Brilliant to see Spain go out. Third World Cup in a row the defending champions have been knocked out in the first round.
3 out of the last 4 however...
Grumpy old bastard alert
Brilliant to see Spain go out. Third World Cup in a row the defending champions have been knocked out in the first round.
3 out of the last 4 however...
Whoops! Completely forgot about 2006.
Brilliant to see Spain go out. Third World Cup in the last four the defending champions have been knocked out in the first round. Chile look good and they could go far. Shame for Cazorla though, he made a difference and looked their best player when he came on. With Xavi dropped, even at 2-0 down Fabregas couldn't get on. 
In the sweepstake I organised at work I made a third prize for the team with the worst goal difference in the group stage, expecting it to give those who got the teams like Iran or Algeria a chance. Looking like it will be the person who got Spain!
Netherlands-Australia was a great game too. Shame for Australia, they could have got at least a point from both their games so far. Really fancied them to do the incredible when they took the lead, and with a better option from Oar when he fired at Leckie's chest, they might have done. That should have 3-2, instead it was 2-3 immediately. They have been impressive though. When the draw was made everyone expected some big thrashings so they have made a really good account of themselves. Cahill now has more World Cup goals than Messi, Ronaldo and Rooney combined.
Brazil v Chile, if that's what pans out, could be sensational.
"At the end of the drive the lawmen arrive...
I'll take my chance because luck is on my side or something...
Her name is Rio, she don't need to understand...
Oh Rio, Rio, hear them shout across the land..."
Brilliant to see Spain go out. Third World Cup in the last four the defending champions have been knocked out in the first round. Chile look good and they could go far. Shame for Cazorla though, he made a difference and looked their best player when he came on. With Xavi dropped, even at 2-0 down Fabregas couldn't get on.
In the sweepstake I organised at work I made a third prize for the team with the worst goal difference in the group stage, expecting it to give those who got the teams like Iran or Algeria a chance. Looking like it will be the person who got Spain!
Netherlands-Australia was a great game too. Shame for Australia, they could have got at least a point from both their games so far. Really fancied them to do the incredible when they took the lead, and with a better option from Oar when he fired at Leckie's chest, they might have done. That should have 3-2, instead it was 2-3 immediately. They have been impressive though. When the draw was made everyone expected some big thrashings so they have made a really good account of themselves. Cahill now has more World Cup goals than Messi, Ronaldo and Rooney combined.
Brazil v Chile, if that's what pans out, could be sensational.
Less than Smeltz then too, nice.
A good game to watch and neither side deserved to lose. If the Dutch continue to play so poorly as they did in both their games then I doubt they will go beyond the 16. The one player that did look good for Holland was Depay.
Thought it was bizarre that Cahill was subbed off with almost 25 minutes still to go. Really, Taggert and Hallaran were a better chance to score than him? Very strange decision by Ange. It's not as though Cahill needed a rest either - he's suspended for the final game anyway.
Also think Ange paid the price in the long run for not including a bit more experience in that backline. Silly, inexperienced defending cost the Aussies heavily.
A good game to watch and neither side deserved to lose. If the Dutch continue to play so poorly as they did in both their games then I doubt they will go beyond the 16. The one player that did look good for Holland was Depay.
Thought it was bizarre that Cahill was subbed off with almost 25 minutes still to go. Really, Taggert and Hallaran were a better chance to score than him? Very strange decision by Ange. It's not as though Cahill needed a rest either - he's suspended for the final game anyway.
Also think Ange paid the price in the long run for not including a bit more experience in that backline. Silly, inexperienced defending cost the Aussies heavily.
So who would you have had in the backline. Lucas?
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
Have to hand it to Cahill. Apart from the sublime quality of that goal today, he has scored 5 of Aussie's 11 WC goals since 2006, so when people talk about "big game players", he has to be close to the top of the list. And I'm sure there's been plenty of other important goals - do we think the Samoan community in Wellington could convince to come to the Nix?
Have to hand it to Cahill. Apart from the sublime quality of that goal today, he has scored 5 of Aussie's 11 WC goals since 2006, so when people talk about "big game players", he has to be close to the top of the list. And I'm sure there's been plenty of other important goals - do we think the Samoan community in Wellington could convince to come to the Nix?
I'd call it a good lone striker...
I have been impressed by this Australian team and it vindicates Ange's decision to leave out veterans Wiltshire and Neil. The fact that about half this relatively young side who played so enterprisingly in both games against very good opposition were from the A League is a credit to how that competition has developed. In a lesser group against teams like Greece, Iran or Cameroon I think Australia would have won a game or two. It'll be interesting to see how Taggart goes replacing the suspended Cahill in their final game.
I have been impressed by this Australian team and it vindicates Ange's decision to leave out veterans Wiltshire and Neil. The fact that about half this relatively young side who played so enterprisingly in both games against very good opposition were from the A League is a credit to how that competition has developed. In a lesser group against teams like Greece, Iran or Cameroon I think Australia would have won a game or two. It'll be interesting to see how Taggart goes replacing the suspended Cahill in their final game.
Ange to start receiving big money offers from abroad. Greece being first.
"At the end of the drive the lawmen arrive...
I'll take my chance because luck is on my side or something...
Her name is Rio, she don't need to understand...
Oh Rio, Rio, hear them shout across the land..."
I'm really looking forward to the last two games in this group, Netherlands v Chile should be great and Australia will be up for an upset against Spain.
For those without Sky, TV One have changed their broadcast schedule and will now show Netherlands v Chile live instead of Spain v Australia
(since there is nothing resting on the Spain v Aussies)
Big Pete 65, Christchurch
Why not show both games or can't we survive without infomercials?
Why not show both games or can't we survive without infomercials?
They're only allowed to show a certain number of games. If they decide to show another game from what's previously advertised, it must come at the expense of that game.
Plus both games will be played at the same time.
That's a huge pain in the arse
Plus both games will be played at the same time.
That's a huge pain in the arse
For a good reason - to prevent the teams from achieving a "convenient" result based on the outcome of the other game. This is of no importance for this group (as Chile and the Netherlands are going through) but consider the group with USA, Portugal, Ghana and Germany in it. If games were playing at different times a "convenient" result could be contrived by the second game participant to suit them both, for example for Germany to lose by one goal only, then both USA and Germany go through anyway.
Actually, getting outplayed quite a bit these days
Yeah I know but still a pain in the ass. And there's always someone on the sideline listening to other results. I've seen it before where a game of influence has been about 4-0 with 20mins to go, then the players in the other game sitting back and passing around knowing that they're both going through.
anyone else looking more forward to Aus v Spain than Netherlands v Chile? Not fussed about the latter, will get to see them again in round of 16
I am watching the Netherlands game on channel 1 and then will have my laptop on ISKY watching the spain game. Perfect!!! no just to get up at 4am
I love simultaneous kickoffs!
If NZ enjoys it, that's great. We'll concentrate on winning the World Cup, you concentrate on winning pre-World Cup friendlies (see the difference in attitude here).
Obviously OZ didn't concentrate hard enough this year? Thoughts?
Plus both games will be played at the same time.
That's a huge pain in the arse
For a good reason - to prevent the teams from achieving a "convenient" result based on the outcome of the other game. This is of no importance for this group (as Chile and the Netherlands are going through) but consider the group with USA, Portugal, Ghana and Germany in it. If games were playing at different times a "convenient" result could be contrived by the second game participant to suit them both, for example for Germany to lose by one goal only, then both USA and Germany go through anyway.
Didn't that come about after Argentina conveniently beat Peru 6-0 to progress in their World Cup? Everyone knew it was a dodgy result but the then FIFA leader who was as a honest as Sepp did nothing about it.
1982 was the last world cup with games at different times, and it resulted in West Germany vs Austria a 1-0 or 2-0 win for Germans would see both teams through and eliminate Algeria. Germans scored and then the game just fizzled. in 1986 the games were simultaneous.
If NZ enjoys it, that's great. We'll concentrate on winning the World Cup, you concentrate on winning pre-World Cup friendlies (see the difference in attitude here).
Obviously OZ didn't concentrate hard enough this year? Thoughts?
Lol at winning the World Cup. Ok...
At least Diego Costa kept himself entertained on the bench during their final match.
Three for me, and two for them.
Contender for most pointless World Cup statistic by a commentator: today was the first time in 18 years that the Dutch have fielded a side without a player whose name has a 'van' in it.
If NZ enjoys it, that's great. We'll concentrate on winning the World Cup, you concentrate on winning pre-World Cup friendlies (see the difference in attitude here).
Obviously OZ didn't concentrate hard enough this year? Thoughts?
I think the gap between the Socceroos and the AW's is closing - we'd give that side a run for their money on a good day.
AW's defence is better than Australia's - both our defence at the last World Cup and our current best defensive line-up. Our centre-backs especially were and are much superior (Reid and Smith).
That was a slack Spain side the Socceroos played, with several veterans about to set off into the sunset - I think the Italian side we played in 2010 played better, with more intensity, even if they couldn't beat us. Nelsen, Reid,Smith and co. didn't give up any slack goals as the Socceroos did vs. Spain - very poor for the second and third Spanish goals. The Aussie fullbacks were ball watching and didn't pick up the players who scored at all (weren't even aware they were there).
I'll give the Aussies strung more passes together than we did in South Africa and had a better attacking midfield than we did.
But in the end the AW's results were better - three points from three games vs. zero for the Socceroos this time around. We scored two goals and conceded two in South Africa; the Aussies scored three and conceded nine this time around.
Conceding three goals in every game can't be classed as a success for the Aussies...not when the mighty 2010 All Whites conceded only two goals the whole tournament.
No excuses about "building for the future", "bold attempt at attractive attacking play" etc. please from Australia - results on the day are what matters!!!
Suck on a sour Kiwifruit Australia!!!
And we can feel okay about not qualifying now - considering how good Mexico have been in the tournament so far.
The Socceroos only had lame opponents like Korea, Japan and Iran (and worse teams) to play in their qualifiers. Asian sides have been very disappointing at this World Cup - NOT ONE SINGLE WIN FOR AN ASIAN SIDE YET in Brazil !!!
Big Pete 65, Christchurch
If NZ enjoys it, that's great. We'll concentrate on winning the World Cup, you concentrate on winning pre-World Cup friendlies (see the difference in attitude here).
Obviously OZ didn't concentrate hard enough this year? Thoughts?
I think the gap between the Socceroos and the AW's is closing - we'd give that side a run for their money on a good day.
AW's defence is better than Australia's - both our defence at the last World Cup and our current best defensive line-up. Our centre-backs especially were and are much superior (Reid and Smith).
That was a slack Spain side the Socceroos played, with several veterans about to set off into the sunset - I think the Italian side we played in 2010 played better, with more intensity, even if they couldn't beat us. Nelsen, Reid,Smith and co. didn't give up any slack goals as the Socceroos did vs. Spain - very poor for the second and third Spanish goals. The Aussie fullbacks were ball watching and didn't pick up the players who scored at all (weren't even aware they were there).
I'll give the Aussies strung more passes together than we did in South Africa and had a better attacking midfield than we did.
But in the end the AW's results were better - three points from three games vs. zero for the Socceroos this time around. We scored two goals and conceded two in South Africa; the Aussies scored three and conceded nine this time around.
Conceding three goals in every game can't be classed as a success for the Aussies...not when the mighty 2010 All Whites conceded only two goals the whole tournament.
No excuses about "building for the future", "bold attempt at attractive attacking play" etc. please from Australia - results on the day are what matters!!!
Suck on a sour Kiwifruit Australia!!!
And we can feel okay about not qualifying now - considering how good Mexico have been in the tournament so far.
The Socceroos only had lame opponents like Korea, Japan and Iran (and worse teams) to play in their qualifiers. Asian sides have been very disappointing at this World Cup - NOT ONE SINGLE WIN FOR AN ASIAN SIDE YET in Brazil !!!
Had to smile with some of your comments. It is a sort of imaginary comparison between two sides. The one thing I certainly agree with is that the goals against Spain ( I think all of them ) were due to poor defending -- ball watching.
The other thing you conveniently omitted was that our opposition in South Africa (apart from Italy) was Paraguay and Slovakia. I would humbly suggest that the three sides that Oz played this week were of a much higher caliber. Spain were slack compared to their usual performances but the fact remains they are the defending champions and still have many world class players.
Of the Australian squad of 2010, I think only 2/3 players went to Brazil. The team is a lot younger and far less experienced that the one that was in SA I think that they played a lot better than I thought they would and with the way the new coach has got them going I now expect ( where as last year I did not think they would) them to qualify for the next WC.
As for feeling okay about us not qualifying, and how good Mexico have been. You are the stats expert. We were flogged my Mexico, but how many of the players that beat us are playing in Brazil . I don't know but I suspect there are not many. What happened in SA is history but what NZ Football do from here on in will decide whether or not we have a chance to get into the next finals. Quite honestly unless we get automatic qualification I can't see us getting there anytime soon.
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
If NZ enjoys it, that's great. We'll concentrate on winning the World Cup, you concentrate on winning pre-World Cup friendlies (see the difference in attitude here).
Obviously OZ didn't concentrate hard enough this year? Thoughts?
I think the gap between the Socceroos and the AW's is closing - we'd give that side a run for their money on a good day.
AW's defence is better than Australia's - both our defence at the last World Cup and our current best defensive line-up. Our centre-backs especially were and are much superior (Reid and Smith).
That was a slack Spain side the Socceroos played, with several veterans about to set off into the sunset - I think the Italian side we played in 2010 played better, with more intensity, even if they couldn't beat us. Nelsen, Reid,Smith and co. didn't give up any slack goals as the Socceroos did vs. Spain - very poor for the second and third Spanish goals. The Aussie fullbacks were ball watching and didn't pick up the players who scored at all (weren't even aware they were there).
I'll give the Aussies strung more passes together than we did in South Africa and had a better attacking midfield than we did.
But in the end the AW's results were better - three points from three games vs. zero for the Socceroos this time around. We scored two goals and conceded two in South Africa; the Aussies scored three and conceded nine this time around.
Conceding three goals in every game can't be classed as a success for the Aussies...not when the mighty 2010 All Whites conceded only two goals the whole tournament.
No excuses about "building for the future", "bold attempt at attractive attacking play" etc. please from Australia - results on the day are what matters!!!
Suck on a sour Kiwifruit Australia!!!
And we can feel okay about not qualifying now - considering how good Mexico have been in the tournament so far.
The Socceroos only had lame opponents like Korea, Japan and Iran (and worse teams) to play in their qualifiers. Asian sides have been very disappointing at this World Cup - NOT ONE SINGLE WIN FOR AN ASIAN SIDE YET in Brazil !!!
Had to smile with some of your comments. It is a sort of imaginary comparison between two sides. The one thing I certainly agree with is that the goals against Spain ( I think all of them ) were due to poor defending -- ball watching.
The other thing you conveniently omitted was that our opposition in South Africa (apart from Italy) was Paraguay and Slovakia. I would humbly suggest that the three sides that Oz played this week were of a much higher caliber. Spain were slack compared to their usual performances but the fact remains they are the defending champions and still have many world class players.
Of the Australian squad of 2010, I think only 2/3 players went to Brazil. The team is a lot younger and far less experienced that the one that was in SA I think that they played a lot better than I thought they would and with the way the new coach has got them going I now expect ( where as last year I did not think they would) them to qualify for the next WC.
As for feeling okay about us not qualifying, and how good Mexico have been. You are the stats expert. We were flogged my Mexico, but how many of the players that beat us are playing in Brazil . I don't know but I suspect there are not many. What happened in SA is history but what NZ Football do from here on in will decide whether or not we have a chance to get into the next finals. Quite honestly unless we get automatic qualification I can't see us getting there anytime soon.
To be fare, I was exaggerating for effect - a bit tabloid! I was pissed off Australia weren't really dire so I couldn't use my phrase "Ocker Soccer Shocker!"
Agree with you Leggy - Spain, Netherlands and Chile were superior opposition to what we faced in SA in 2010.
Shows you how unbalanced many of the groups were this World Cup with some packed with top sides and then others like Group C Colombia, Greece, Ivory Coast and Japan. England or Australia would have some chance of qualifying from that group if they replaced one of the sides.
Ange made some bold decisions in dropping older players (several were injured anyway) and going with youth. As you say, will probably pay off for him in the long term...Interesting that like NZ, Ange struggled to find quality fullbacks - he had only one right-back in the squad, Franjic, who got injured and missed the tournament. McGowan, his replacement wasn't a specialist right-back and was a weak link. The two Aussie centre-backs looked pretty average.
NZ's chances of qualifying for Russia 2018 depend entirely on who we get in the continental play-off - decision no doubt to be made soon.
FIFA seem to rotate Oceania's play-off opponent between Asia and CONCACAF.
A play-off against the fifth best side in Asian qualifying (Jordan last year) is not insurmountable. The All Whites play Uzbekistan in Tashkent in September in the first outing under the new coach and they lost the play-off to decide fifth in Asia last year to Jordan - so that will be interesting.
But an erroneous international news agency report which has NZ "joining CONMEBOL [the South American confederation]" has me worried:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/10202715/NZ-...
May be due to a translation error - but it may suggest we have to play off against the fifth best side in South America to qualify, as Jordan had to in playing Uruguay for this World Cup.
Big Pete 65, Christchurch
I am watching a youtube clip on the 7 weirdest things at the World Cup. Some Chilean oorn star said if they beat Australia, she would have an 8 hour gang bang to celebrate. They did and she did but she also extended it to 12 hours. She then said if they beat Spain, she'd got 16 hours and they did. This item starts up about 2.45 mins into the clip.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=awONtau9cKADear me. Just as well she was not an English star of the same trade, she would be twiddling her thumbs still.
Actually, getting outplayed quite a bit these days
I am watching a youtube clip on the 7 weirdest things at the World Cup. Some Chilean oorn star said if they beat Australia, she would have an 8 hour gang bang to celebrate. They did and she did but she also extended it to 12 hours. She then said if they beat Spain, she'd got 16 hours and they did. This item starts up about 2.45 mins into the clip.
We're after YouPorn links, not YouTube.
