2 edits
I am seriously enjoying the way Ecuador plays. Their build-ups are a joy to watch, and they keep doing these awesome passes across the field.
Their defence is pretty impressive too - there were a couple of tackles against Poland that were textbook goal-savers.
Hope I don't jinx them, but I'm looking forward to their match against Germany already, followed by them beating whoever they meet from Group B.
EDIT: Actually, I hope they play England because then it'll be easy to know who to barrack for. A team I find riveting versus a team that sent me to sleep in their first match.
Originally posted by orfeoThey should play England if they qualify second in their group.
I am seriously enjoying the way Ecuador plays. Their build-ups are a joy to watch, and they keep doing these awesome passes across the field.
Their defence is pretty impressive too - there were a couple of tackles against Poland that were textbook goal-savers.
Hope I don't jinx them, but I'm looking forward to their match against Germany already, follow ...[text shortened]... arrack for. A team I find riveting versus a team that sent me to sleep in their first match.
2-0 now.
Originally posted by Freddie2006You're making a couple of assumptions there that I don't agree with. Like England being capable of beating Sweden. They're going to have to do a lot in tonight's match to convince me of that after the 1st game's mess.
They should play England if they qualify second in their group.
2-0 now.
Originally posted by orfeoYou're a joke. Did you not see the Sweden T&T game? You remind me of those Americans who think that the USA have a good chance of winning their group. Just because England have one, slightly disappointing game, you assume they stand no chance of beating Sweden. You're having a laugh right?
You're making a couple of assumptions there that I don't agree with. Like England being capable of beating Sweden. They're going to have to do a lot in tonight's match to convince me of that after the 1st game's mess.
2 edits
Originally posted by Freddie2006I saw the entire Sweden vs T&T game. It was a great game, unlike the other one that sent me to sleep. The reason it was a draw was because of T&T's great defending, not because Sweden wasn't any good.
You're a joke. Did you not see the Sweden T&T game? You remind me of those Americans who think that the USA have a good chance of winning their group. Just because England have one, slightly disappointing game, you assume they stand no chance of beating Sweden. You're having a laugh right?
Besides, as I already indicated, I'm reserving further judgment until tonight's games. But England's first game wasn't "slightly disappointing", it was (from the bits I managed to be awake for at either end) one of the worst matches of the tournament. They won because Paraguay somehow managed to be even more disappointing than they were.
EDIT: And seconds after I finished writing this, Ecuador proved their worth again. 3-0.
Originally posted by orfeoMay I quietly suggest that you save up your criticism for after Australia play Brazil, rather than expending them on a team that actually knows how to play football.
I saw the entire Sweden vs T&T game. It was a great game, unlike the other one that sent me to sleep. The reason it was a draw was because of T&T's great defending, not because Sweden wasn't any good.
Besides, as I already indicated, I'm reserving further judgment until tonight's games. But England's first game wasn't "slightly disappointing", it was (fr ...[text shortened]... EDIT: And seconds after I finished writing this, Ecuador proved their worth again. 3-0.
Originally posted by orfeoEngland swopped the entire team at half time if I remember rightly. You were considered such poor opposition that it was merely an experiment for Errikson to test out some young players. Clearly they wern't that good. Perhaps if you look further than that game you'll notice that Australia had never beaten England in a proper game.
Hmm, and what happened last time Australia played England...?
Originally posted by Freddie2006We did better in the first half than in the second, I believe.
England swopped the entire team at half time if I remember rightly. You were considered such poor opposition that it was merely an experiment for Errikson to test out some young players. Clearly they wern't that good. Perhaps if you look further than that game you'll notice that Australia had never beaten England in a proper game.
1 edit
Originally posted by dylLOL, correct! It was the MAIN team that we beat 2-0, and in the 'young players' half they managed to hold us to a 1-1 draw.
We did better in the first half than in the second, I believe.
Do you think we should let Freddie keep digging the hole or is he deep in enough already?
Originally posted by Freddie2006We've played you twice, according to the records on the FIFA website, and they were both friendlies.
England swopped the entire team at half time if I remember rightly. You were considered such poor opposition that it was merely an experiment for Errikson to test out some young players. Clearly they wern't that good. Perhaps if you look further than that game you'll notice that Australia had never beaten England in a proper game.
Trust me, we know how to play football. And this never had anything to do with the quality of Australian play, anyway until you brought it up - what has my nationality got to do with whether or not the English team played a good first game? Would it make any difference to the validity of my point of view if I lived in Brazil?