He also turned down two Swedish "clear" pens. I've had enough of you already. Feck off an cry on another board you tiresome myopic clown. Italy are gash. Cheerio.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] World Cup Play-Offs.
- Thread starter Leekbrookgull
- Start date
I am aware Australia should have come home from central America with a goal or two, BUT they didn't - and this was always expected to be a tight encounter. I genuinely don't believe it will be comfortable at all. I reckon Australia will score one, and I hope for their sakes that proves to be enough.
Iggle Piggle
Well-known member
- Sep 3, 2010
- 5,329
Good point well made. The format of the 48 team world cup will be the same as the old Leyland DAF trophy. I for one can't forget what a roaring success that was.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
So if only those 3 teams can win it, its essentially pointless anyone else turning up. Right-o then. That sounds fun. A round-robin of just the top 4 maybe, playing each other in an endless cycle for 9 months. Sounds like a wet dream for Sky.
He also turned down two Swedish "clear" pens. I've had enough of you already. Feck off an cry on another board you tiresome myopic clown. Italy are gash. Cheerio.
Wow,I bet if you were in front of me you'd get your bitch claws out and wanna scratch me big man?
Hope so.
Honduras are a bunch of cheating, dirty bar stewards who pick up red cards like a postman delivers on Valentine's Day. Even in the first leg they had four or five bookings. Would love to see the Aussies at the World Cup. They were very entertaining in Brazil - great game against Holland - 3-2 to the Dutch after a brave fightback. One of the more memorable games in the group stage last time.
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,221
But there are a fair few players in the current squad who'd never have got into most Italian sides in the past. Alright, it sounds like the manager hasn't helped himself with some negative team selections and ignoring certain players who might have brought a bit of flair and inspiration to proceedings. But there's no Maldini, no Pirlo, no Schillaci or Tardelli or Baggio, for example. The current Italian side are, to a neutral like me, monumentally dull. France, Spain, Brazil, Argentina, say: they're all teams you'd pay to watch, even if they're not on form. Italy? No.
They weren't good enough to qualify, ergo they don't deserve to be there. That's not down to a tough qualifying group, It's because they showed nothing whatsoever when it came to facing Sweden over two legs.
What? Italy are anti football. It's in your DNA to try and win 1-0.
The amount of discussions I've had with people like you who slate Italian football.I always ask them how much Italian football do they watch and they always come back with 'never'. On the other hand I'm sure you are excited at the prospect of watching Englands free flowing attacking football.
Overhyped Champions League and five major continental leagues (England, Germany, France, Italy and Spain) partially to blame.
Yes I agree, you can get a better manager and improve, so next time you can qualify. But next time isn't what was being discussed, you said it was a shame for football fans not having big teams in the WC, and Simster said it's only a shame if they are any good. You're not any good, and it doesn't matter whether that's due to the manager or players, you're still no good.
The World Cup has ALWAYS been a trade-off between having the world's best teams, and extending the sport's appeal to new parts of the globe and new markets. Since moving to a 32 team tournament, it has worked an absolute treat. Places like the USA, China, NZ and Australia have all qualified and elevated the sport to the mainstream in those countries. Obviously, Europe has born the brunt of that in terms of number of half decent countries failing to make the cut, but let's be clear - the tournament is not enriched by having more bang average European teams at the expense of new but slightly worse teams from other parts of the globe. In 2017/18, Italy are one of those bang average European teams who would have qualified if they weren't European. They are very ordinary though, so...meh. 48 teams (as is FIFA's intention) will be the goose that kills the golden egg obviously, if awarding it to Qatar hasn't already done that. We'll be gorging on too many meaningless fixtures.
The principle of rankings points is fine, but it has been shabbily and lazily executed by FIFA. No surprise there then. It'll be fine once FIFA sort out the way rankings points are granted, so that it eliminates the idea of turning down tactical friendly fixtures. I agree with you over Concacaf, which is somehow even more forgiving than Conmebol qualifying. Both seem expressly designed to ensure Brazil and the USA are guaranteed to qualify for all too obvious reasons.
It's not right to pick out some of Italy's best players of all time and say just because we don't have them anymore we don't have quality players.I doubt you watch Italy play much or their league teams.I doubt you have watched much of Insigne lately or Sharraway.I'm sure you know of the combination of Buffon,Chellini and Bonucci at the back.Then there is the highly rated Verratti and the 100m valued Belotti.Yes we had the players to qualify and with the right manager we could have done well as Conte showed when he was in charge.Last night we were not brilliant but we were far from dull.
P.S Schillaci?One great world cup and the rest of his career he did little.
I've watched nearly every game the Italians have played at every major tournament in the last 30 years. I'm not commenting on your domestic game.
If you read much hear you'll know most of us can't really be bothered with England either these days.
Brian Fantana
Well-known member
I don’t think Italy can have too many complaints really. They had, what, 75% possession last night and mustered a mighty four shots on target. The manager resolutely refused to bring on Insigne and instead was getting his midfielders warning up. Managerial bellcheesery of the worst kind, deserving of failure in my book.
We have not been good in the qualifiers yet that doesn't mean as often happens we would not have turned it on in the World Cup.Even in 1982 when we won it we drew our first 3 games and then after we entertained in one of the world cup games of all time.Italy 3 Brazil 2.If you want Sweden then you are welcome to them.
hart's shirt
Well-known member
It's not all doom and gloom for Italy.
With Chile also failing to qualify, both teams could arrange a friendly against each other.
Then again, it might turn out something like this...
With Chile also failing to qualify, both teams could arrange a friendly against each other.
Then again, it might turn out something like this...
So did Paolo Rossi. He did nothing in his career but win the world cup in 1982. I bet someone as "ignorant" as me probably wouldn't even have picked him for that Italian squad.
But the fact is, you have to be good enough to qualify first. Italy didn't, they weren't very good at all, and now they are out. No tears being shed anywhere else but Italy because your team is poor.
Sweden are an agricultural but well organised team - not unlike Iceland. Iceland entertained everyone in the Euros didn't they?
Obviously if you had powered past Sweden with a vintage 4 goal salvo, we'd have been salivating and drooling over Italy being there next year. Sadly for you, they looked every bit as crap as a team that couldn't score once in 180 minutes against a nation with one fifth of Italy's population. With that in mind, I am ambivalent as to whether a Zatan-less Sweden or a goal-free Italy took that spot.
What if he had given Sweden their two 'clear' penalties? Italy are currently if not 'shite' then certainly not very good and definitely over the hill. Just look at the team last night.
Buffon: 40 year old goalkeeper, a legend but still 40 years old.
Barzagli: 36 year old centre back, only started three Serie A games this season.
Bonucci: Good player no arguments there.
Chiellini: 33 years old, still a good player but getting on now
Florenzi:
A nothing player. Every team in the world has a right sided player who can get up and down and put a half decent cross in. England have about ten to the standard of Florenzi.Candreva: Just a journeyman midfielder until Inter lost their minds and spunked 20 million euros on him. 30 years old.
Jorginho: I quite like, decent player.
Parolo: 32 years old, again decent combative midfielder, but not going to set the world alight is he?
Darmian: Manchester United's third choice left back behind Blind and Ashley Young.
Gabbiadini: A Southampton striker who has scored 3 goals this season. England fans would be tearing their hair out if we were picking this chump up front.
Immobile: Great player.
The bench is hardly full of quality either.
Sorry but that is a pretty shite team. It just does not have the legs in midfield, out wide or in defence to compete at the top level, or the quality in midfield to compensate. England actually do have a better team than this, and there are not many of the top nations you can say that about.