What country you think is going to win the World Cup

Ninjacat said:

RKF95 said:

Why dont everybody stop crying about one little post

---

Because, we are currently getting the site back on track. We don't need people spoiling it and dragging it down.

Exactly

RKF95

Want to see Germany win if England were beaten by the eventual winners that softens the blow

I773D33MABL3 said:

@Gashead

Germany also scored four goals against Argentina (a far better side than England) and, in general, played on top form through-out the tournament. 

England under-performed and only managed to win a single group game by a measly single goal. The disallowed goal against Germany is simply giving people an excuse to deny the fact that they were beaten by a much better side. 

England played well for the last ten minutes of the second half. They could have come out re-energised to take on the Germans but instead flopped onto the pitch and played shite.

Not shite like a team demoralised by a bad decision, but shite like they had played in every match prior to that. 

Other teams have had decisions go against them but have still come out fighting and not gone on to concede. 

Germany were throwing their whole team up the pitch to try and score against the Spanish. Three times the Spanish strikers got to run at Friedrich on his own at the back and still they were kept out. 

If England need all eleven men back to defend their goal then they're not up to standard.

1st- I thought Ireland were brilliant in the tournament

2nd- Mexico-Argentina  Arg's 1st goal was offside and Mexico definitely came out fighting.

3rd- England had 1 player sprinting back to defend after being up the field.

Gashead, why dont u stop trying to start something and just grow up.

And even if Englands 2nd goal counted, Germany was outplaying them the whole game, so get over it.

Germany dominated England = Germany won

Germany got dominated by Spain = Germany lost

@Gashead-64

1st – Hilarious; yes, we weren't there. I'm not too sure how that fits into your argument though.

2nd – Mexico went 3-0 down and still managed to pull one back in the dying minutes. That qualifies as fighting back.

3rd – And what? Conceded? If you used context I might be able to tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing. 

parnakas said:

Hmm The second i saw that that goal went in, I knew it would cause MAD controversy. 

Heres the solution to this: Replays. Refs should be allowed to watch the bloody replay, and then make the call. Simple as that. Hockey has it, American Football has it, hell, i think even Tennis has it.

Cricket and rugby also use some sort of video technology. Fifa are coming up with ridiculous excuses to keep it out of the game and at this stage it's stubbornness rather than any genuine issue that has them saying no.

They claim it'll slow down the game but I'd love to compare the average time in a rugby game given to waiting for TMO (Television match official) decisions against the time soccer players spend crowding around the ref fighting about a call he's made.

@Gashead

Fighting back doesn't mean a team has to draw level. Fighting back describes how a team is playing. 

If they draw level; fantastic, they succeeded. But a team can fight back without scoring anything. 

When Mexico went 3-0 down they were still in the game and actively trying to score.

England did the same for ten minutes and then wandered around waiting for the whistle to blow.

The idea that if they had got 2-2 that they would have held out is nonsense. Keep in mind the game started level at 0-0 and they still let two in. 

England are not a bad side, I support half the players when they play for their clubs (Excluding Chelsea scum!). But they were one of the most under-performing teams in the tournament. 

They lost to one of the most impressive teams; people had picked Germany to go all the way. 

I can't understand how you can argue that it was wrong for a misfiring England to be beaten by the same team that went on to destroy Argentina 4-0!

NuFc_kNoXiE_KiLa said:

Gashead-64 said:

ScottSummers1 said:

NuFc_kNoXiE_KiLa said:

wtf you going on about RKF95, germany got beat fair and square and you go wild yet england (POSSIBLY) lost because of a disallowed goal and noones been like that

---

sorry Knoxie, but whichever way you put it, that goal would only have made it 4-2.

and Holland are gonna win. They've played better as a team than Spain have and deserve to win. Spain play boring football and got lucky by beating Germany.

---

WHY DON'T PPL UNDERSTAND THAT GERMANYS 3RD AND 4TH GOALS WERE BECAUSE ENGLAND WERE PUSHING ALL THEIR PLAYERS UP THE FIELD GRRRRRR

---

anyone with a real understanding of the game knows that the 2nd goal would have changed the whole complexion of the game. not only were england playing shit in the 2nd half but it looked like they all felt they had 'already lost'. maybe if that goal counted they mightve thought they were still in it and had much more confidence in themselves, as well as not pushing as many players forward. yes the score couldve still been 4-2 to germany, but it also could have stayed 2-2 and maybe england could have won it through ET or pens. im not one to moan when it comes to this, england were outplayed of course, but that 2nd goal could have made the difference i reckon.

dont tell me i dont understand the game, twat.