Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
World Cup 2010: General Discussion World Cup 2010: General Discussion

06-01-2010 , 12:33 PM
I think I'd have risked Carragher as left back cover if it meant we could pick an extra midfielder.
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 12:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BurningSquirrel
lol Khedira

shame that Hummels is not part of the team
wat? Khedira is pretty good. Wouldn't be surprised at all if he played a great tournament.

I think if I was the coach I'd drop Klose+Jansen+Beck and add Frings+Hummels
The lack of (defensive) midfielders is borderline insane imo
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 12:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
Its a lock that GJ will score a wonder goal in the group stages and then make a catastrophic error and generally get raped for 90 mins and cost us a place in a semi.
That why i think it was pretty important england got the D.M problem solved or at least tyred different option .
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 12:36 PM
Barry should be fit for the second group game
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 12:40 PM
lookin at Group F, a Italy 1st, Paraguay 2nd, forecast looks good @2.1. Its a very weak group with New Zealand looking reasonably poor and Slovakia not much better.

Group B, England 1st, Usa 2nd@2.37, looks even better. expect england to ease through the group, and Algeria aern't expected to do anythin, with Slovenia lookin also poor.

Group A, France to win the group@2, is very good odds, considering there full of star players. whereas S.africa probably wont perform, and one would expect Uruguay and Mexico to fight it out for the 2nd spot.
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 12:40 PM
warnock seems an ok player ya just not seen him for england.

i'd prefer to gamble on Ashley cole fitness over a short amount of games and go with carragher/barry to cover if need be. Most of the time full squads aren't used in tourneys. Wayne bridge would have been ideal.


James
johnson terry ferdinand a cole

lennon barry lampard gerrard

j cole
rooney

imo.
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 12:46 PM
Quote:
New Zealand looking reasonably poor
I'd disagree with that
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 12:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoopie1
I can't see that a right-footed and slow Carragher is a better option. I rate Warnock, I think he's a good player, the problem with using Barry there is that you then have a defensive midfielder-shaped hole that we don't have cover for.
carrick for barry cover, hes not in good form but still a top player, bought for 25mil for man u, cant be bad
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 12:48 PM
oh yeah what about ledley king as barry cover, he ***** class in midfield anyway lol, did you not see him that time, when was it last world cup or something? ??
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 12:58 PM
Do you have to Bring 3 Goalkeeper?
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 12:59 PM
please start Joe Hart
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceire
Do you have to Bring 3 Goalkeeper?
I always thought it was a bit unnecessary myself.
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by clowntable
wat? Khedira is pretty good. Wouldn't be surprised at all if he played a great tournament.

I think if I was the coach I'd drop Klose+Jansen+Beck and add Frings+Hummels
The lack of (defensive) midfielders is borderline insane imo
You don't need DMs if you have Aogo, Lahm and Boateng to cover for the position obviously, they are all so experienced there.
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnglishLad72
please start Green
FYP
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:07 PM
Taking just two goalies would be an unnecessary risk, especially if the World Cup is 3000 miles away from home and you lose a keeper 24 hours before a game
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
Its a lock that GJ will score a wonder goal in the group stages and then make a catastrophic error and generally get raped for 90 mins and cost us a place in a semi.
This seems like a pretty reasonable assessment of GJ
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Consty
I always thought it was a bit unnecessary myself.
Thats why i was wondering was it in the rules? Im sure if it wasn't someone would have taken the gamble before.
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1444
Group A, France to win the group@2, is very good odds, considering there full of star players. whereas S.africa probably wont perform, and one would expect Uruguay and Mexico to fight it out for the 2nd spot.
Cogent analysis. My guess is most of the people on the other side of the France bet probably aren't aware that France is full of star players.
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:18 PM
just love the picture of walcott they use here

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/foot...10/8713742.stm
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedeezy
This seems like a pretty reasonable assessment of GJ
Having watched him at Liverpool for a season, I can confirm that this is a likely series of events.
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:20 PM
France is a side that looks to be changing. Right here at the last minute. Of course the manager is the same, but with Lass out because of the tragic illness we could see a very different midfield and up front Henry's form is so poor that I think I read today somewhere (skimmed) that he has even suggested himself that he would be satisfied with more of a joker role instead of starting.

All this basically means we could see some sort of different lineup/formation/style/tactics than what we've seen underperforming for years now.

I can't say it will finally be good. But there is definitely (finally) a chance of something really different. Can't get worse can it?
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sh58
just love the picture of walcott they use here

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/foot...10/8713742.stm
yeah that was the exact moment walcott found out he wasn't going
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceire
Thats why i was wondering was it in the rules? Im sure if it wasn't someone would have taken the gamble before.
Seems like a pretty awful gamble to me just to load up on one more random squad player.
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:25 PM
for whoever you are saying, you are required to take three goalkeepers.

which is precisely why jagielka should have gone
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote
06-01-2010 , 01:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bjørn
France is a side that looks to be changing. Right here at the last minute. Of course the manager is the same, but with Lass out because of the tragic illness we could see a very different midfield and up front Henry's form is so poor that I think I read today somewhere (skimmed) that he has even suggested himself that he would be satisfied with more of a joker role instead of starting.

All this basically means we could see some sort of different lineup/formation/style/tactics than what we've seen underperforming for years now.

I can't say it will finally be good. But there is definitely (finally) a chance of something really different. Can't get worse can it?
It can.
The offense is still mediocre, but the defense is more exposed.
World Cup 2010: General Discussion Quote

      
m