This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Archive FTBL/0002/REC/HPOO

Scroll to see replies

India have a population of 1bn, why the hell are they not the best cricketing nation in the world? Despite every boy in India being born with a bat or ball in their hand.

Reply 6941

Refused

kpg

India have a population of 1bn, why the hell are they not the best cricketing nation in the world? Despite every boy in India being born with a bat or ball in their hand.

Reply 6942

Anyone who doubts that population is a major factor is an idiot. Clearly there's more to it than this, but I never claimed that there wasn't.

And kpg actually proves my point for me. I stated that if the USA took 'soccer' seriously, they'd be a major force due to its size. India takes cricket seriously, and last time I checked they are a major force in cricket.

Reply 6943

john!!

Actually Brazil have one it five times, but I don't see why this should automatically make them favourites regardless of how they play. Two of Brazil's wins were before 1966!

I appreciate a lot of fans are now tipping the likes of Argentina or Spain over Brazil, but the media seem to be saying that England have no chance yet Brazil are still favourites. There's not a lot of consistency.

I don't understand why not... Brazil's recent record is pretty amazing and England have been playing terribly. Where's the inconcistency?

Reply 6944

john!!

I don't understand why not... Brazil's recent record is pretty amazing and England have been playing terribly. Where's the inconcistency?

The squad has changed somewhat since 1958! And indeed 1994. Therefore past victories are clearly irrelevant in terms of the current tournament.

My point is that when Brazil play okay and win as they did today and against Croatia they're deemed to simply be playing in first gear. When England perform poorly and win we're written off. Why does no one assume that we're just playing in first gear and will turn it on later in the tournament?

Reply 6945

Zerforax

yea i see you point.. i would probably still drop Lennon for Owen he has more experiance and needs every game he can for the latter stages of the tournment.. i mean hes playing so badly he can only get better in theory :p:

Reply 6946

DontBuyTheSun

That means Crouch is getting dropped because he wouldnt dare drop super owen.
Useless ****ing swede

Reply 6947

forkwise

calderstonesLFC

That means Crouch is getting dropped because he wouldnt dare drop super owen.
Useless ****ing swede

I've got a feeling he will drop Owen and play Rooney with Crouch

Reply 6948

DontBuyTheSun

forkwise

I've got a feeling he will drop Owen and play Rooney with Crouch

Crouch is on a yellow card, so he might drop him to make sure.

Reply 6949

WaW™

i think he should rest all major players utilise the players he has at his disposal. Try Bridge, Walcott, Downing etc etc

Reply 6950

*titanium*

yes like siad before, he plays for Telaviv, thou just because i felt like haveing to add something, he plays for hapoel telaviv, as there is also macabe telaviv

Reply 6951

*titanium*

I heard that the refs can refer to a screen to see a reply this world cup, but i have not seen them do it.

Reply 6952

Cortez

You still havent said what bet you were talking about? :confused:

Reply 6953

Economist

Looked good at the start but should have scored at least 2 probably 3 tonight

Reply 6954

Strictly Business

Current top 3 in the world.

Reply 6955

mancred

read the first post, it says there clearly

Reply 6956

mancred

I think its a bad idea. The world cup has had some fantastic fast flowing football. By letting the ref look at a screen it would take the pace off the game and prevent the flow and momentum that is often vital for teams to win.

I reckon for penelties and possibly direct free kicks then it could be brought in because it could help the outcome of the game, apart from that there is not really any point.