Italy In The Final

[OneeyedJohn]

I remember saying a while ago that Italian flair ( Ukraine/Germany) and simulation (Australia) would take them far. So it has proven.

In retrospect the blatant dive/falling over against Australia ( the ref wasn't cheating , the Italian was), does put one off supporting such a team. However their guile and tactics against Wurstland has to be admired, one minute they look dead on their feet, the next they are weaving intricate patterns around the opposing penalty area.

If Henry can avoid the histrionics and stop clutching his face everytime a defender nears him, then I hope they thrash Portugal for the good of the game.

P.S. C'mon on England..............................Euro 2008

[tigerbeer]

wow, such a GREAT one-liner, with such a depth of wisdom !

about 70-pages threads.... (BTW - the RAIN.... - was it yours? classic !)

oh, well - now, THAT is the criteria - who makes more long threads, right? alright - you are better than me, you win and I loose - satisfied?

if you wanna know - I am neither keen on starting many pages treads nor having a lot of posts. as you can see even Rainman who's joined 2 months after me, has more than twice number of posts than me, not to speak of some others, who perhaps have more posts than you, while joined only a year ago or less.

I do not worship Rianman (as you said you do), but I said the truth - I like his attitude, although not necessarily agree with all his opinions and statements. but then - it is natural, people tend to defer. another thing is - at least he manages to keep it within margins of point itself, not jumps to personal attacks. at least so far I haven't seen such.

and I am merely speaking up my mind as he does.

now, back to the topic - Italy, not Germany is in the final !

i kinda agree with aaaaaa, rainman has some good points and posts made in tv. but again i seriously would like to know what is meant by high class or middle class teams. history does say a lot about previous cup winnings but just does not justify labeling of teams. I'd say that switzerland does kick some ass for being in the world cup so to speak and so does ghana. but does not deserve to be labeled "low class". come on rainman, have a higher regard for your country's team. england <--- high class? i don't think so otherwise they would still be heading for the cup. italy, portugal, germany and france <--- absolutely high class at this point of time for being in the semi final.

then again i'd like to hear your explanation nonetheless when you are in the mood rainman.

[mrbojangles]

england <--- high class? i don't think so otherwise they would still be heading for the cup. italy, portugal, germany and france <--- absolutely high class at this point of time for being in the semi final.

So, in your view, the formula for being labelled high class or middle class, is how well you can take penalty shoot out's?

Personally (and unfortunately for the game) i think in this world cup, the main criteria is how well you can fool the ref. I think alot of players out there have themselves honourary Equity cards

[tigerbeer]

england <--- high class? i don't think so otherwise they would still be heading for the cup. italy, portugal, germany and france <--- absolutely high class at this point of time for being in the semi final.

So, in your view, the formula for being labelled high class or middle class, is how well you can take penalty shoot out's?

Personally (and unfortunately for the game) i think in this world cup, the main criteria is how well you can fool the ref. I think alot of players out there have themselves honourary Equity cards

please read previous postings of others to see where i am coming from when i mention the word "class".

[OneeyedJohn]

David Coleman's description of 'class' has yet to be topped when he was commentating on an Olympic 400 metre heat,,,the Cuban Juantorena was top man in the event (1970's) and coming round the final bend Coleman says 'now Juantorena is going to open his legs, and show us his class'

[mrbojangles]

england <--- high class? i don't think so otherwise they would still be heading for the cup. italy, portugal, germany and france <--- absolutely high class at this point of time for being in the semi final.

So, in your view, the formula for being labelled high class or middle class, is how well you can take penalty shoot out's?

Personally (and unfortunately for the game) i think in this world cup, the main criteria is how well you can fool the ref. I think alot of players out there have themselves honourary Equity cards

please read previous postings of others to see where i am coming from when i mention the word "class".

How can i read postings from "OTHERS" to know where "YOU" are coming from I'm not psychic you know

So for clarity, what is you formula / criteria for being labelled high / middle / Low class

[tigerbeer]

england <--- high class? i don't think so otherwise they would still be heading for the cup. italy, portugal, germany and france <--- absolutely high class at this point of time for being in the semi final.

So, in your view, the formula for being labelled high class or middle class, is how well you can take penalty shoot out's?

Personally (and unfortunately for the game) i think in this world cup, the main criteria is how well you can fool the ref. I think alot of players out there have themselves honourary Equity cards

please read previous postings of others to see where i am coming from when i mention the word "class".

How can i read postings from "OTHERS" to know where "YOU" are coming from I'm not psychic you know

So for clarity, what is you formula / criteria for being labelled high / middle / Low class

duh. again please read people who posted in the same thread before i did???????????

[rainman]

i probably shouldn't try and write long posts when i don't feel too well, but lets give it a try anyways. what i meant with low/middle/high class teams is that some teams just perform better over the years in world cup competitions than others. its not meant as an insult, not anywhere near it. i should have maybe picked a different label than low/middle/high, but anyways. it also has a little bit to do with the quality of football.

take italy for example, they were world cup winners in 1934, 1938 and 1982. the last real good performance is over 20 years ago. i labaled them as middle class because sometimes they perform very well and sometimes they perform very poorly.

take brazil, out of the 18 world cups played so far, they finished in the top 4 no less than 10 times and only once as 4th. the football, in most years, has been a joy to watch ..therefor my classification as a high class team.

take switzerland. i honestly don't know how many world cups they've participated in but they never got past the quarterfinals. this year they had a great team and a great draw and really a chance to go to the semifinals with the right tactic. the coach is mostly an *censored* because he dropped the best striker (vonlanthen) in the last days of the preparations due to a minor injury that was cured before the world cup even began and left out of the squad one of the perhaps best defenders, henchoz (who played last season for wigan, not sure about this season). then the injury of senderos really limited chances of progressing against the ukraine. but either way, i still consider them a low class team, even though they're my country. why? well, they generally perform average on world cups, but miss out on perhaps half of them because they just dont qualify.

you should understand that the "class" qualification is just a personal opinion by myself. i'd rather see some variation in the semifinals rather than, lets just say average performing teams. maybe some surprises (australia, ecuador or serbia to the semis?) and some really good teams like brazil (who dissapointed this year, i know), argentina or spain.

you could probably define them as:

- high class: teams who are 'expected' by their country to win the world cup, most of them play great football and generally do well in world cups.

- medium class: teams who may be expected by their country to go all the way, but also realize that its probably not going to happen and are just there to go as far as they can.

- low class: teams who never or very rarely make it past the first stage (saudi arabia?) or teams who are "first timers" at a world cup. they may every now and then surprise everyone, though. like south korea (4th), croatia (3rd) or chile (3rd).

lets face it, who wants to watch a final between italy and france? surely not as many as argentina against spain. if i labeled your country as a low class team, dont take it personally, its just my opinion of the quality of performance in past world cups and quality of football to enjoy.

Edited July 5, 2006 by rainman

[mrbojangles]

england <--- high class? i don't think so otherwise they would still be heading for the cup. italy, portugal, germany and france <--- absolutely high class at this point of time for being in the semi final.

So, in your view, the formula for being labelled high class or middle class, is how well you can take penalty shoot out's?

Personally (and unfortunately for the game) i think in this world cup, the main criteria is how well you can fool the ref. I think alot of players out there have themselves honourary Equity cards

please read previous postings of others to see where i am coming from when i mention the word "class".

How can i read postings from "OTHERS" to know where "YOU" are coming from I'm not psychic you know

So for clarity, what is you formula / criteria for being labelled high / middle / Low class

duh. again please read people who posted in the same thread before i did???????????

Does anyone else know what this guy is going on about Oh, &lt;deleted&gt; it, i can't be arsed, if you can't be bothered to answer the question

[kayo]

This year France have played the best football , they will crush Portugal tonight and embarass the Eyeties in the final. European football is the best.

signed (holland 1st, then england 2nd, then france 3rd, FAN). Kick those small porto balls..

Australia would have been in the final if not for cheating refs in our game against Italy!

Donz Croc

:D Crox, there´s a joke forum for these comments.

[Stacking Zeds]

I remember saying a while ago that Italian flair ( Ukraine/Germany) and simulation (Australia) would take them far. So it has proven.

In retrospect the blatant dive/falling over against Australia ( the ref wasn't cheating , the Italian was), does put one off supporting such a team. However their guile and tactics against Wurstland has to be admired, one minute they look dead on their feet, the next they are weaving intricate patterns around the opposing penalty area.

If Henry can avoid the histrionics and stop clutching his face everytime a defender nears him, then I hope they thrash Portugal for the good of the game.

P.S. C'mon on England..............................Euro 2008

OneeyedJohn, I agree with you more than I agree with myself. I must admit, I was all p*ss and wind when I posted this topic, but your post represents the reality. Kudos for your sage analysis

All this talk of "low, middle and high class European..." reminds me of Germanic linguistic theory but I do agree with most of what RainMan is saying. You rock, dude.

As for aaaaaa (please excuse spelling), I still think the 1994 final is the most boring game I have ever seen. The quality of this game is also mentioned on the link you posted (by the way, why post a link if it is counterproductive to the point you were making?). Maybe it's because the 1994 tournament was such a good one. In any event, that game stood out as a yawn fest because Italy went into it playing for a 0-0 draw.

Will the ghosts of the 1994 final return? It depends which one of the two Italian teams OneeyedJohn is talking about turns up to play.

[tigerbeer]

england <--- high class? i don't think so otherwise they would still be heading for the cup. italy, portugal, germany and france <--- absolutely high class at this point of time for being in the semi final.

So, in your view, the formula for being labelled high class or middle class, is how well you can take penalty shoot out's?

Personally (and unfortunately for the game) i think in this world cup, the main criteria is how well you can fool the ref. I think alot of players out there have themselves honourary Equity cards

please read previous postings of others to see where i am coming from when i mention the word "class".

How can i read postings from "OTHERS" to know where "YOU" are coming from I'm not psychic you know

So for clarity, what is you formula / criteria for being labelled high / middle / Low class

duh. again please read people who posted in the same thread before i did???????????

Does anyone else know what this guy is going on about Oh, &lt;deleted&gt; it, i can't be arsed, if you can't be bothered to answer the question

didn't know people could be that ignorant. i was not the one who mentioned low/middle/high class to start off with. rainman did. i was just one of them who was trying to figure out what criteria rainman used to justify if a team is low/middle or high class. so why the &lt;deleted&gt; you asking me for? keep telling you to read the previous posts again and again to find out who started this low/middle/high class team thing. geeezzzzzzzzzzzzz ??????????

[mrbojangles]

england <--- high class? i don't think so otherwise they would still be heading for the cup. italy, portugal, germany and france <--- absolutely high class at this point of time for being in the semi final.

So, in your view, the formula for being labelled high class or middle class, is how well you can take penalty shoot out's?

Personally (and unfortunately for the game) i think in this world cup, the main criteria is how well you can fool the ref. I think alot of players out there have themselves honourary Equity cards

please read previous postings of others to see where i am coming from when i mention the word "class".

How can i read postings from "OTHERS" to know where "YOU" are coming from I'm not psychic you know

So for clarity, what is you formula / criteria for being labelled high / middle / Low class

duh. again please read people who posted in the same thread before i did???????????

Does anyone else know what this guy is going on about Oh, &lt;deleted&gt; it, i can't be arsed, if you can't be bothered to answer the question

didn't know people could be that ignorant. i was not the one who mentioned low/middle/high class to start off with. rainman did. i was just one of them who was trying to figure out what criteria rainman used to justify if a team is low/middle or high class. so why the &lt;deleted&gt; you asking me for? keep telling you to read the previous posts again and again to find out who started this low/middle/high class team thing. geeezzzzzzzzzzzzz ??????????

And if you look at my first post above to you, of which you stated "england <--- high class? i don't think so otherwise they would still be heading for the cup. italy, portugal, germany and france <--- absolutely high class at this point of time for being in the semi final".

Therefore, you have made a statement that clearly expresses you have a criteria in your mind, as to what qualifies teams to be high class or not. I know, that you wasn't the one to first suggest high/middle and low class but you say that England are not and that only the 4 teams in the semi's can be. Which is utter nonsense, England aside, are you saying that Brazil and Argentina are not high class because they didn't make the semi's ?

[rainman]

as i stated in my previous post(s), i am not talking about this world cup only, i'm talking about general performances at past world cups and even other continental competitions. brazil went out at the same stage as england, but i still consider it a high class team.

[aaaaaa]

well, you're definetely getting closer to providing your definition of "high", "middle" and "low" class teams, dude ! anything more yet ?

[rainman]

well, you're definetely getting closer to providing your definition of "high", "middle" and "low" class teams, dude ! anything more yet ?

read my post above.

[aaaaaa]

rainman,

yes, true - I've missed that post - it was on previous page ...

well, in general I agree with your reasoning. yes, perhaps criteria can be used as how many WC attended (means qualified for it at all), then in those participations - how many won / went to quarter or semi finals ...

however there are few points to consider:

1) as you've mentioned Brazil - even though they are favorites and supposed to fall into "high class", they were beaten by France in '98 and now again. France - only once got WC and somehow two years later euro cup; however next WC tournament 2002 they've finished ... 28th out of 32 teams ! so, my point is - even high class teams, although prove on average results their worth, might meet with something as, let's say, BAD LUCK. and mid- or low class can get through (for example Greece in '04 Euro cup - is it high or middle class ? or turkey in WC 2002 - only lost to Brazil in final - how they could even get there past all mighty Argentina, Spain, Holland etc. ?)

2) if such labeling or classification was valid - then I think only "HIGH class" would have been ALWAYS getting into quarter-, semi- and finals? in other words - only high class teams would have won almost or always. but somehow as we can see - that is not the case, right ?

I think it has also to do at least to some extent with the organization of WC tournament. First stage teams are grouped and each team palys with each in their group, then 2 top are let to advance to Second stage (round of 16). and since that point - each team wich looses - is out. which is sort of - as said elsewhere - a lotery. Argentina, Germany - won all their previous games or almost. where are they now ? France and Italy barely managed to get into Round of 16 - and yet they are in the final now.

so, I think if Stage 2 was organized in the same way as Stage 1 (Round of 32) - means each team was allowed to play with each of 15 other, and then in the end points counted - THEN perhaps your definitions might've been applicable.

but of course that is impossible - that would stretch whole WC tournament for few months. another issue also I guess. so, we have what is going on now - by whatever happenstance (like Argentinian goalkeeper injured and substituted or Rooney baited and sent away - or whatever other cases) "high class" team is ousted.

so, that is why although you reasoning is ... reasonable - I still think it doesn't realy work here.

I bet others can explain better than me.

Edited July 6, 2006 by aaaaaa

[Maestro]

No post here since Thursday!

Already before the games started I predicted that Italy will win the cup but even some Italians seem to think otherwise, for the reason given in the attached PowerPoint presentation.

The text in the first slide reads

in UK English: Why we shan’t win the World Cup...

in US English: Why we won’t win the World Cup...

--------------

Maestro

[Maestro]

The PPS file could not be attached, and for the last 55 minutes I have tried to upload it to my Yahoo Briefcase...still churning but it probably won’t upload.

Googling, I now found this link with the reason why some Italians think Italy won’t win the World Cup.

--------------

Maestro

[BAF]

Pele has compained about the playing style of the Italians

Well, Italy is Brazil's closer contender for the crown of best ever football nation ever...

Respected German magazine Der Spiegel called them 'parasites' and 'mamma's boys'

Well, Italy has just been over Germany and have beaten them in the majority of the times they have been one against the other...

What about some good old fashioned FACTS to get things into perspective and better understand the true values on the field?

There are just 7 teams to have ever won the World Cup and they are, in order from the most successful one to the least:

1. Brazil:

world champion 5 times

2nd place 2 times

3rd place 2 times

4th place 1 time

2. Italy:

world champion 4 times

2nd place 2 times

3rd place 1 time

4th place 1 time

3. Germany:

world champion 3 times

2nd place 4 times

3rd place 3 time

4th place 1 time

4. Argentina:

world champion 2 times

2nd place 2 times

3rd place never

4th place never

5. Uruguay:

world champion 2 times

2nd place never

3rd place never

4th place 2 times

6. France:

world champion 1 time

2nd place 1 time

3rd place 2 times

4th place 1 time

7. England:

world champion 1 time

2nd place never

3rd place never

4th place 1 time

Ciao e viva l'Italia campione del mondo!

[aaaaaa]

one thing is interesting - that Germany won their last WC in Italy, and Italy their last / latest WC in Germany ! would Germans ever get chance to revenge it - I mean to wait till next WC hosted by Italy and be able to win it ?