All Whites, Ferns, and other international teams

Watch The Aussies Panic

51 replies · 2,463 views
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
whooooooo wrote:
loyalgunner wrote:
I rate Australia as being not too far behind England (provided Australia has its top squad).  NZ are nowhere near either of those sides, our best hope would be points against South Africa but they have the twelfth man and they played us inside-out at the Confederations (admittedly we were garbage in that game).


so you rate the likes of Beckham, Lampard, Gerard, J.Cole/Milner in the same category as :

Culina, Grella, Emerton, Bresciano

or J.Terry compared with C.Moore.

W.Rooney compared with B.Holmen/ S.Mcdonald

don't think so.

England ranked- 7
Australia ranked- 24

i disagree, but to each their own.


You didn't actually read my post, did you?  I didn't say Australia were as good as England, I said they're "not too far behind" England.  So that means I don't put MacDonald, Culina etc up there with Beckham (over-rated) and Gerrard etc.

I do think England are better, but not by much.  England consistently fail, bare that in mind if you ever want to make a point about them.  They have numerous star players but don't too often play like a world-class side.  Infact they're not a world-class side, numerous other sides are a lot better than them and the fact they're ranked 7th really speaks for the FIFA ranking system.

As an aside, last time the two sides met Australia ran out 3-1 victors.

Please, nobody post up the line-ups, for the sake of my argument.
loyalgunner2009-11-16 00:07:52
Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Woteva.  We are 66.666666% of the footballing nation that Australia is.  2 WCs.  OZ 3.
Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
charliec wrote:
Im happy that both NZ and Aust will be at the world cup.  Its fantastic


In a broader sense, yes, Southern Hemisphere soccer just took on a new meaning with both teams in the Tournament Proper simultaneously. The rest of the world is wondering what's happening.
Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Surely they wouldve been wondering what wouldve been happening if a country of 700k in Bahrain had made it too?

Those just want football to be europe,and think the game is only REALLY played there. They fail to see the broader world picture. If they had their way,we would play the euro champs every 2 years,but add Brazil to the competition every 4 years and call it a world cup.

Allegedly

Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Tegal wrote:

Surely they wouldve been wondering what wouldve been happening if a country of 700k in Bahrain had made it too?

Those just want football to be europe,and think the game is only REALLY played there. They fail to see the broader world picture. If they had their way,we would play the euro champs every 2 years,but add Brazil to the competition every 4 years and call it a world cup.


That would be a spunky event though. The Euro Cup, plus Argentina and Brazil would be a show-stopper.

For the purists, that IS a fantasy!
Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
not exactly a WORLD cup though is it.

Allegedly

Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Tegal wrote:
not exactly a WORLD cup though is it.


I'd watch it mate, would be terrific for the purists!
Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Id probably not watch it on principle. The european championships with brazil and argentina added is not a world cup,and anyone who pushes for it to be that way really just cant see the bigger world picture (im not including you in this diegos son). Saying the WORLD cup should just be limited to europe and a couple of sth american countries is pretty arrogant and completely ignores the rest of the world as its own footballing force (im tired and didnt word that right,meh)

Its just a bit of a passionate peeve of mine is all. The whole "the game is europe,screw the rest of the world". Even british expats here have the same attitude,laughing off our footballing culture and ability.

Allegedly

Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Tegal wrote:

Id probably not watch it on principle. The european championships with brazil and argentina added is not a world cup,and anyone who pushes for it to be that way really just cant see the bigger world picture (im not including you in this diegos son). Saying the WORLD cup should just be limited to europe and a couple of sth american countries is pretty arrogant and completely ignores the rest of the world as its own footballing force (im tired and didnt word that right,meh)

Its just a bit of a passionate peeve of mine is all. The whole "the game is europe,screw the rest of the world". Even british expats here have the same attitude,laughing off our footballing culture and ability.


I get your point, obviously the UEFA-run Euro Championships with Brazil and Argentina, from a pure footballing perspective would be mouth-watering.

The only way it would ever happen is if UEFA allowed either team an 'invited' entry to the Euro Champs (COMMEBOL has done it with the Copa America before).

But for the World Cup (run by FIFA) it would never happen.


Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
whooooooo wrote:
loyalgunner wrote:
I rate Australia as being not too far behind England (provided Australia has its top squad).  NZ are nowhere near either of those sides, our best hope would be points against South Africa but they have the twelfth man and they played us inside-out at the Confederations (admittedly we were garbage in that game).


so you rate the likes of Beckham, Lampard, Gerard, J.Cole/Milner in the same category as :

Culina, Grella, Emerton, Bresciano

or J.Terry compared with C.Moore.

W.Rooney compared with B.Holmen/ S.Mcdonald

don't think so.

England ranked- 7
Australia ranked- 24

i disagree, but to each their own.


I would not at all be suprised to see Aussie beat England, though. I would be shocked if we pulled it off. That is the difference. Aussie don't get smashed by anyone anymore - they beat Netherlands and Ireland at home reasonably convincingly..

I would kill for us to be at that level. We just don't have anyone like Kewell, Cahill or Bresciano - top level midfield players and creative players. I think that we probably compare in the striking stakes and Nelsen would make the Socceroos team as well but that is about it.

In saying that I would still fancy us against them because we would up our game just because it is Aussie
valeo2009-11-17 02:03:52

a.haak

Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
australian soccer is just a bunch of filthy croats


seriously I want the sh*ttest group every, Im with Nelson
Permalink Permalink
over 16 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
aussienixfan wrote:
aussienixfan wrote:
aussienixfan wrote:
Stevo wrote:

I only fear that certain Western Samoan.  Apart from him - I'd fancy us to be honest.

Sorry, not sure who you're talking about. No Samoans in our squad.

To be fair it can be confusing at times though, like your mate Smeltzy the German born Australian.


So who is Tim Cahill??????
An Australian footballer who plays club football for Everton. Like many influential Australian footballers, he was born in Sydney.

Thanks for asking.


Yet he played for Western Samoa Youth team before he grab hold of the FIFA free transfers for former youth internationals to change nationality in a one year window in 2004. He is Samoan.
He played for them when he was 14. He was born and raised in Australia FFS.

How about McGlinchy? Can you say the same for him? How about when Smeltz went home to the Gold Coast? Glass houses and all that.



Cahill played for Samoa because he considers himself a Samoan. That is his identity. See a certain goal celebration recently with reference to the Sunami in his HOME land?
Oh Wellington is wonderful. We got the wind, the rain and the phoenix. Oh Wellington is wonderful.
Permalink Permalink