Asian interest ends as Brazil put down marker - but England don't need to worry!

[webfact]

 

SPONSORED BY

 

by Rooster | ASEAN NOW

 

Direct Asian interest in the World Cup ended last night with the defeat of both Japan and South Korea at the hands of Croatia and tournament favorites Brazil respectively.

 

Brazil were particularly impressive in the first half of the late match Thai time as they built up a 4-0 lead by the 36th minute.

 

South Korea pegged them back a little in the second half as the South Americans took their feet off the gas. The game ended 4-1 with some spectacular goals by both teams, especially a neat passing move that let in Richarlison. 

 

 

Brazil have created many chances so far in the tournament but this was the first time they converted them in numbers. They missed several good opportunities to add to their tally in a profligate second half. 

 

International media was full of words like "ominous" for the rest of the teams in Qatar but while Brazil are the most likely winners I see no reason for England - or anyone else - to be overly concerned. 

 

In decades past there was a mystique about Brazil that led to an inferiority complex that no longer exists. 

 

These days many of the Brazilians play alongside England stars in the English Premier League.

 

They are teammates at Tottenham, Man Utd, West Ham, Chelsea and Arsenal to name but five. 

 

Flesh and blood with all the potential frailties, so I don't think England manager Gareth Southgate or his team will be overly concerned. 

 

 

This is not Mexico in 1970!

 

Brazil got off to such a quick start that the Koreans were simply blown away. They were then able to play with a freedom knowing that the enormous pressure put on them back home was off....until the next match. 

 

That will be against Croatia with either the Netherlands or Argentina likely to await in the semis. 

 

 

The earlier game was drab with Japan and Croatia playing out a tedious 1-1 draw that went to penalties. 

 

Japan are now the new England after they wimped out with the spot kicks and were tamed 3-1.

 

But they like South Korea can look back at some great wins in the group stages that will long live in the memory. 

 

On the Betfair exchange punters reacted with Brazil's price tightening to a shade under 2-1 from 5-2. 

 

Tonight's action will see Morocco play Spain at 10pm Thai time and Portugal take on Switzerland at 2am.

 

I'm predicting a surprise with a Morocco win and think that the other game will be worth staying in bed for and go to penalties; then it will be anyone's guess as to who progresses. 

 

The match may well be Cristiano Ronaldo's World Cup swansong. CR7 has reportedly been offered a 200 million euro yearly contract to play at Saudi Arabian club Al-Nassr. 

 

Following tonight's last round of 16 matches football fans can get some decent sleep for the next few nights before Croatia vs Brazil at 10pm Friday (Thai time) and the Netherlands vs Argentina at 2am Saturday morning. 

 

[Seppius]

Someone told me Hemmingway is showing the 2am games? is this true?

[blazes]

As long as Southgate's little sheep don't take that ridiculous knee, they will do ok.....

[RayC]

1 hour ago, blazes said:

As long as Southgate's little sheep don't take that ridiculous knee, they will do ok.....

I agree that if they remain on one knee throughout the game against France, then England will find it difficult.

 

However, if past matches are anything to go by, it's probably safe to assume that the starting eleven will be fully upright before the referee blows his whistle, and that the team will run around a bit during the match.

[Phnom Penh Trader]

Roy Keane on Brazil :

 

’I thought that I was watching Strictly (Come Dancing)!’ ????

[TigerandDog]

The only reason Southgate doesn't have to worry about Brazil is because they won't get to play them. They'll be lucky to get past France, and even if they should somehow manage that they won't get past Spain. My guess is they'll be going home after tomorrow's game, with their tails between their legs et again.

[Hanaguma]

Yet another reason soccer is unwatchable- ending a playoff game with a penalty shoot.   Really takes the "team" out of the sport, doesn't it?  How about playing until someone scores?  

[RayC]

8 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Yet another reason soccer is unwatchable- ending a playoff game with a penalty shoot.   Really takes the "team" out of the sport, doesn't it?  How about playing until someone scores?  

A game can end with a penalty shoot-out therefore, one more reason football is unwatchable? You ignore the pressure and tension involved in a penalty shoot-out, which is felt by both players and fans: It is a real test of both skill and nerve for the players.

 

A minimum of 5 - usually 6 - players per side are involved in a penalty shoot-out, and it sometimes happens that all 22 players have to take a penalty, so the team element is very much present.

 

That said, I think that the vast majority of fans would prefer that a winner was found in 90/ 120 minutes of play.

 

A 'golden goal' ending has been tried. However, instead of encouraging teams to attack, it usually resulted in negative play, which in the end still required penalties to settle things, therefore it was dropped.

[Mac Mickmanus]

26 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Yet another reason soccer is unwatchable- ending a playoff game with a penalty shoot.   Really takes the "team" out of the sport, doesn't it?  How about playing until someone scores?  

What if neither teams scores after 24 hours of playing ?

[Denim]

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What if neither teams scores after 24 hours of playing ?

Bury them then re start with a second eleven.

[edwinchester]

12 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What if neither teams scores after 24 hours of playing ?

Pistols at dawn for the team managers.

[richard_smith237]

45 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Yet another reason soccer is unwatchable- ending a playoff game with a penalty shoot.   Really takes the "team" out of the sport, doesn't it? 

So why even bother watching it or commenting on something which you seem to be implying is of no interest or relevance to you ???

 

45 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

How about playing until someone scores?  

They do that... its called ‘extra time’....      The same could be argued about Basketball...  Just give each time 100 points and let them play 5 mins....  usually a comment made by those who have no understanding of the idiosyncrasies of the game... the same can be said for your comment on football... 

[Mac Mickmanus]

13 minutes ago, edwinchester said:

Pistols at dawn for the team managers.

Southgate would miss 

[loong]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

The earlier game was drab with Japan and Croatia playing out a tedious 1-1 draw that went to penalties.

Did you actually watch the game?

Japan were the much better team and totally dominated in the first half.

I might agree with you that Croatia's game was somewhat tedious.

[loong]

3 hours ago, TigerandDog said:

The only reason Southgate doesn't have to worry about Brazil is because they won't get to play them. They'll be lucky to get past France, and even if they should somehow manage that they won't get past Spain. My guess is they'll be going home after tomorrow's game, with their tails between their legs et again.

Why do you think that they will go home after tomorrow's game?

Which game are you referring to?

England are not playing tomorrow!

They played in the semi-final in 2018. I don't think that their tails were between their legs then.

[Mac Mickmanus]

3 hours ago, TigerandDog said:

The only reason Southgate doesn't have to worry about Brazil is because they won't get to play them. They'll be lucky to get past France, and even if they should somehow manage that they won't get past Spain. My guess is they'll be going home after tomorrow's game, with their tails between their legs et again.

You seem to be hoping that England go out the World Cup and you dread England actually winning it .

   Do you support any particular team in the world Cup, or just support whoever England are playing ?

[Mac Mickmanus]

4 hours ago, TigerandDog said:

The only reason Southgate doesn't have to worry about Brazil is because they won't get to play them. They'll be lucky to get past France, 

England tactics for France 

 

 

Edited December 6, 2022 by Mac Mickmanus

[Hanaguma]

4 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What if neither teams scores after 24 hours of playing ?

Then they will be might tired and someone will score in the 25th hour.  

 

OR

 

Do like NHL hockey does. Start taking players off the field of play- start extra time with the full 11 and then remove one every 10 minutes.   At least it still stays a team sport and not a lottery.

[Hanaguma]

4 hours ago, RayC said:

A game can end with a penalty shoot-out therefore, one more reason football is unwatchable? You ignore the pressure and tension involved in a penalty shoot-out, which is felt by both players and fans: It is a real test of both skill and nerve for the players.

 

A minimum of 5 - usually 6 - players per side are involved in a penalty shoot-out, and it sometimes happens that all 22 players have to take a penalty, so the team element is very much present.

 

That said, I think that the vast majority of fans would prefer that a winner was found in 90/ 120 minutes of play.

 

A 'golden goal' ending has been tried. However, instead of encouraging teams to attack, it usually resulted in negative play, which in the end still required penalties to settle things, therefore it was dropped.

Of course there is pressur and tension involved, but that isn't the point. It is a team game, reducing it to a one on one is ludicrous. Would be like having a home run hitting contest to decide a baseball game. 

 

The "golden goal" probably didn't work because the players knew that a penalty shootout was coming afterwards. It made them ultra conservative. But if they knew they had to play until they scored, it would be different. 

 

I can see in league play wanting to speed things along, but in the sudden death playoffs? Sorry, no.   Hell, even World Cup Finals have been decided by penalty kicks.  Unsatisfying for the winners and losers alike. 

[Mac Mickmanus]

16 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Then they will be might tired and someone will score in the 25th hour.  

 

OR

 

Do like NHL hockey does. Start taking players off the field of play- start extra time with the full 11 and then remove one every 10 minutes.   At least it still stays a team sport and not a lottery.

What would happen after two hours when there are no players left on the pitch and the score is still equal ?

[Hanaguma]

24 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What would happen after two hours when there are no players left on the pitch and the score is still equal ?

The two remaining goalkeepers can settle it with a nice round of Rock Paper Scissors.  

[RayC]

41 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Of course there is pressur and tension involved, but that isn't the point. It is a team game, reducing it to a one on one is ludicrous. Would be like having a home run hitting contest to decide a baseball game. 

If that's your objection then, presumably, you would do away with penalties/ free throws from all sports? A free throw in basketball/ netball, etc relies purely on the ability of the thrower. It is a solitary exercise (as is penalty kicking in rugby). No else is involved or can interfere. In a similar vein, in baseball or cricket if the pitcher or bowler strikes/bowls out the batsmen the rest of the fielding team haven't been involved. I believe that there are only two players actively involved in an ice hockey penalty(?).

 

41 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

 

The "golden goal" probably didn't work because the players knew that a penalty shootout was coming afterwards. It made them ultra conservative. But if they knew they had to play until they scored, it would be different. 

Possibly but there are practical problems in playing on ad infinitum.

 

41 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

 

I can see in league play wanting to speed things along, but in the sudden death playoffs? Sorry, no.   Hell, even World Cup Finals have been decided by penalty kicks.  Unsatisfying for the winners and losers alike. 

In most football leagues - amateur or professional - the match finishes after 90 minutes. If the scores are level, both teams share the spoils; (typically) 1 point each. There is (usually) no requirement in league matches that there has to be a winner.

 

As I said previously, I think that most football fans would prefer to see knock-out matches resolved after 90/ 120 minutes; however, imo penalties are as good a method as any for resolving matters if the match ends in a draw. 

[Mac Mickmanus]

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

 

The "golden goal" probably didn't work because the players knew that a penalty shootout was coming afterwards. It made them ultra conservative. But if they knew they had to play until they scored, it would be different. 

 

Yeah 22 players all sitting on the pitch and the ref telling them, "You cannot come off the pitch until someone scores a  goal "

   And the players bedding down for the night on the pitch and asking for the floodlights to be switched off so they can get some sleep 

[BostonRob2]

Interesting debate.

 

This is worth a read:

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1195909-10-alternatives-to-a-penalty-shootout#:~:text=ADG sees an attacker go,we go to sudden death.

 

Rooster

 

 

[richard_smith237]

3 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Then they will be might tired and someone will score in the 25th hour.  

 

OR

 

Do like NHL hockey does. Start taking players off the field of play- start extra time with the full 11 and then remove one every 10 minutes.   At least it still stays a team sport and not a lottery.

Would you also get rid of penalties in the game ???...   it seems you think penalties are not part of the game...

How about direct free-kicks ???....    when a player shoots directly, he’s not involving all of or any of his team... 

 

 

[RayC]

1 hour ago, BostonRob2 said:

Interesting debate.

 

This is worth a read:

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1195909-10-alternatives-to-a-penalty-shootout#:~:text=ADG sees an attacker go,we go to sudden death.

 

Rooster

 

 

I can see pros and cons to all the potential solutions.

 

Personally, I still think that penalties are as good as system as any (although I suspect that some Spanish fans might disagree!).

[Mac Mickmanus]

1 hour ago, BostonRob2 said:

Interesting debate.

 

This is worth a read:

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1195909-10-alternatives-to-a-penalty-shootout#:~:text=ADG sees an attacker go,we go to sudden death.

 

Rooster

 

 

Thy have all been tried and all been rejected for various reasons 

[still kicking]

9 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Yet another reason soccer is unwatchable- ending a playoff game with a penalty shoot.   Really takes the "team" out of the sport, doesn't it?  How about playing until someone scores?  

Typical Yanky reply or Canadian 

[BostonRob2]

So Morocco progress. Now who would have predicted that......

 

Ronaldo on the bench. Could still be a late substitute hero.

 

Rooster

[TigerandDog]

14 hours ago, loong said:

Why do you think that they will go home after tomorrow's game?

Which game are you referring to?

England are not playing tomorrow!

They played in the semi-final in 2018. I don't think that their tails were between their legs then.

Yes they played in the 2018 semi final and still went home with their tails between their legs after losing that game because of their inflated opinions of how good they thought they were. The problem with England is they think they are better than they really are. The current team is the best team they've had in a very long time but they are not yet up to the same level as Brazil, France, Argentina or Portugal. Keep in mind they lost the Euro final to Italy and Italy didn't even qualify for the world cup. It's one thing to have confidence, but England supporters and the team aren't realistic when it comes to their actual capabilities.