WC 2006 Official Thread

[bababui]

Dropping Ronaldo seems to have helprd the Portuguese offense

[Sdpm100]

Originally Posted by thomasthomas

So, if Portugal wins, and Angola wins, do the Angolans have a shot at the next round?

If they overturn a -3 goal difference over Mexico then yes.

[piperclap]

good try by bravo there

[bababui]

Originally Posted by thomasthomas

So, if Portugal wins, and Angola wins, do the Angolans have a shot at the next round?

Yes they do in a massive upset

[redmarkYankees]

Originally Posted by The Funk

Didn't Defoe start quite a few games on the bench though?

He did, but not enough to justify the statement ukhotstave made about goals this season proving Defoe to be a 'far better player'.

Even if you discounted sub appearances entirely, assumed that neither player scored as a sub and therefore give Defoe "freebies" for his sub appearances (poor assumptions, but I don't have the inclination to look up exact minutes spent on the field):

Crouch - 13 in 43 (30% strike rate)
Defoe - 9 in 24 (38% strike rate)

Not massively better, even with the poor assumptions, and certainly not approaching the 50% threshold. When you factor in that Crouch creates goals for team mates and gets involved in far more build up play than Defoe (indeed, it's the reason Jol hasn't used him as much), who's been the better player this season?

[bababui]

Morning SDPM..having concurrent matches is testing your lineup skills

[piperclap]

****ing dive. bull****.

[redmarkYankees]

Originally Posted by The Funk

Villa would also have the advantage of being able to talk to his teammates.

[piperclap]

Wow...that should have been a corner

[Sdpm100]

Originally Posted by redmarkYankees

He did, but not enough to justify the statement ukhotstave made about goals this season proving Defoe to be a 'far better player'.

Even if you discounted sub appearances entirely, assumed that neither player scored as a sub and therefore give Defoe "freebies" for his sub appearances (poor assumptions, but I don't have the inclination to look up exact minutes spent on the field):

Crouch - 13 in 43 (30% strike rate)
Defoe - 9 in 24 (38% strike rate)

Not massively better, even with the poor assumptions, and certainly not approaching the 50% threshold. When you factor in that Crouch creates goals for team mates and gets involved in far more build up play than Defoe (indeed, it's the reason Jol hasn't used him as much), who's been the better player this season?

I looked it up, and if you base it on Premiership appearances (as that is the most consistent opponent each player faces) both Defoe and Crouch score at exactly the same rate - 264 minutes per goal.

If you care, I'll get you the stats at half-time.

[piperclap]

seriously, what is up with ESPN. Those two bars at the top are wasting at least 1/8th of the screen.

Yes, I am awaRE that this is a live broad cast and it is in fact the 2006 world cup. Anyone who is watching this game knows that.

GRRRRR

edit: too early to spell well

[bababui]

Figo has looked so much better than he did last goround

[Sdpm100]

Originally Posted by bababui

Morning SDPM..having concurrent matches is testing your lineup skills

Yes, but the "teams to follow" comment and then edit the post afterwards, comes in handy when there is only the one to cut and paste.

But then someone posts in between the time it takes to write the top line and post (30 seconds rule) and they then don't follow each other.

[theasfl]

Originally Posted by thomasthomas

So, if Portugal wins, and Angola wins, do the Angolans have a shot at the next round?

the Angolans would move on if they turned GD around

[redmarkYankees]

Originally Posted by Sdpm100

I looked it up, and if you base it on Premiership appearances (as that is the most consistent opponent each player faces) both Defoe and Crouch score at exactly the same rate - 264 minutes per goal.

If you care, I'll get you the stats at half-time.

Thanks, for the 264 mins point. Good stat.

I wouldn't go so far as to say I care, but definitely interested . I'm not even a huge fan of Crouch (I wouldn't have him in my starting Liverpool XI), but the statement was false and I knew it was. But this will no doubt be used against me that I'm an argumentative so-and-so.

[bababui]

Where is Mr Chisanga?

[piperclap]

Marquez is soo dreamy

[Sdpm100]

There's yet another player wearing boots the same colour as the team (Caneira I think) Why?

Are they both Puma, theasfl?

[bababui]

And CC didnt spam us yesterday...hmmm..maybe the enormity of this thread is too much for even him

[The Funk]

Originally Posted by redmarkYankees

He did, but not enough to justify the statement ukhotstave made about goals this season proving Defoe to be a 'far better player'.

Even if you discounted sub appearances entirely, assumed that neither player scored as a sub and therefore give Defoe "freebies" for his sub appearances (poor assumptions, but I don't have the inclination to look up exact minutes spent on the field):

Crouch - 13 in 43 (30% strike rate)
Defoe - 9 in 24 (38% strike rate)

Not massively better, even with the poor assumptions, and certainly not approaching the 50% threshold. When you factor in that Crouch creates goals for team mates and gets involved in far more build up play than Defoe (indeed, it's the reason Jol hasn't used him as much), who's been the better player this season?

Yeah, it's hard to compare the two as they are very different. I would take DeFoe over Crouch in a heartbeat as he's more the type of player Newcastle need. You're right about him not being used so much showing his weaknesses - he's selfish, and not in the good striker way, he shoots far too often from distance. He's a good finisher, but he's not always that good at getting in the right place to actually finish.

I'd say he's worth maybe 5-6 million. Possibly 7 if he can develop a bit, although I don't think he has the natural instincts to become top-class. Definitely not the 9 or so Spurs seem to want for him.