GalagaGuy Posted July 6 Author Posted July 6 26 minutes ago, buddha said: my theory? did you watch the first half? mexico dominated them and england played on the counter. couldnt stop em. They just won having played 40 minutes down a man, they can't be that bad. Quote
buddha Posted July 6 Posted July 6 Just now, GalagaGuy said: They just won having played 40 minutes down a man, they can't be that bad. they played much better in the second half when they went down to ten men, brought in two new fullbacks and an extra central defender. england have a really good coach. 1 Quote
buddha Posted July 6 Posted July 6 tough luck for mexico. i thought they outplayed england even before the red card. Quote
buddha Posted July 6 Posted July 6 34 minutes ago, Hongbit said: This post aged poorly. Fortunately, there’s still a decent chance that everything said happens before it’s over. 32 minutes ago, Hongbit said: 3 goals will not win this game. did it age as poorly as this post? 😉 Quote
oblong Posted July 6 Posted July 6 checked in with one of my mates over there that I work with... he's not in today. Quote
DTroppens Posted July 6 Posted July 6 On 7/3/2026 at 8:21 PM, Hongbit said: Maybe we needed a 48 team cup all along. No more questions about the new format. It has worked pretty well. I wondered if it would work, but it's been a clear success. And if nothing else, we are getting more games during the World Cup. There hasn't been a day off from games yet. That typically doesn't happen during the group stage but by this date in a 32 team tourney that would've been happening by now I'd imagine since we'd be in the quarterfinal by this time. I don't think the tourney has suffered at all due to the extra teams and the round of 32. The round of 32 certainly hasn't. We've seen many entertaining games. Has it made it easier for some teams to be able to win out in group stages with "lesser than" overall talent in their pool. Has it made the top-seed draws easier in the round of 32? Sure. But even when the teams that you'd expect to drop, drop, it's not been a ton of "dog games." And this is the first cycle of 48 teams. I worried about it, but I have no concerns moving forward. The world has absorbed it reasonably well. Even a lot of the games decided by 3+ goals have had their moments of entertainment. And more than half of the games have had three or more goals. And it's not like every five- or six-goal game is "Oh that's a minnow losing 5-1." There has been a 3-3 game, a 4-2 game that was tied at 2-2 at one time and a few 3-2 games. And with more teams being able to realistically qualify for the World Cup, you might see more countries invest in that possibility. The depth is crazy better with the men's game (a 60-something ranked team in the women's game isn't doing anything better than 5-0 in a World Cup against a top 5 side) and more opportunity dangling in front of more teams having a chance to make the tourney will make it even deeper. This is probably the "weakest depth" 48-team tourney the men will ever have, and this wasn't too bad at all. 1 Quote
GalagaGuy Posted July 6 Author Posted July 6 As bad as the USA might look with Trump intervening, Belgium looks even worse for filing an appeal. It's not like the foul was committed against them so they just look like cowards who are trying to take the USA's best player off the field. Quote
DTroppens Posted July 6 Posted July 6 Mexico-England was more evidence of the tournament that just keeps on giving. I don't know if I've ever seen a PK on what is almost a 50-50 ball with both legs up trying to kick the ball and the second one below the first ended up getting a PK. They tried to convince us that is an actual point of emphasis, but that wasn't a PK. But I'm not going to worry too much about it. And when you are at home in the stadium you never lose and you allow one goal to become two scored on you in two minutes, you deserve to lose. That was the game right there. Mexico can't just control play probably should've scored a goal before England scored and then allow two in two minutes (realistically probably less than a minute between goals during actual playing time). You have to be mentally stronger than that than to allow that to happen. And now, I'm sure Mexico will be looking for a new manager in about 12 to 24 hours. Really, I didn't have a team I wanted to win this game. I don't pull for England in any sort of soccer competition (minus my fav club teams) and Mexico is the US's greatest rival so I definitely don't want the US to not advance farther than any other CONCACAF team, so at least that's assured now before tonight's game. But that said, in a perfect world if Mexico would advance and the US beat Belgium, I would've taken that. It would be nice to see a CONCACAF hosted World Cup actually have two CONCACAF teams in the quarterfinal. Quote
DTroppens Posted July 6 Posted July 6 5 minutes ago, GalagaGuy said: As bad as the USA might look with Trump intervening, Belgium looks even worse for filing an appeal. It's not like the foul was committed against them so they just look like cowards who are trying to take the USA's best player off the field. If I was Belgium I'd file and appeal. I don't think it makes them look like cowards. He got a red. He shouldn't be playing. If Courtois or DeBruyne (or if a completely healthy Lukaku) got a red in the prior game, I'm sure the US would be griping. and probably filing an appeal. Quote
Hongbit Posted July 6 Posted July 6 8 minutes ago, GalagaGuy said: As bad as the USA might look with Trump intervening, Belgium looks even worse for filing an appeal. It's not like the foul was committed against them so they just look like cowards who are trying to take the USA's best player off the field. Belgium had to completely rework their game plan less than 48 hours before kickoff. I can see how that would piss them off. Quote
GalagaGuy Posted July 6 Author Posted July 6 3 minutes ago, DTroppens said: If I was Belgium I'd file and appeal. I don't think it makes them look like cowards. He got a red. He shouldn't be playing. If Courtois or DeBruyne (or if a completely healthy Lukaku) got a red in the prior game, I'm sure the US would be griping. and probably filing an appeal. It should have never been a red in the first place and anyone on Team Belgium who looks at the play objectively would come to that conclusion. There was nothing intentional or reckless about the play, it was simply an unfortunate case of one player sticking his leg into an area where another player was about to land. Quote
DTroppens Posted July 6 Posted July 6 (edited) 33 minutes ago, GalagaGuy said: It should have never been a red in the first place and anyone on Team Belgium who looks at the play objectively would come to that conclusion. There was nothing intentional or reckless about the play, it was simply an unfortunate case of one player sticking his leg into an area where another player was about to land. Even if Belgium doesn't think it was a red card offense (I don't know what they think), I think pretty much any team in a World Cup figures if a player gets a red card, he isn't playing the next game. That's how it goes, right? And this clearly impacts what Belgium was preparing for. I'm sure they'll adjust, but they have a right to be downright ticked. Again, if Lukaku or DeBruyne had a suspension coming from a red card and suddenly didn't have to serve it, the US team would be going ballistic, and I'm guessing your opinion would be slightly different as well. All this said, Belgium isn't going to say they can't win. They are the favorites against any US lineup, but to pretend that this is almost a "nothing to see here, you should be okay with it" instance is a tad silly. They have a right to be upset and wouldn't be cowards appealing it. The players preparing on the pitch, they are preparing. Edited July 6 by DTroppens Quote
GalagaGuy Posted July 6 Author Posted July 6 Soccer isn't like other sports where you're putting together a game plan specifically tailored to any one player. It's not like the Lions game planning to stop the QB from running or the Tigers putting together a right handed line up to counter a left handed starter. At the same time, soccer isn't like a sport like basketball where you're playing man on man so there really isn't anything to adjust for with one player either in or out of the line up. Belgium is simply trying to take the best player off the field to improve their odds of winning. Quote
lordstanley Posted July 6 Posted July 6 If I were Belgium I would definitely be yelling and screaming. This decision stinks. And I will continue to rant about how Evgeni Malkin should been out of Game 3 of fhe 2009 SCF versus the Wings. 2 1 Quote
RedTeamGo! Posted July 6 Posted July 6 Can't lie - I am cracking up at the euro fans clutching their pearls over this. Hilarious stuff. The INTEGRITY of the game!!!!! There are so many scandals in world soccer it would be funny if real people were not often getting hurt. This one is harmless. The entire build up to the world cup in Qatar comes to mind. Hell, a story was just released about Argentina using their national soccer program to groom little boys. Nobody talked about that story at all, europeans and south americans completely ignored it. The Argentine fans were just shouting the N word and other racist BS at an African American youtuber at the game against Cabo Verde. Nobody bats an eye. Mexican fans scream a homophobic slur every time the opposing team kicks a goal kick, happened multiple times last night. CONCACAF has warned the Mexican soccer federation about it many times, and in CONCACAF play they even stop the match. FIFA has no such rule. Nobody bats an eye. Countless scandals in global soccer. With that said, again, the pearl clutching by Euro soccer fans on this is the funniest thing in soccer since European players invented flopping. 1 Quote
buddha Posted July 6 Posted July 6 They changed the rules to help the US win. its not fair. all those scandals you talked abiut ARE talked about a lot, you just dont hear about them because you live in the US. european pearl clutching is always annoying, but so is rule breaking and corruption. its annoying when qatar, russia, and saudi arabia do it to buy world cups. its annoying when paraguay cheats. its annoying when maradona cheats. its annoying when south korea did it to win games in their world cup, its annoying when morocco did it at the afcon this year, and its annoying when the US does it. yeah, it happens in soccer all the time, still doesnt make it right. Quote
lordstanley Posted July 6 Posted July 6 2 hours ago, RedTeamGo! said: Can't lie - I am cracking up at the euro fans clutching their pearls over this. Hilarious stuff. The INTEGRITY of the game!!!!! There are so many scandals in world soccer it would be funny if real people were not often getting hurt. This one is harmless. The entire build up to the world cup in Qatar comes to mind. Hell, a story was just released about Argentina using their national soccer program to groom little boys. Nobody talked about that story at all, europeans and south americans completely ignored it. The Argentine fans were just shouting the N word and other racist BS at an African American youtuber at the game against Cabo Verde. Nobody bats an eye. Mexican fans scream a homophobic slur every time the opposing team kicks a goal kick, happened multiple times last night. CONCACAF has warned the Mexican soccer federation about it many times, and in CONCACAF play they even stop the match. FIFA has no such rule. Nobody bats an eye. Countless scandals in global soccer. With that said, again, the pearl clutching by Euro soccer fans on this is the funniest thing in soccer since European players invented flopping. Well until yesterday I was fully behind the USA/CONCACAF taking a Belgium scalp tonight. Now I don’t really care. And if Balogun scores tonight I’ll switch to actively cheering against them. The examples you cite are off field matters. This Balogun decision overruns a half century of competitive precedent. England has four key players sitting on one yellow - Kane, Bellingham, Rice and O’Reilly - and are just a cheap call away in the quarter from missing the semi. Then what? Would their suspension be deferred for a year too? Quote
Hongbit Posted July 6 Posted July 6 44 minutes ago, lordstanley said: Well until yesterday I was fully behind the USA/CONCACAF taking a Belgium scalp tonight. Now I don’t really care. And if Balogun scores tonight I’ll switch to actively cheering against them. The examples you cite are off field matters. This Balogun decision overruns a half century of competitive precedent. England has four key players sitting on one yellow - Kane, Bellingham, Rice and O’Reilly - and are just a cheap call away in the quarter from missing the semi. Then what? Would their suspension be deferred for a year too? Cards are wiped clean after the quarterfinals. But as an answer to your what if, yes FIFA would do the same thing and allow Kane or Bellingham to play. It’s bad for business when a questionable card from questionable ref makes a huge impact on the biggest games of the tournament. Remember, the goal isn’t to host the ideal soccer tournament. The goal is to get views and make dollars. Quote
Hongbit Posted July 6 Posted July 6 Watch the ref tonight take a stand and send off Balogun for something silly. Quote
RedTeamGo! Posted July 6 Posted July 6 1 hour ago, lordstanley said: Well until yesterday I was fully behind the USA/CONCACAF taking a Belgium scalp tonight. Now I don’t really care. And if Balogun scores tonight I’ll switch to actively cheering against them. The examples you cite are off field matters. This Balogun decision overruns a half century of competitive precedent. England has four key players sitting on one yellow - Kane, Bellingham, Rice and O’Reilly - and are just a cheap call away in the quarter from missing the semi. Then what? Would their suspension be deferred for a year too? No England isn’t. They wipe the yellows after the quarterfinals Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.