughout the tournament.

Will it be soccer or football? Pitch or field? Will players wear kits and boots or uniforms and cleats? Stop me before I have an aneurysm.

On June 12, when the United States takes the field against England in Rustenburg, the folks describing the action as it is beamed back to the colonies will be speaking the Queen’s English, sprinkled with the so-called soccer terms that make expatriates so happy and sound like nails on the blackboard to many Americans.

J. P. Dellacamera and John Harkes, who team on Major League Soccer and United States national team games for ESPN, have been relegated, Dellacamera to ESPN Radio, to work the 64 tournament games with Tommy Smyth and his onion bag; Harkes merely to oblivion.

“The group of commentators we have assembled represents some of the finest English-language voices for televised soccer anywhere in the world,” Jed Drake, ESPN’s executive producer, 2010 FIFA World Cup, said in a statement. “They present the sport at its highest level, and their firsthand knowledge of the players who will compete in the FIFA World Cup will greatly inform fans and enhance how we present this global event in the United States.”

These guys might be good and they certainly know their stuff, but is Drake telling American soccer fans that there are not four people in the United States capable of conveying the same information with a global perspective and no foreign accent?

Which voices do you prefer? The Bacardi Breezers (Geezers) or the Yanks? Does it matter? Should ESPN even be using two guys in the booth, or would one informed and knowledgeable announcer be just fine? What would the reaction be in England if Sky Sports or the BBC employed a Yank to call Premier League games or, even worse, the World Cup?