Ireland
-
A humble guy with healthy desire. -
Not really, only Klose from the starters.Originally posted by RedReet View Post
It looks a poor squad on paper, and most of their supposed better players had poor seasons.
Who was Ballack's replacement in the squad, anyone know?Comment
-
Who's 'the starters' then?Originally posted by Mattshark View Post
They've lost their first choice keeper, and Neuer is relatively young and inexperienced. In fact, bar some of the usual suspects, they appear to have quite a young squad throughout. Podolski had a shocking season at Cologne, Klose didn't play much and Gomez was a bit of a disappointment for Bayern. Muller may have stepped up, but again he may lack experience. Not sure how good a season Bastian had, but two goals doesn't make great reading.
Haven't looked at any teams in any great depth yet, but that was my early impression when looking at the squad. Although not great for Chelsea, I'd have given them much more of a chance with Ballack there.If we are all only happy when we are really winning in the end, when your race finishes, what life would that be?Comment
-
Comment
-
Really? Ballack was **** in the last WC and they played far better when he was injured.Originally posted by RedReet View Post
Podolski didn't have the best season true. Gomes is a sub. Schweinsteiger and Lahm had good seasons as did Kroos, Khedira, Trochowski and Ozil. Marin also looks a real talent too.
They have a young team, but there are some very good players in there.Comment
-
Paraglide will surprise a few people.
.
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post.Comment
-
Originally posted by Mattshark View Post
Not that it really matters anymore, but I’ll reply out of politeness.
I was gonna take your word on the German team playing better without Ballack but question the relevance, seeing as that was four years ago with a different group of players and a different manager (we played better without Gerrard five years ago, but it didn’t necessarily make us a better team). However a quick check on Wiki shows that Ballack has been in the team of the tournament for the last two World Cups, as well as the last Euro’s, plus he only missed the opening game in this tournament when Germany ‘played far better’.
Anyway, even if he wasn’t one of their best players in every recent major tournament, surely his experience alone would have been a great asset, especially with a team so young? I don’t have the squad in front of me at the minute, but bar Schweinsteiger, do any of the rest of the midfield have any world cup experience? People automatically assume that Germany will the there or thereabouts as they have the experience and know-how, but is that really the case this year? I have no doubt you probably know more about these players breaking into the German team than me, as after our **** season I barely watched any foreign football after about November, and you’ve probably given this team much more thought than me, but I honestly don’t believe they’ll be good enough to make a major impact on this tournament.
Chances are, I’ll be proved catastrophically wrong, and fully expect you to highlight this afterwards.
If we are all only happy when we are really winning in the end, when your race finishes, what life would that be?Comment
-
Yup, just check out the reviews thread.Originally posted by Neil Young View PostParamore will surprise a few people.
If we are all only happy when we are really winning in the end, when your race finishes, what life would that be?Comment
-
this was ages ago, but this was exactly the point i was making before!Originally posted by RedReet View PostNot that it really matters anymore, but I’ll reply out of politeness.
I was gonna take your word on the German team playing better without Ballack but question the relevance, seeing as that was four years ago with a different group of players and a different manager (we played better without Gerrard five years ago, but it didn’t necessarily make us a better team). However a quick check on Wiki shows that Ballack has been in the team of the tournament for the last two World Cups, as well as the last Euro’s, plus he only missed the opening game in this tournament when Germany ‘played far better’.
Anyway, even if he wasn’t one of their best players in every recent major tournament, surely his experience alone would have been a great asset, especially with a team so young? I don’t have the squad in front of me at the minute, but bar Schweinsteiger, do any of the rest of the midfield have any world cup experience? People automatically assume that Germany will the there or thereabouts as they have the experience and know-how, but is that really the case this year? I have no doubt you probably know more about these players breaking into the German team than me, as after our **** season I barely watched any foreign football after about November, and you’ve probably given this team much more thought than me, but I honestly don’t believe they’ll be good enough to make a major impact on this tournament.
Chances are, I’ll be proved catastrophically wrong, and fully expect you to highlight this afterwards.
96 Never ForgottenComment
-
UruguayAnybody who criticizes Klopp ever is a James Blunt. Nov 2015
#****CITYComment
-
After loosing our last two test matches with a abysmal performance I would quickly nominate someone else.Originally posted by Neil Young View PostDenmark. I have it on excellent authority they're really good. (Darkon says so)
Bendtner for the Golden Boot.
But then again it was without Bendtner both of them!Comment
-
denmarkOriginally posted by PTP View PostJacques Brel is alive and well and playing at AnfieldComment
-
I hadn't realised Denmark was in Africa.
I reckon Gondwanaland will do well.
The winning country will come from Pangaea.
.
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post.Comment
-
-
Originally posted by MrsB View Post
.
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post.Comment
Comment