The Draw

Good points. I watched the Slovenia/Russia 2nd leg and Slovenia had the benefit of playing against 10 men for most of the match, but they definitely showed they can bunker after getting their goal - exactly the type of squad that gives the U.S. trouble b/c we lack a playmaker to crack the bunker.

Algeria, I don't know much about, except that they beat Egypt, but didn't their fans attack Egypt's players or something like that prior to their match?

England, moreso than the U.S., will view this as an easy draw. Before Capello, I'd have given the U.S. a great chance to shock them in the first match, now not so much.

 

Good thinkin' 'Bhoy

 

I missed it. Tried getting my buddies sling box and that didnt work -tried following the streams online and none of them were up to speed.

I hate internet streaming - it never works, and when it does you cant see anything anyway. STUPID.

Anyway - went home for lunch and watched a few minutes... Good draw - I dont know that it could have been much better. Small country - the worst African country - hit or miss England - and our boys.

 

Except it means our uniforms will all be different, will be torn, and the players will have no boots.

 

France gets that group?? You've got to be kidding, may justice prevail.

Ivory Coast, Brazil, and Portugal in the same group?..ouch North Korea

The US draw? Can't ask for anything more. England is the clear favorite. We better not pull a Czech Republic opener like last time which destroyed our GD. I'm sure the other 2 teams feel they can get out of the group also, but bottomline anything short of advancing from this group should be regarded as an unmitigated disaster.

 

Nice one, Mo. And to add:

Against England, can a fife and drummer troop lead the squad onto the pitch, flying the Spirit of '76?

 

Yes, but we'll still win.

 

Only if France helps us.

 

I really couldn’t be more pleased with the draw. There is really no group of death in my mind.

 

lol, a French ref should do the trick

 

Would signing them all up for Thierry Henry's "How to cross the ball and Britian with one hand tied behind your back" seminar qualify as assistance from France?

 

HHeh... I've been reading the brit papers on it.

Capello & co arent all that worried, 1950 gets brought up once per site, but for some reason the Brits seem to think those friendly wins against us actually mean something.
Obligatory Fulham Reference:

 

Ha! And the jingoistic volleys have only just begun!!

We'll reach "nuclear" come go time. And THAT, is awesome!

We've called England's bluffs so well before, they probably wonder if we know them better than they know themselves.

 

Wonder what the crap rags like the Sun have to say about the draw. Scratch that, no I don't

I can't bring myself to fear Slovenia. If your playmaker is Robert Koren, pardon me if I am not that scared of you. Algeria, like everyone else, I know nothing about, and I will take my chances with them.

Our draw could have gone a lot worse -- I was very pleased with how it came out. I think ours is the most two tiered group of the lot -- I see teh #2 spot as ours to lose, if not the #1 spot.

The Mail's US - Fulham reference is an example of really lazy journalism. Did that hack actually watch any of our games?

 

Whats really funny about some of you is you refer to the Sun/Mirror etc as CRAP rags but everyday you visit their websites and read what their saying?

Say's alot about you I think!!!


BTW History is exactly that, it's the past means nothing it's all about "On the Day" so forget about history and wait for the outcome on the pitch, I'm not getting excited about the World cup draw I would have much preferred stronger opposition and against teams that can win the world cup.

If you Americans really believe you can win this World cup then my hats off to you?...GOOD LUCK! your going to need it.

 

uh.. no! I cant speak for anyone else but..
I first read the beeb, then the Guardian, Times, Telegraph and LAST.. I read the Daily Mail. Drew the line there. If I'd read the Sun or the Mirror.. THEN you would'a had me.

Now, do I rank them correctly or not?
{And btw, I cant remember the previous time I went to the dailymail site.. I had to go to 'drudgereports' for the link. I get to the others by typing in the url box and using the 'suggestions' from auto-complete.}

Well, I look at it differently. First, I think the draw points to England actually having a good chance to win the WC.
England actually having a manager that knows how to coach AND manage is a good sign.
The US and Algeria will probably give them a good workout. and contribute to the focus they'll need to get through the knockouts.

History doesnt say squat about the quality of the teams but it does encourage them in other ways.. I'd look at 2002 rather than 1950.
And to the Confed Cup.
England should, as well.

 

Yes I agree I do think England have a good draw and a great chance to win the WC But Im not jumping up and screaming about we ARE going to Win the WC I would look really silly if we lost a BIG game and got knocked out by a so called lower country.

And No I would suggest the correct order be:

The Times
Telegraph
Guardian
Mail
Express
Mirror
Sun
Star and the real rag if it's still around called the Daily Sport, aint got no sport just soft porn never really understood how it was allowed to publish as a daily newspaper, maybe it's not around any more I have no clue and I'm not even going to look.

 

So.. you're saying I was right, overall.

Actually I prefer the Telegraph.. but that's another forum.

 

I dunno guys, it seems we're dismissing the Slovenians in the same way that the English are dismissing us. They finished ahead of the Czech Rep, Poland, and a still good Northern Ireland in their qualifying group and then did Russia in a home and home. Could we take care of Russia in a home and home? I'm not so sure right now. In any case I'm sure Bob will be ready.