England vs France

TheMercenary • Oct 13, 2007 12:14 am
In the quarter finals of the world cup Sat!

South Africa vs. Argentina on Sun!

Winners go to the World Cup final next week.
Sundae • Oct 13, 2007 6:06 am
Sorry, you seem to have made a mistake.
It's England vs Estonia today and England need the 3 winning points to ensure qualification to Euro 2008.

Just thought I'd set you straight ;)
ZenGum • Oct 13, 2007 9:04 am
It's Johnny Goldenboots and 14 mediocre others versus the froggies.

Ok you may now play Spot The Bitter Australian.

Really the England forwards were better than the Australian forwards. But I think that kicking for goal leads to dull games, I want to see tries, goal line sieges and desperate tackles. Pah, win a game without scoring a try? :lame:
lookout123 • Oct 13, 2007 1:14 pm
is it possible you all are talking about different things?

if you're talking about football, i just watched arsenal, er i mean France, pick apart the faroe islands to the tune of 6-0. pretty boring. I find it pretty telling on Henry's fitness and his need to get his touch fine tuned that he played the full 90 in a match like this.
Sundae • Oct 13, 2007 4:12 pm
Merc & Zen are talking bout the same thing - I was just teasing because rugby isn't really considered a sport in my (parents') house.

Nice to get a 3-0 win though (football). Except what was Owen doing? Forgotten the offside rule or something?!

Mum is catching up on saved episodes of Coronation Street right now, that's how little Dad values rugby.
Aliantha • Oct 13, 2007 11:49 pm
What Zen said!
ZenGum • Oct 14, 2007 1:07 am
I think penalty goals and drop goals should only be worth two points. This would encourage teams to kick for touch and go for the try.
TheMercenary • Oct 14, 2007 9:44 am
ZenGum;394627 wrote:
It's Johnny Goldenboots and 14 mediocre others versus the froggies.

Ok you may now play Spot The Bitter Australian.

Really the England forwards were better than the Australian forwards. But I think that kicking for goal leads to dull games, I want to see tries, goal line sieges and desperate tackles. Pah, win a game without scoring a try? :lame:


Yea, not scoring a try to win, I'll give you that. But all said and done, they beat the French on their home turf! And that is the most important thing. I don't care how they do it really, just beat them.

Now for today we have SA and Argentina! The Pumas have never beaten SA, well but for one time in the 60's when SA toured as a "other than SA side", but forget that. If The Pumas beat SA that would be a real upset. England could surely beat The Pumas, I am not so sure about them beating SA. Kicking alone will not beat the Africans. Thoughts?
TheMercenary • Oct 14, 2007 9:46 am
Sundae Girl;394699 wrote:
Merc & Zen are talking bout the same thing - I was just teasing because rugby isn't really considered a sport in my (parents') house.

Nice to get a 3-0 win though (football). Except what was Owen doing? Forgotten the offside rule or something?!

Mum is catching up on saved episodes of Coronation Street right now, that's how little Dad values rugby.

What! Blasphemy!
ZenGum • Oct 14, 2007 9:52 am
Just wondering Merc, how did you get a taste for rugby?
TheMercenary • Oct 14, 2007 10:14 am
ZenGum;394890 wrote:
Just wondering Merc, how did you get a taste for rugby?


Started to play in college in 1978, before that I had never heard of it. Been hooked ever since. I have been a referee for 8 years now.
ZenGum • Oct 21, 2007 12:45 pm
RWC Final
South Africa 15 (five penalty goals) def england 6 (two penalty goals).
Now you can win the world cup final without scoring a try. Bah.
Gawd that's almost as bad as the soccer.

:zzz:
Sundae • Oct 21, 2007 12:59 pm
We did score a try. It was just disallowed.
No excuse for our game against Russia though :blush:
Cloud • Oct 21, 2007 1:23 pm
I have just one word in response to this thread:

underpants
Cyclefrance • Oct 21, 2007 6:30 pm
Lewis might still win the F1 championship though - BMW and Williams up for a stewards enquiry.....
ZenGum • Oct 22, 2007 1:59 pm
Cloud;397680 wrote:
I have just one word in response to this thread:

underpants


No, no, no. It has to be panties.

("It has to be panties" is in fact a band name, they were about in Melbourne, Australia, several years ago.)
DanaC • Oct 22, 2007 2:17 pm
That's a fabulous name for a band!

I actually think the most correct term to use in this thread is Pants! Total and utter fucking pants! And on that note, if you don't mind I am off to cry quietly and mourn the further demise of English sport. Did anybody see the farce that was the Eng -v-Russia match?

*crawls off to a darkened corner to cry*
ZenGum • Oct 24, 2007 12:37 pm
DanaC;398094 wrote:
That's a fabulous name for a band!

I actually think the most correct term to use in this thread is Pants! Total and utter fucking pants! And on that note, if you don't mind I am off to cry quietly and mourn the further demise of English sport. Did anybody see the farce that was the Eng -v-Russia match?

*crawls off to a darkened corner to cry*


:comfort: there, there, I'm sure you'll win the ... something ... soon.

As a band name it is super-memorable. I've never heard or seen them, no idea what they're like, they've probably broken up long ago ... but I STILL remember the name. That's marketing for ya.
Sundae • Oct 24, 2007 3:18 pm
ZenGum;398077 wrote:
"It has to be panties" is in fact a band name, they were about in Melbourne, Australia, several years ago.)


DanaC;398094 wrote:
That's a fabulous name for a band!


ZenGum;399006 wrote:
As a band name it is super-memorable. I've never heard or seen them, no idea what they're like, they've probably broken up long ago ... but I STILL remember the name. That's marketing for ya.

Okay, so I read it as a brand name and I was still impressed :blush:
lookout123 • Oct 24, 2007 6:16 pm
the farce that was the Eng -v-Russia match?

you mean McLaren's death march?
DanaC • Oct 24, 2007 7:06 pm
That's the one.
lookout123 • Oct 24, 2007 7:19 pm
my honest opinion is that england has the same problem as spain. too much trying to keep people happy and not enough trying to win.

there is more than enough talent available for the manager to pull a squad from, but they continue down the path of pulling the most talented/popular player in each position, throwing them together on the field and expecting it to work out. sometimes the best individuals don't make the best team. complimentary players are needed. for example, gerrard and lampard don't belong in the same midfield, they cover the same ground. i really think england would do much better if they ditched a few of the old stand by's in favor of some unknowns, even looking at the championship if necessary.

but that is just my opinion.

The US national team has pathetic leadership as well. they refuse to look outside of the normal development channels for players. There is absolutely no reason for Jay Demerit (Watford defender) to be riding the pine when guys like Onyewu continue to suck.