World Cup 2010

A forum for non-baseball sports
Post Reply
User avatar
sighyoung
Mayor of GRB
Posts: 38642
Joined: April 17 06, 7:42 pm
Location: Louisville

Re: World Cup 2010

Post by sighyoung »

jim wrote:So the Brits call choking curses?

Who is next and what time? I'm watching. Count me in on this whole world cup thing.

What is a c.ock-up?
"Curses!" is in place of a swear word, like "Darn!" or "Rats!" You know, "Curses, foiled again!"

As thrill wrote, a "c.ock-up" is what you think it is--a [expletive]-up.

jim
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
Posts: 50393
Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm

Re: World Cup 2010

Post by jim »

sighyoung wrote:
jim wrote:So the Brits call choking curses?

Who is next and what time? I'm watching. Count me in on this whole world cup thing.

What is a c.ock-up?
"Curses!" is in place of a swear word, like "Darn!" or "Rats!" You know, "Curses, foiled again!"

Crazy language they speak, isn't it? I thought they were talking about a goat or something. As to using language like that on the headlines:
[SHOW]
Image
I just get the biggest kick out of that yellow card. The guy comes running up reaching into his pocket and pulls that out and puts it over the guys head.

User avatar
Maclowery
Child Pot Activist
Posts: 7742
Joined: June 15 06, 7:27 am
Location: NYC

Re: World Cup 2010

Post by Maclowery »

Home now. What a great experience. Loads of fun seeing a bar full of fans (bandwagon like me or no) supporting the USA. It can't even come close to comparing to being in a Brazilian bar (in Iowa, with all 150 or so Brazilians in this entire backwater state) seeing Brazil win the WC in 2002, but it's a good damned start. If only more Americans realized just how awesome it is to watch an awesome soccer match.

YOU SAY YANKS! ! !

Fat Strat
Official GRB Sponsor of Larry Bigbie
Posts: 28010
Joined: April 17 06, 9:16 pm
Location: No. 16 on the Cards Top 15 Prospect List

Re: World Cup 2010

Post by Fat Strat »

jim wrote:How much "luck" (I hate that word, but I think you know what I mean) is there in soccer. When a 31 plays a 14 in baseball, nobody would be surprised in the least if the 31 ranked team beat the 14th. In soccer I assume it's less likely for "luck" to come into play?
Far less luck, I would think. After all, it wasn't "luck" that scored the US's goal. It was a serious error. You can get a lucky bounce in or touch on a corner every now and then, or a defender could slip and allow an inferior forward to score. A ball can hit a cross bar (see Altidore) or a goalie can guess right on a shot. Luck plays a part, no doubt, but you can usually only keep a good club down for so long.

It would be a real surprise, imo, if either Algeria or Slovenia beat us. A tie is possible with either team, just as it was with England. I think it was obvious that England was the better club today. Well, theoretically, it should be just as obvious or more obvious that America is better than Slovenia and Algeria.

jim
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
Posts: 50393
Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm

Re: World Cup 2010

Post by jim »

Fat Strat wrote:
jim wrote:How much "luck" (I hate that word, but I think you know what I mean) is there in soccer. When a 31 plays a 14 in baseball, nobody would be surprised in the least if the 31 ranked team beat the 14th. In soccer I assume it's less likely for "luck" to come into play?
Far less luck, I would think. After all, it wasn't "luck" that scored the US's goal. It was a serious error. You can get a lucky bounce in or touch on a corner every now and then, or a defender could slip and allow an inferior forward to score. A ball can hit a cross bar (see Altidore) or a goalie can guess right on a shot. Luck plays a part, no doubt, but you can usually only keep a good club down for so long.

It would be a real surprise, imo, if either Algeria or Slovenia beat us. A tie is possible with either team, just as it was with England. I think it was obvious that England was the better club today. Well, theoretically, it should be just as obvious or more obvious that America is better than Slovenia and Algeria.
I mean how often do the equivalent of the Pirates beat the equivalent of the Yankees? The Pirates would probably do it 1/3+ of the time. That often in soccer?

User avatar
Transmogrified Tiger
Puppy Murderer
Posts: 9323
Joined: April 25 06, 6:07 pm
Location: Across the River

Re: World Cup 2010

Post by Transmogrified Tiger »

jim wrote:
Fat Strat wrote:
jim wrote:How much "luck" (I hate that word, but I think you know what I mean) is there in soccer. When a 31 plays a 14 in baseball, nobody would be surprised in the least if the 31 ranked team beat the 14th. In soccer I assume it's less likely for "luck" to come into play?
Far less luck, I would think. After all, it wasn't "luck" that scored the US's goal. It was a serious error. You can get a lucky bounce in or touch on a corner every now and then, or a defender could slip and allow an inferior forward to score. A ball can hit a cross bar (see Altidore) or a goalie can guess right on a shot. Luck plays a part, no doubt, but you can usually only keep a good club down for so long.

It would be a real surprise, imo, if either Algeria or Slovenia beat us. A tie is possible with either team, just as it was with England. I think it was obvious that England was the better club today. Well, theoretically, it should be just as obvious or more obvious that America is better than Slovenia and Algeria.
I mean how often do the equivalent of the Pirates beat the equivalent of the Yankees? The Pirates would probably do it 1/3+ of the time. That often in soccer?
Less often. I think college football and its frequency of upsets would be the closest comparison.

User avatar
go birds
-go birds
Posts: 32057
Joined: February 5 10, 9:54 am

Re: World Cup 2010

Post by go birds »

Heck of a game today.

Had a really big missed opportunity to go ahead, but i guess that was just karma for the sloppy Green play.

greenback44
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 11665
Joined: June 26 06, 8:54 pm
Location: In a Small Town with Jack and Diane

Re: World Cup 2010

Post by greenback44 »

thrill wrote:You're totally right, outside of elite speed, there really isn't one talent you can go far with. You have to have balance.
Forwards benefit from the ability to fall down and writhe in agony.

User avatar
thrill
bronoun enthusiast
Posts: 30539
Joined: April 14 06, 10:45 pm
Location: barely online

Re: World Cup 2010

Post by thrill »

Image

User avatar
lukethedrifter
darjeeling sipping elite
Posts: 37260
Joined: October 17 06, 11:19 am
Location: Huis Clos

Re: World Cup 2010

Post by lukethedrifter »

jim wrote:How much "luck" (I hate that word, but I think you know what I mean) is there in soccer. When a 31 plays a 14 in baseball, nobody would be surprised in the least if the 31 ranked team beat the 14th. In soccer I assume it's less likely for "luck" to come into play?
When the announcer mentioned this was the first goal the US had scored against England in games played outside of the US since 1950, I figured that said something about the luck involved.

Between the huge upset in 1950 and this game, England has outscored the US 33-7 with the US winning once in 8 tries. Going back to 1950 that makes it 2 wins, 7 losses and 1 tie. About what a SABRgeek might predict.

I wonder why they never played between 64 and 85?

Post Reply