World Cup 2010 - Bastards Speak Up 2.0!!!

I swear the offside rule has been rewritten on the sly for this World Cup.





First the goalie can run out of goal and catch people offside, and now you can hoof it up the pitch to your striker standing on opposing goal-line.





:icallbullshit:
 
piedpiper said:Duderonomy said:And Germany's first goal was offside!







NO





Please revisit the rules.





"There is no offside if a player receives the ball directly from: a goal kick"










I wish somebody had told England!


We could have been playing with Heskey AND Crouch up front, one standing in front of the opposition goalkeeper, the other to nod it in from goal kicks. It would've been brutal, Ozzie rules football, but about the only way we might have beaten Germany yesterday.
 
Goal.jpg






maradona.jpg
 
Duderonomy said:piedpiper said:Duderonomy said:And Germany's first goal was offside!







NO





Please revisit the rules.





"There is no offside if a player receives the ball directly from: a goal kick"










I wish somebody had told England!


We could have been playing with Heskey AND Crouch up front, one standing in front of the opposition goalkeeper, the other to nod it in from goal kicks. It would've been brutal, Ozzie rules football, but about the only way we might have beaten Germany yesterday.




Good lord no, the last thing I needed to see was Emile spooning any more chances in front of goal.
 
There's only one thing to do when your team gets knocked out of the WC.





Google.com





And type in





2204355





And then click ???I???m feeling lucky???
 
Someone wanna talk to me about Messi and all the hormones they've fed him over the years? I just got back from Argetina and it was impossible to get a straight answer out of those people re: this guy. They actually sorta sounded proud in describing how he was a midget and how impressively he's grown thanks to years of injections to his legs. Is that healthy? Is it ethical? Srs questions; I'm not a messi hater; just curious.
 
rootlesscosmo said:Someone wanna talk to me about Messi and all the hormones they've fed him over the years? I just got back from Argetina and it was impossible to get a straight answer out of those people re: this guy. They actually sorta sounded proud in describing how he was a midget and how impressively he's grown thanks to years of injections to his legs. Is that healthy? Is it ethical? Srs questions; I'm not a messi hater; just curious.




Anything that happens before a player turns 18 counts as 'formation'. Would you prefer a less brilliant, more ethical version of him?
 
Messi was diagnosed with a growth hormone deficiency as a child, so I don't think it's unethical for him to receive hormone treatment. Kids in the States with growth problems receive hormone treatment on the regular. Im sure the treatment that Messi received was expensive and far more advanced, but I don't find it problematic.
 
brasil needs ramires' speed against the netherlands


damn yellow card rule change


same for those young ghanean defenders, you play the game of your life and then you can't help your country go as far as they have ever gone because of some card 3 weeks ago


:weaksauce:
 
DigginDave said: Would you prefer a less brilliant, more ethical version of him?

yes!
 
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/412423-world-cup-soccer-the-past-future-of-bob-bradleys-us-national-team





good analysis of US team's failings in the WC and its needs going forward. i pretty much agree w/most of it.





still pissed Clark & Findley got the start instead of Edu & Feilhaber or Gomez...
 
I got as far as the bit where he listed the top 15 countries and decided I could no longer pretend he knew anything about football.
 
Junior said:I got as far as the bit where he listed the top 15 countries and decided I could no longer pretend he knew anything about football.




(1) Brazil; (2) Argentina; (3) Spain; (4) Portugal; (5) Germany; (6) Chile; (7) Paraguay; (8) Uruguay; (9) Czech Republic; (10) Italy; (11) France; (12) Denmark; (13) Ghana; (14) Nigeria; (15) Mexico; (16) the Netherlands; (17) Slovakia; (18) South Korea.





Who's missing? (hint: do NOT say England).


Who shouldn't be on that list?
 
England. Seriously. We were shit at this world cup but if you're just judging it on that then how can the Czech team be at number 9? Yes we're crap and overrated but so are many of the other teams on there (Italy and France at 10 and 11?).





Also, Nigeria at 14? Based on what? Paraguay 7th best team in the world?
 
Junior said:England. Seriously. We were shit at this world cup but if you're just judging it on that then how can the Czech team be at number 9? Yes we're crap and overrated but so are many of the other teams on there (Italy and France at 10 and 11?).





Also, Nigeria at 14? Based on what? Paraguay 7th best team in the world?




Last time England played France in a friendly, they fucking schooled us. It was like the WC game against Brasil, when they went down to ten men and still played keep-ball. France weren't breaking a sweat, and every time Anelka dropped deep, he was unmarked, and dictated the match. And he's not even a world class playmaker. I think we might be 12 or so, but not top ten. Just like USA, there are plenty of more technically adept teams ahead of us. I think Japan would do us. South Korea too. All of the South American teams at this tournament would do us. Italy and France would do us. On this form, Ghana would have us, but Nigeria looked short of ideas, so they'd probably be at our level. Ivory Coast would do us.


It would be easier to list the teams that we could beat.
 
Yeah agreed but if you look at that list he's gone to 18 without mentioning England. I think it's worth putting our shit performance at the World Cup in perspective in that, yes we were awful, but on form we're no way outside the top 18 in the World right now. Give it a year or two without us rejigging the squad though and I suspect we'd be well on our way out of the top twenty.