Friday, June 16, 2006
England bloody England
Am feeling utterly dejected and miserable today after watching England's pathetic 2-0 win over Trinidad & Tabago yesterday. Yes, we won. But we were playing a team that are 47th in the world rankings who's most high profile player is Dwight Yorke, currently seeing out his twilight years down under for Sydney FC.
Observations:
1) Peter Crouch is DIRE. Yes, he may have scored but that was purely due to his height and very little to do with his skills. He terribly mis-hit an easy volley, gave the ball away several times and looked out of his depth. God knows how he got into the England team but with Owen looking so poor it seems as if we'll have to put up with him.
2) Where is the passion? There's no verve to England, no pizzazz, no incision. Just turgid, long ball, no imagination football.
3) We can only score from a Beckham cross or free kicks. Admittedly, Gerrard did score a screamer just before the end but that was only down to a lack of concentration from T&T. Don't expect the likes of Holland and Brazil to allow that to happen. Why can't we score from open play?
4) Everyone looks knackered. There is just no zip to the the team at all.
Mmmm...I was actually predicting England to win. Seems I will have to revise that opinion. If we play like this in the 2nd round we are out. It's as simple as that.
Has anyone got a voodoo doll of Sven they can send me?
Observations:
1) Peter Crouch is DIRE. Yes, he may have scored but that was purely due to his height and very little to do with his skills. He terribly mis-hit an easy volley, gave the ball away several times and looked out of his depth. God knows how he got into the England team but with Owen looking so poor it seems as if we'll have to put up with him.
2) Where is the passion? There's no verve to England, no pizzazz, no incision. Just turgid, long ball, no imagination football.
3) We can only score from a Beckham cross or free kicks. Admittedly, Gerrard did score a screamer just before the end but that was only down to a lack of concentration from T&T. Don't expect the likes of Holland and Brazil to allow that to happen. Why can't we score from open play?
4) Everyone looks knackered. There is just no zip to the the team at all.
Mmmm...I was actually predicting England to win. Seems I will have to revise that opinion. If we play like this in the 2nd round we are out. It's as simple as that.
Has anyone got a voodoo doll of Sven they can send me?
Thursday, June 15, 2006
World Cup
The first round of World Cup games is over. How do my predictions look?
Well, I predicted Italy would bomb out at the group stage but after their fairly convincing victory over Ghana and the US' meek defeat at the hands of the Czech Republic, I must say that this prediction is looking very shaky indeed. I was expecting the US to get a draw against the Italians but based on their first performance this will be a tall order indeed.
I'm backing England to win, no doubt just misguided optimism, and their first game did not change my mind on this. They certainly did not play like world beaters but got the result and now look very likely to finish top of the group. If they do they will meet either Costa Rica or Ecuador in the 2nd round which is a very inviting fixture indeed. I think England won't have to really step up to the plate until the QF which I predict will be against Portugal, Holland or Argentina. Out of all of those I would prefer Argentina. If we finish top we can't play Brazil until the final.
My overachievers are Australia and they just about kept that prediction alive by scoring 3 goals in the last 8 minutes against Japan. The match against Croatia is obviously going to be the decider and Australia will need the game of their lives to qualify but with Guus in charge I think they must just squeak it.
Well, I predicted Italy would bomb out at the group stage but after their fairly convincing victory over Ghana and the US' meek defeat at the hands of the Czech Republic, I must say that this prediction is looking very shaky indeed. I was expecting the US to get a draw against the Italians but based on their first performance this will be a tall order indeed.
I'm backing England to win, no doubt just misguided optimism, and their first game did not change my mind on this. They certainly did not play like world beaters but got the result and now look very likely to finish top of the group. If they do they will meet either Costa Rica or Ecuador in the 2nd round which is a very inviting fixture indeed. I think England won't have to really step up to the plate until the QF which I predict will be against Portugal, Holland or Argentina. Out of all of those I would prefer Argentina. If we finish top we can't play Brazil until the final.
My overachievers are Australia and they just about kept that prediction alive by scoring 3 goals in the last 8 minutes against Japan. The match against Croatia is obviously going to be the decider and Australia will need the game of their lives to qualify but with Guus in charge I think they must just squeak it.
Football Camera Work
One of the problems I've always had with watching Aussie Rules on TV is that the camera focuses far too much close up on the player who has the ball and not the field as a whole so you have no idea who the player wants to pass to, where the goal is etc etc This makes the whole spectacle, in my opinion, appear as if it's just one unorganised scrum for the ball. You can get no sense of the tactics on display, you can't shout at the TV 'PASS TO HIM YOU FUCKER!" because you can't see where 'him' is.
The Age has noticed that the camera work is different for football and doesn't seem impressed with it. In game such as football, where tactics are everything, it's absolutely vital that the game is seen from a wide angle. If the player with the ball was focused on all the time then how could you tell who he should pass to, where he should aim his shot, when he should cross? Let's keep the close ups for the moments that really matter eh?
The Age has noticed that the camera work is different for football and doesn't seem impressed with it. In game such as football, where tactics are everything, it's absolutely vital that the game is seen from a wide angle. If the player with the ball was focused on all the time then how could you tell who he should pass to, where he should aim his shot, when he should cross? Let's keep the close ups for the moments that really matter eh?
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Orgasmic Goal!
The Times' excellent football writer, Julian Barnes, on Australia's new found love of football.
Choice quote:
'...only in football does a goal matter so much. The explosion of release at a goal is something no other sport does in the same way. In Australian rules, a goal is a kiss on the lips; in football, it's an orgasm. '
Choice quote:
'...only in football does a goal matter so much. The explosion of release at a goal is something no other sport does in the same way. In Australian rules, a goal is a kiss on the lips; in football, it's an orgasm. '
Cancer or Sex?
The Christian Right in the US would rather it's children get cancer than have pre-marital sex.
Jesus. Christ.
Jesus. Christ.
Monday, June 12, 2006
Letter of the Day?
The Age deemed it suitable to publish the following letter re Gay Marriage in today's edition. Read it and weep.
Men marry women, women marry men
HOW pleasing it is to see The Age, after months of presenting only one side of the debate, at last giving a limited voice to opponents of the concept of same-sex marriage (Insight, 10/6).
The institution of marriage has taken many forms over the centuries. Different societies have permitted polygamous marriages, polyandrous marriages and collective marriages, in addition to monogamous marriages. However, they all have had one thing in common: both sexes are involved. Men marry women. Women marry men.
We no longer persecute homosexuals in the way that we persecute those whose sexual preference is for young children or animals, nor should we do so. They harm nobody but themselves. There is, however, clearly something wrong with a sexually reproductive mammal that prefers to attempt to mate with another of its own sex, no matter how eminent.
It is the person who evinces homosexual behaviour, not the person who disapproves of such behaviour, who is psychologically disturbed.
A. L. Riley, Mornington
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
