[Euro 2012] Discussion thread.
- Thread starter das_ben
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
I mean, its still the better thing to watch, since the NBA finals just screams "finally lebron gets his ring"
Paying more attention to this than that **** finals.
Paying more attention to this than that **** finals.
I don't think so. Ukraine only won one match and lost 2 + their goal difference is lousy, so they don't deserve to be going anywhere from what I can see.
The disallowed goal? - All teams have been through that and don't forget that England have been on the receiving end of these decisions before as well, so that's just how it is I'm afraid.
Even if Ukraine had drawn, they still wouldn't have gone through.
But anyway, England win the group (against all expectations - let's be honest here) but now things are getting interesting.
I don't personally think they'll beat Italy but look at what's happened, France are n't exactly on fire at the moment, Sweden are out and Holland have had a nightmare tournament.
I'm not counting England out just yet because Italy seem to be the superior team on paper but they've only won one game and drawn two, so they're not exactly dominating the tournament.
If I ruled the world, I would seriously consider having them shot.
There is no suitable punishment for inflicting them on the rest of the world.
There is no suitable punishment for inflicting them on the rest of the world.
Look, England didn't play well, but this is a little...uhm...one eyed.
England didn't create a single chance? You didn't see the header in front of an open goal that Rooney managed to put wide? How about Ashley Cole's chance in the second half where the Ukrainian keeper made a great save?
That's 2 very good chances, apart from the goal...so to say they didn't create one chance is just plain wrong.
Ukraine's over-the-line goal? Watch it again, when the pass is made to Devic at the beginning of the move he is a mile offside. If the goal had been given THEN it would have been unfair. As it was, one mistake cancelled the other out.
Don't get me wrong, England have been ugly ugly ugly to watch, but they've played 3, won 2 and drawn 1. Ukraine have lost twice and won only one and only scored 2 goals (against the team that finished bottom of the group) compared with England scoring 6. And all this, despite Ukraine having the huge advantage of playing at home.
Ukraine are out, and there's nothing wrong or unfair about that. Don't blame conspiracy. Debt punishment for Greece? Seriously, wake up!
Italy 34 attempts, England 9 sitting behind waiting for a counter-strike... I never thought that England with "the best league in the world" would become the old Italy we hated with the catenaccio, Greece or Ireland... total pathetic game, only defense. Totally humiliated by Italy, I hope they win. Defending 120 minutes and hoping to win the game at the penalties (which is luck, not skill) is not only fucking ugly, it is lame.
English pride my ass...
All well in the end, now we will see a nice match between two great teams who know how to play attractive football, Germany vs. Italy.
English pride my ass...
All well in the end, now we will see a nice match between two great teams who know how to play attractive football, Germany vs. Italy.
Last edited:
this is one of those rare times when the sports gods were fair and just.
you're right that Italy outplayed England at almost every end.
this is one of those matches though that illustrates why I still can't really take soccer seriously. what other sport has final scores of 0 to 0? I say it every time the topic comes up but I honestly believe that the game of soccer would be better enjoyed by all if they just made the pitch a little smaller.
would it be so bad if the field wasn't so utterly huge?
would people not have at least as much fun watching a match if a few more goals were scored?
If Italy doesn't get off their a$$es and score a goal or two during regular time, then Germany will trounch them. I want Italy to win, but not scoring makes me nervous. Just found out about it, now to watch the highlights on ESPN.
EDIT: just saw the highlights........why when someone is offsides don't they hold back to make sure they're not offsides before the pass is kicked to them? Anyway, looks like Italy had plenty of chances but just couldn't find the net until the penalty-kick shootout. Wait, why do they call them penalty kicks? Are both teams penalized for not scoring in regular and stoppage time? It should just be called a shootout.
EDIT: just saw the highlights........why when someone is offsides don't they hold back to make sure they're not offsides before the pass is kicked to them? Anyway, looks like Italy had plenty of chances but just couldn't find the net until the penalty-kick shootout. Wait, why do they call them penalty kicks? Are both teams penalized for not scoring in regular and stoppage time? It should just be called a shootout.
Last edited:
I was about to post something inflammatory, but I suppose you deserve a proper reply. Football, to people that enjoy it for the whole sport, is about a lot more than goals. If anything, goals are a bonus to excellent plays. Personally, I'm very annoyed with commentary that reduces the game to goals (which has become common in Germany) when there's so much more to enjoy: passes, tactics, positioning, etc. - not all of these are obvious to the casual viewer, but once you get into the sport, you do not want to miss them. As a matter of fact, making the pitch smaller would most likely have the opposite effect to the one you're aiming for, resulting in more crowding, when most of the time for scoring goals space is essential.
I'm pretty sure passing, tactics, and positioning would still be prevalent and important on a smaller pitch. they're not going to suddenly disappear from play. I'm not talking about cutting the field in half, just making it a little tighter than it is now. and if you're so worried about crowding, then just take 1 player from each team off the field to account for the difference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoor_soccer does just that, or at least the German variant 'Hallenfussball', to my knowledge.
Why does it matter if the scores are 0-0. The skill level in this game was particularly low, but to the supporters a 0-0 game can be among the most tense encounters imaginable as it can change with just the slightest error. For me, a game where a team quickly goes 2-0 up is considerably less interesting as the game becomes one sided as the tension is significantly reduced.
That you can't take it seriously just reflects on the fact that you like sports with more goals or scores, but for most football fans the enjoyment and tension don't come from the goals alone.
I mean, I'm a huge fan of cricket, where a game takes 5 days and is incomprehensible to anyone who has never played or watched it.
I guess another example would be grand tours in cycling (like the TdF) where people find it boring because they don't understand the tactics and psychology involved.
Changing a sport like football to suit audiences who want more goals would be a terrible, as the game in this form has been played and refined for over a hundred years.
If you like smaller pitches with fewer players then there's beach football or 5 a side, but in 11 a side football the size of the pitch is an essential part of the game as it demands tactical decisions as to how the space is going to used/defended/attacked, and allows for a wide range of different tactics.