World Cup 2010

[Black-Dog]

After this we say in our land only Deutscheland.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piODdIUlBDM

[Mangani]

And don't expect to see Loserpool repeat those scores anytime soon

I won't expect ANY English club team to repeat those scores anytime soon.

Mind you, 'Loserpool' did smack Besiktas 8-0 in the Champions League fairly recently. Highest ever tally in that competition.

I like the irony of your 'Loserpool' taunt. England's most successful ever club and outside Chelski and Man Ure the most succesful English club of the last half dozen years too.

Guess the 17 other Premier League clubs are losers too??

[Tripmender]

After this we say in our land only Deutscheland.

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=piODdIUlBDM

Ausserordentlich seltsam

Aber besser als 'Wind of Change' (Skorpions)

[Tripmender]

I like the irony of your 'Loserpool' taunt. England's most successful ever club and outside Chelski and Man Ure the most succesful English club of the last half dozen years too.

Remind me: when did the Dippers last win the league?

I hear the Spanish press are calling Torres 'the Spanish Heskey'. Hmm, good luck with that

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZH-aPQ_ODE

[Mangani]

Remind me: when did the Dippers last win the league

?

Liverpool last won the Champions League (highest club honour in the game) in 2005.

When did Chelsea, Arsenal and 95% of all the other English clubs EVER win that?

I hear the Spanish press are calling Torres 'the Spanish Heskey'. Hmm, good luck with that

I take it you're a Manc? Of course, Rooney did so much better in the World Cup didn't he?

By the way absolutely terrible singing in that video. Typical of Mancs. Can hardly hear them at all and then when they do finally sing it's absolute hell on the ears.

This is the loudest Old Trafford has ever been :

[silvermedalist]

No they don't have to play with 10 men. They start again with 11. But knowing Uruguay, they'll probably end up with 10 or fewer later in the game

I think the highest UK score was 36-0 in a Scottish game many many years ago. You get higher scores in Scottish football for some reason. I expect it's because the teams often turn up to play completely drunk.

More recently, in a 2001 World Cup qualifying game in the 'Oceania' group, Australia beat American Samoa 31-0. I think the inclusion of countries like American Samoa and the Galapagos Islands was FIFA's own version of Affirmative Action, for the Socceroos' benefit.

If someone gets a second yellow in the previous game then they have to play with ten? I thought there was a situation where you had to play with 10? 36-0 in soccer is a complete oblitertion. I dont feel so bad now being on the short end of a 36-1 softball drubbing when I was a teen. Thanks for the info

[Tripmender]

If someone gets a second yellow in the previous game then they have to play with ten?

If someone gets 2 yellows in one game, they are sent off. No replacement, 10 men for the rest of the game. But it doesn't affect the next game - the team starts with 11 players, although they can't play the guy who was sent off in the previous game.

If a player gets a yellow in 2 separate games in the WC, he misses the next game but isn't sent off. His team still starts the next game with 11 men, but without him. However, after the qtr finals all yellow cards are wiped clean. So if he gets a yellow in the group stage and another in the qtr final, he misses the semi. But if he gets one in the qtr and one in the semi, he doesn't miss the final. Unless of course his team fails to win its semi

ALLES KLAR ???

[Tripmender]

This is the loudest Old Trafford has ever been :

You may well be right. Unfortunately, as with most scouse, I couldn't understand a word of it

OHHHHH, WE SPEAK ENGLISH

WE SPEAK ENGLISH

YOU DON'T

YOU DON'T

[silvermedalist]

If someone gets 2 yellows in one game, they are sent off. No replacement, 10 men for the rest of the game. But it doesn't affect the next game - the team starts with 11 players, although they can't play the guy who was sent off in the previous game.

If a player gets a yellow in 2 separate games in the WC, he misses the next game but isn't sent off. His team still starts the next game with 11 men, but without him. However, after the qtr finals all yellow cards are wiped clean. So if he gets a yellow in the group stage and another in the qtr final, he misses the semi. But if he gets one in the qtr and one in the semi, he doesn't miss the final. Unless of course his team fails to win its semi

ALLES KLAR ???

Comprendo!!

[silvermedalist]

If someone gets 2 yellows in one game, they are sent off. No replacement, 10 men for the rest of the game. But it doesn't affect the next game - the team starts with 11 players, although they can't play the guy who was sent off in the previous game.

If a player gets a yellow in 2 separate games in the WC, he misses the next game but isn't sent off. His team still starts the next game with 11 men, but without him. However, after the qtr finals all yellow cards are wiped clean. So if he gets a yellow in the group stage and another in the qtr final, he misses the semi. But if he gets one in the qtr and one in the semi, he doesn't miss the final. Unless of course his team fails to win its semi

ALLES KLAR ???

Wait a minute. So there has to be a situration where a team only has 10 players? I have heard the announcers mention it. I think I saw it happen once when someone was red carded early in an MLS game?

Is it possible a team could be forced to play with 9? ie if there are two red cards?

[Tripmender]

Wait a minute. So there has to be a situration where a team only has 10 players? I have heard the announcers mention it. I think I saw it happen once when someone was red carded early in an MLS game?

Is it possible a team could be forced to play with 9? ie if there are two red cards?

A team will have 10 players if one is sent off. Yes, a team can have more than one player sent off. In theory, the game stops if either team has fewer than 7 players, i.e. if 5 players get sent off. The points are then awarded to the surviving team, regardless of the score.

I don't think this has ever happened in an English pro game, not in my lifetime at least. But it's probably fairly commonplace in South America. I think a South American ref actually once shot a player. They take it fairly seriously down there.

[silvermedalist]

A team will have 10 players if one is sent off. Yes, a team can have more than one player sent off. In theory, the game stops if either team has fewer than 7 players, i.e. if 5 players get sent off. The points are then awarded to the surviving team, regardless of the score.

I don't think this has ever happened in an English pro game, not in my lifetime at least. But it's probably fairly commonplace in South America. I think a South American ref actually once shot a player. They take it fairly seriously down there.

Maradanna is probably on the way anywhere but Argentina. I saw his picture in the NY Post this morning and them holding him back from climbing into the stands to get at some German fans that were gloating as they put it. Its a good thing he isnt going to Colombia.

[Tripmender]

Maradanna is probably on the way anywhere but Argentina. I saw his picture in the NY Post this morning and them holding him back from climbing into the stands to get at some German fans that were gloating as they put it. Its a good thing he isnt going to Colombia.

I'd love to see that picture . I'll look for it! But it might have been English fans gloating. Apparently there were loads of them at the game because they bought tickets for it before we got knocked out.

[Tripmender]

Haha! Found it:

My link

And the fans are antagonising him even more by filming him! PRICELESS!

Can't wait till they put the video on Youtube. With a translation from Gaucho Spanish!!

[Mangani]

No they don't have to play with 10 men. They start again with 11. But knowing Uruguay, they'll probably end up with 10 or fewer later in the game

I think the highest UK score was 36-0 in a Scottish game many many years ago. You get higher scores in Scottish football for some reason. I expect it's because the teams often turn up to play completely drunk.

More recently, in a 2001 World Cup qualifying game in the 'Oceania' group, Australia beat American Samoa 31-0. I think the inclusion of countries like American Samoa and the Galapagos Islands was FIFA's own version of Affirmative Action, for the Socceroos' benefit.

I could be wrong but I think that American Samoa team were made up of amateurs weren't they? I don't think that team consisted of full time professionals.

I also think the Scottish team that lost 36-0 in the 19th century were also amateurs playing in the Scottish cup.

I wonder what the highest score is for two professional football teams playing each other???

[Tripmender]

I could be wrong but I think that American Samoa team were made up of amateurs weren't they? I don't think that team consisted of full time professionals.

I also think the Scottish team that lost 36-0 in the 19th century were also amateurs playing in the Scottish cup.

I wonder what the highest score is for two professional football teams playing each other???

Well, I thought the commentator said that one or more of the Algerian team were amateurs? A bus driver? Or maybe that was some other team. Anyway, on the basis established above of approx '3 goals per amateur opponent', we should have beaten them somewhere between 3-0 and 6-0. Seems the amateurs just aren't playing by the rules anymore

I seem to remember lots of high scores from the early rounds of Euro club competitions in the early/mid 70s. Didn't your lot get into double figures a couple of times?

[Mangani]

Well, I thought the commentator said that one or more of the Algerian team were amateurs? A bus driver? Or maybe that was some other team. Anyway, on the basis established above of approx '3 goals per amateur opponent', we should have beaten them somewhere between 3-0 and 6-0. Seems the amateurs just aren't playing by the rules anymore

Deffo right there. Should have had at least a few goals past Algeria, especially if one of them was a bus driver. Could have nipped one past him at least when he was taking a passenger fare.

I seem to remember lots of high scores from the early rounds of Euro club competitions in the early/mid 70s. Didn't your lot get into double figures a couple of times?

Yeah, Liverpool beat some team called Stromsgodset Drammen 11-0 and another team called Oulu Palloseura 10-1. Not all that far from the recent 8-0 Besiktas drubbing. I'd forgotten about those. Thanks for reminding me. Don't know if Stromsgodset and Oulu Palloseura were full professional though. I guess so.

[silvermedalist]

Dont remember ever seeing a better strike than the one the Netherlands scored on. Forlan answered. No surprise. But I will be surprised if the Netherlands get beat here. Have to think the winner of Spain and Germany will win the whole thing?

Well the Dutch have shown alot in the second half. Perhaps they do have a shot.?

[Rock N' Rollin' Man]

Good game. Think it's going to be Germany facing the Dutch in the final (we'll see tomorrow), should be a good game. Uruguay and the losing team of the second semi-final match still have a game to play for third place.

[silvermedalist]

Good game. Think it's going to be Germany facing the Dutch in the final (we'll see tomorrow), should be a good game. Uruguay and the losing team of the second semi-final match still have a game to play for third place.

Spain will probably not fold like Argentina. Germany did show they are beatable. I think it was Serbia that beat them and that was the longhot team that Sports Illustrated picked to make alot of noise. I cant really get a handle on how the game will go? The Netherlands will have that extra day rest, wonder if that could factor in?

[Rock N' Rollin' Man]

Spain will probably not fold like Argentina. Germany did show they are beatable. I think it was Serbia that beat them and that was the longhot team that Sports Illustrated picked to make alot of noise. I cant really get a handle on how the game will go? The Netherlands will have that extra day rest, wonder if that could factor in?

Germany has crushed its last two opponents and Spain also lost in the group stage against the Swiss but again we shall see tomorrow.

/

What's next for the two teams I go for:

Mexico: Some friendly matches then 2011 Copa America and 2011 CONCACAF Gold Cup.

US: Some friendly matches then 2011 CONCACAF Gold Cup.

[silvermedalist]

Germany has crushed its last two opponents and Spain also lost in the group stage against the Swiss but again we shall see tomorrow.

/

What's next for the two teams I go for:

Mexico: Some friendly matches then 2011 Copa America and 2011 CONCACAF Gold Cup.

US: Some friendly matches then 2011 CONCACAF Gold Cup.

We know the 2014 World Cup is in Brazil. It sounds like the 2018 is in Europe but has not been decided on yet? I think it was in Japan either four or eight years ago? So I would assume the earliest it would ever come to the US would be 2022? Assuming the best case scenario for the sport here?

[Rock N' Rollin' Man]

We know the 2014 World Cup is in Brazil. It sounds like the 2018 is in Europe but has not been decided on yet? I think it was in Japan either four or eight years ago? So I would assume the earliest it would ever come to the US would be 2022? Assuming the best case scenario for the sport here?

The executive committee of FIFA will announce their decision for the two editions [2018 and 2022 FIFA World Cup], on 2 December 2010. Candidates have applied for either or both of the 2018 and 2022 tournaments, but the 2022 hosts will not be chosen from the same continent as the 2018 hosts. Currently, there are seven individual nations which have registered their intention with FIFA to bid for the right to host one of the two tournaments: Australia, England, Japan, Qatar, Russia, South Korea and the United States. Additionally, Belgium and the Netherlands registered to bid together, as did Portugal and Spain.

Copied it from Wikipedia.

2022 bids only: Australia, Japan, Qatar and South Korea.

It would be really cool if one of the two was to be held in the US.

[silvermedalist]

The executive committee of FIFA will announce their decision for the two editions [2018 and 2022 FIFA World Cup], on 2 December 2010. Candidates have applied for either or both of the 2018 and 2022 tournaments, but the 2022 hosts will not be chosen from the same continent as the 2018 hosts. Currently, there are seven individual nations which have registered their intention with FIFA to bid for the right to host one of the two tournaments: Australia, England, Japan, Qatar, Russia, South Korea and the United States.

Copied it from Wikipedia. It would be really cool if one of the two was to be held in the US.

Perhaps Asia has a turn coming judging by the list? I thought Japan had it recently? I would rate Australia having a big shot. If Europe is to get one maybe England has a shot? Hope they have a better team in four tears.

[Mangani]

England should have the 2018 World Cup. England hasn't hosted it for 44 years(it will be 52 years in 2018) and already have the inferastructure to do a first class job.

Germany (in contrast) hosted the World Cup TWICE in 34 years (1972 and 2006).

It's England's time surely. England is one of the most football crazy nations in the world and won't have to do much about getting ready for it as it's already in place and ready.

Not being unfair but I think it would be absolutely ridiculous and a disgrace if the USA got to host another World Cup before England did. The USA already hosted it in 1994 and most of their population doesn't give a damn about football. By all means have it some time in the future but if somehow England doesn't get the World Cup in 2018 but the USA gets it in 2022 then it's time for England to boycott FIFA haha.