Liverpool FC Forum

by **account deleted by request** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:34 pm

Oasis you made an excellent(in my view) call when you went for Mexico. I and many more on here would never have included them in our thoughts. They exceeded my expectations by giving Argentina a really close game. Take great credit and satisfaction from that and move on.

by **stmichael** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:35 pm

s@int wrote:Oasis you made an excellent(in my view) call when you went for Mexico. I and many more on here would never have included them in our thoughts. They exceeded my expectations by giving Argentina a really close game. Take great credit and satisfaction from that and move on.

stop talking to yourself

by **48-1119859832** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:37 pm

s@int wrote:Oasis you made an excellent(in my view) call when you went for Mexico. I and many more on here would never have included them in our thoughts. They exceeded my expectations by giving Argentina a really close game. Take great credit and satisfaction from that and move on.

I have, and I;m now backing England to do well, even if their matches are so painful to watch.

by **Ace Ventura** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:40 pm

0asis wrote:
Ace Ventura wrote:
0asis wrote:That's very true, Ace. However at least Mexico were entertaining and played wonderful football. They were just unlucky against Angola, Portugal and Argentina, it seems as tho England have stolen Mexico's luck.

Unluky in 3 out of 4 games the manager must of ran over several black cats.
I would rather England were playing breathtaking football and entertaining the world and they havent yet, but give me the option of winning ugly or going out whilst playing good football i know what i will take.

Then you do not appreciate good football when you see it. England have to be ashamed of the way they've played. For a team that is supposed to be one of the top favourites, they've been poor and very uninteresting to watch. But as someone said it's a results tournement and England are getting the results, but they are painful to watch, always have been, always will be.

We may be boring to watch but we are still in the tourament and are difficult to beat, 2 defeats in 4 games shows me the Mexicans while being entertaining are not solid or disciplined enough.
But this conversation has run its cause really now, well played Mexico thanks for the entertaining games but better luck next time.

by **GOAT** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:43 pm

Ace Ventura wrote:
0asis wrote:That's very true, Ace. However at least Mexico were entertaining and played wonderful football. They were just unlucky against Angola, Portugal and Argentina, it seems as tho England have stolen Mexico's luck.

Unluky in 3 out of 4 games the manager must of ran over several black cats.
I would rather England were playing breathtaking football and entertaining the world and they havent yet, but give me the option of winning ugly or going out whilst playing good football i know what i will take.

Finally someone shares my view, ive heard people saying it will be a disaster if england win the world cup just because they are playing poorly! Thats ridiculous, ill support them all the way no matter how they play, as you say i would rather they play poorly but keep getting the results than play well and go out.

by **48-1119859832** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:46 pm

GOAT wrote:
Ace Ventura wrote:
0asis wrote:That's very true, Ace. However at least Mexico were entertaining and played wonderful football. They were just unlucky against Angola, Portugal and Argentina, it seems as tho England have stolen Mexico's luck.

Unluky in 3 out of 4 games the manager must of ran over several black cats.
I would rather England were playing breathtaking football and entertaining the world and they havent yet, but give me the option of winning ugly or going out whilst playing good football i know what i will take.

Finally someone shares my view, ive heard people saying it will be a disaster if england win the world cup just because they are playing poorly! Thats ridiculous, ill support them all the way no matter how they play, as you say i would rather they play poorly but keep getting the results than play well and go out.

Whilst that is the more logical approach to football, teams who play poor football will also go out. England are fortunate that Costinha, Deco and Ronaldo are all out for the game. You had better go up a gear or you will be staring at defeat.

by **Bad Bob** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 6:21 pm

at the Ace vs Oasis debate!

by **davo_LFC** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:02 pm

If the germans get past the argies which i dont think is impossible but i cant see it happening, then i would back klose to be the golden boot winner. He looks a very good striker on his current form and he knows where the net is.

by **JC_81** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:20 pm

john craig wrote:Might stick a cheeky bet on one of the German strikers, someone like Klose again.

Didn't put that bet on in the end, regretting it now

by **Ace Ventura** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 8:29 pm

john craig wrote:
john craig wrote:Might stick a cheeky bet on one of the German strikers, someone like Klose again.

Didn't put that bet on in the end, regretting it now

My tips were Baros and Larsson so never listen to me when it comes to betting.

Klose has been fantastic and not just his goalscoring, i have been really impressed with his link up play and awareness around the box.
I know they say never look at signing players based on a world cup, but i think Klose seems to have a bit of everything and i cant see him playing for Werder Bremen next season.

by **65-1149024436** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 8:32 pm

I think Torres will be the top goalscorer in this World Cup.

Followed by Klose.

by **Ace Ventura** » Mon Jun 26, 2006 8:32 pm

0asis wrote:
GOAT wrote:
Ace Ventura wrote:
0asis wrote:That's very true, Ace. However at least Mexico were entertaining and played wonderful football. They were just unlucky against Angola, Portugal and Argentina, it seems as tho England have stolen Mexico's luck.

Unluky in 3 out of 4 games the manager must of ran over several black cats.
I would rather England were playing breathtaking football and entertaining the world and they havent yet, but give me the option of winning ugly or going out whilst playing good football i know what i will take.

Finally someone shares my view, ive heard people saying it will be a disaster if england win the world cup just because they are playing poorly! Thats ridiculous, ill support them all the way no matter how they play, as you say i would rather they play poorly but keep getting the results than play well and go out.

Whilst that is the more logical approach to football, teams who play poor football will also go out. England are fortunate that Costinha, Deco and Ronaldo are all out for the game. You had better go up a gear or you will be staring at defeat.

And Portugal are fortunate that Owen is out and that Sven has picked only 4 strikers in the squad, three if you dont consider Wallcott.

by **48-1119859832** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 12:04 pm

Ace Ventura wrote:And Portugal are fortunate that Owen is out and that Sven has picked only 4 strikers in the squad, three if you dont consider Wallcott.

Owen has been poor in the last 3 (including this World Cup) tournements. He was poor in World Cup 2002, he was poor in Euro 2004 and he wasn't exactly setting the World alight in this World Cup, albeit he was out injured for the entire season and was just regaining, fitness but he wasn't a threat in this World Cup, so to say Portugal are fortunate is an outrageous comment to make, fair enough if Owen was knocking in the goals and having lots of shots on goal, but he hasn't.

And your comment on Portugal being lucky that Sven has only taken four strikers two being injured, one being a target man and the other being unexperienced, but what happened two years ago? Oh right England had Vassell, I forgot that was a decisive factor.

by **Ace Ventura** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 12:28 pm

0asis wrote:
Ace Ventura wrote:And Portugal are fortunate that Owen is out and that Sven has picked only 4 strikers in the squad, three if you dont consider Wallcott.

Owen has been poor in the last 3 (including this World Cup) tournements. He was poor in World Cup 2002, he was poor in Euro 2004 and he wasn't exactly setting the World alight in this World Cup, albeit he was out injured for the entire season and was just regaining, fitness but he wasn't a threat in this World Cup, so to say Portugal are fortunate is an outrageous comment to make, fair enough if Owen was knocking in the goals and having lots of shots on goal, but he hasn't.

And your comment on Portugal being lucky that Sven has only taken four strikers two being injured, one being a target man and the other being unexperienced, but what happened two years ago? Oh right England had Vassell, I forgot that was a decisive factor.

Do me a favour and f'ck of if all you can do is criticise England.
Anyone who has any clue about Michael Owen knows that he improves with a run of games after a long term injury, in the latter stages of the tournament he would of come good, the championships you are knocking the lad in he scored in each game when the team lost.
He didnt set the world alight in the group stages in 2002 but then scored against Denmark and Brazil.
Again in 2004 he wasn't exactly on fire but linked up really well with Rooney providing assists and showing a different side to his game, and then scoring a great oppurtunist goal against Portugal.
He is the top goalscorer in the current squad and always capable of popping up with a goal in the big games.
You know f'ck all and have no loyalty towards England so feck off and support the mexicans.

by **hawkmoon269** » Tue Jun 27, 2006 12:32 pm

What I don't understand is why Sven brought Wallcott, and then not played him. It's a waste of a place for someone else.

Liverpool FC Forum

Golden boot winner - Who will be the top scorer

Who is online