Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > 2+2 Communities > Other Other Topics
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old 06-25-2004, 07:13 PM
Cyrus Cyrus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Tundra
Posts: 1,720
Default Commercial break

"It was a perfectly good goal."

When you get a chance to see it again, more calmly, and preferably from the camera behind the net, perhaps you will see that there is obstruction. Until then, we will simply disagree.

"Things have gone too far. You can't get near a keeper now without it being a foul should the keeper screw up. They are too overprotected."

The major change has to do with fouling on the pitch, not on the keeper. Since FIFA started promoting more severe refereeing, we are seeing definitely better football and more skills. The keeper is still pretty much protected as he used to be, maybe a little more now. But the major change is that players like Zidane can show off their talents without fearing "Chopper" Harris ending their career with a tackle from behind.

"The Rooney injury was a blow but not catastrophic."

I don't see any other player I the squad that is capable of the things Rooney is. If the fat lad was still in, the Portuguese back would not have that free room in front of their area. So, yes, maybe it wasn't "catastrophic", but is was a blow.

"I don't think you understand Penalties. Apart from Beckham's and Vessels they were fine."

No, three of them went straight where the goalkeeper stood. If the keeper had not dived, he would have caught them. This is NOT how a penalty is supposed to be taken. This is the Rudi Neeskens way and it is not the percentage way.

"If [the penalties] go in they are good penalties, if the keeper doesn't have to make a save they are crap. As simple as that."

I'm afraid this is results-guided thinking instead of percentages-guided thinking. Listen : A good penalty is a penalty that manages to do at least one of these things : (a) make the keeper dive the wrong way (b) hit the side of the net or (c) hit the upper corner of the net.

The England penalties looked good because the Portuguese keeper kept falling (see 'a' above) when he shouldn't.

"Watch it so that [Rooney] does not become another bloated "wasted talent" like Gazza became. <- This is a joke right?"

No joke. I was a Gazza acolyte. How heavy must Rooney get before you realize that the weight is catastrophic? This is not the Puskas era, you know. Weight is the downfall for footballers when so much running is required. (And skilful players cannot apply their skills when they are out of breath.)

"[In] these shootouts, a lot of luck is involved in penalties; the difference between the players abilities from 12 yards is miniscule."

I disagree. England have lost in shootouts in the last four or five major tournaments they were involved! This is called a pattern. Something is wrong - and needs fixing. My opinion is the coach should've taken this psychological burden of past shootout losses off the players' minds - and have them practice for God's sake.

PENALTY SHOOTOUTS ARE LIKE FOOTBALLERS PLAYING A ROUND OF TENNIS AFTER THE FOOTBALL GAME! It's a whole different ball game (excuse the pun) but also a crucial part of today's game. I'm continually surprised at coaches who don't pay the required attention to it.

You think Sven had his players practice penalty kicks? I would bet not - he would probably consider this as too pessimistic.

As to Beckham's penalties (that have cost England dearly once more), the less said the better.
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.