OT: World Cup | Page 12 | The Boneyard

OT: World Cup

Status
Not open for further replies.
intlzncster said:
I don't hate on Wondo as much as everyone else seems to. He may not be as talented as others, but he's had a nose for the goal lately. There's no shame in riding the hot hand. He may just be a poacher, but poached goals still count on the scoreboard!
Expand ...

I like that he knows what he is and we know what he is. He could get the start. But in truth, Dempsey is also more poacher than anything else. That run against Ghana is about as long a run as you'll likely see from him. He's most dangerous getting on the end of balls inside the 18yd box.

I think Mix can handle the ball better coming out of midfield than AJ or Wondo. That's the reason for my selection.

I also think Zusi/Bedoya will need to split time in the heat of Manaus to keep fresh legs on Ronaldo's side of the field. Look for Johnson to factor later in the game after this sub is made.
 
SubbaBub said:
I think it will be Mix or Wondo playing under Dempsey. Wodo is Dempsey s backup and Dempsey is Jozy's. I think AK went in because it was a sub situation. Wondo is better from the start.

But I'd like to see Mix Bradley Zusi below Dempsey in the 4 2 3 1. Jones, Beckerman, and Bradley can play the same game as vs Ghana and Mix can play higher on the wing and drift under Dempsey.
Expand ...

I guess I have a hard time seeing why we would need two defensive mids- Beckerman and Jones. Jones can run box to box and even though I don't think Beckerman has been bad, he brings nothing going forward, which puts too much pressure on Bradley.

I've been a big Zusi critic, but I must say that he is an absolutely fabulous assist man. He's very dangerous when he has time to find his spot.

As green as Green is, I do know he can control the ball well and might take some pressure off Bradley. Might be wishful thinking on my part. So, maybe Mix should be the guy there?
 
bobbygt said:
I guess I have a hard time seeing why we would need two defensive mids- Beckerman and Jones. Jones can run box to box and even though I don't think Beckerman has been bad, he brings nothing going forward, which puts too much pressure on Bradley.

I've been a big Zusi critic, but I must say that he is an absolutely fabulous assist man. He's very dangerous when he has time to find his spot.

As green as Green is, I do know he can control the ball well and might take some pressure off Bradley. Might be wishful thinking on my part. So, maybe Mix should be the guy there?
Expand ...

Beckerman's presence in the game is not putting pressure on Bradley. In fact, it's quite the opposite. He's there so that Bradley doesn't have to feel the pressure of defensive responsibilities. I think that the three of them in the game (with Jones) is actually the way we need to continue to play...
 
bobbygt said:
I guess I have a hard time seeing why we would need two defensive mids- Beckerman and Jones. Jones can run box to box and even though I don't think Beckerman has been bad, he brings nothing going forward, which puts too much pressure on Bradley.

I've been a big Zusi critic, but I must say that he is an absolutely fabulous assist man. He's very dangerous when he has time to find his spot.

As green as Green is, I do know he can control the ball well and might take some pressure off Bradley. Might be wishful thinking on my part. So, maybe Mix should be the guy there?
Expand ...

Then 3 man central midfield, against my initial opinion, seems to be working. It allows each man to do what there best at and burden each a bit less in areas they are not. Jones likes to range up/down and side to side. OK, provide additional cover for Beasley/Dempsey on the left and move forward when prudent. Beckerman concentrates fully on defense and covers Jones/Bradley. Bradley is now allowed to play higher and doesn't have to retreat as deep.

The downside is a lack of offensive punch down the left. But, we lost that anyway once Donovan was left off the roster.

I think it's the best use of the players we have. Green, Chandler, Yedlin will get run if fatigue becomes a problem or we are way ahead Sunday or already through against Germany. I do expect to see Wondo at some point against Portugal. I don't know if/when we'll see Gonzalez. Cameron isn't coming off the field if JK can help it.
 
Initial thoughts on England/Uruguay…

· Very questionable calls from the Spanish referee that appear to be significantly favoring Uruguay, for example, they should be playing with 10 men now

· If the ref does not balance things out, this game could get ugly as Uruguay continues to be very physical and England is bound to get frustrated and will retaliate

· Uruguay’s defense and keeper looks shaky; but they look better than they did against Costa Rica

· Suarez, now with a goal, does not look hurt at all, was he ‘saved’ specifically for this game?

· England can’t put the damn ball in the net
 
Mr. Conehead said:
Initial thoughts on England/Uruguay…
· England can’t put the damn ball in the net
Expand ...

Can't argue this. They seem to dominating from what I can tell. But then they missed a lot of chances against Italy too...although everyone does against Italy.
 
.-.
Wow, that was a heck of a save!
 
Suarez. That's the difference for Uruguay. Wonder how they would have been last game with him. England essentially out. Spain out. Who's next?
 
I kind of think England could still easily out of this group - unless the Uruguay match wasn't a fluke and Costa Rica is a lot better than we think. If Costa Rica loses the next two games 2-0 (Italy, England), then England advances if Italy beats Uruguay. All of those things seem reasonable.
 
Gurleyman said:
I kind of think England could still easily out of this group - unless the Uruguay match wasn't a fluke and Costa Rica is a lot better than we think. If Costa Rica loses the next two games 2-0 (Italy, England), then England advances if Italy beats Uruguay. All of those things seem reasonable.
Expand ...

I think CR isn't all that bad; couple of nice players. And they seem to be playing well, clearly enjoying the South American atmosphere.

And the scenario you describe isn't exactly "easy" per se. A lot of things have to go right for England, and in the World Cup, that usually doesn't happen.
 
Alex Morgan is ready for the game Sunday.

71owU0y.jpg
 
.-.
intlzncster said:
I think CR isn't all that bad; couple of nice players. And they seem to be playing well, clearly enjoying the South American atmosphere.

And the scenario you describe isn't exactly "easy" per se. A lot of things have to go right for England, and in the World Cup, that usually doesn't happen.
Expand ...

As far as teams starting 0-2 go... that seems to be the best place you could be.
 
intlzncster said:
I think CR isn't all that bad; couple of nice players. And they seem to be playing well, clearly enjoying the South American atmosphere. And the scenario you describe isn't exactly "easy" per se. A lot of things have to go right for England, and in the World Cup, that usually doesn't happen.
Expand ...

Easy may be the wrong word, but we'll know more tomorrow. If Italy blows out CR, which wouldn't really be a shock, then England could almost be considered the favorite to come out of the group going into the final day. Italy wouldn't have a spot clinched yet (with a potential three-way tie if they lost), so they couldn't rest people against Uruguay. England will have the goal differential advantage on Uruguay automatically if both finish 1-2, so they would just need a win over CR and an Italy win to move on, which would both be the most likely scenarios.

If Italy only beats CR by one, then England would need a multi-goal win against a possibly bunkering CR to pass them (and still get the U loss), a much harder task. It could also be one of those situations where CR would adjust their strategy as they caught wind of the Uruguay-Italy score, which can be fascinating (uh-oh, Uruguay scored - send everyone forward!)

Although obviously if CR gets a point tomorrow, it's all over for England.
 
Gurleyman said:
Easy may be the wrong word, but we'll know more tomorrow. If Italy blows out CR, which wouldn't really be a shock, then England could almost be considered the favorite to come out of the group going into the final day. Italy wouldn't have a spot clinched yet (with a potential three-way tie if they lost), so they couldn't rest people against Uruguay. England will have the goal differential advantage on Uruguay automatically if both finish 1-2, so they would just need a win over CR and an Italy win to move on, which would both be the most likely scenarios.

If Italy only beats CR by one, then England would need a multi-goal win against a possibly bunkering CR to pass them (and still get the U loss), a much harder task. It could also be one of those situations where CR would adjust their strategy as they caught wind of the Uruguay-Italy score, which can be fascinating (uh-oh, Uruguay scored - send everyone forward!)

Although obviously if CR gets a point tomorrow, it's all over for England.
Expand ...

Nate Silver puts it at 4% for
England to advance. Seems light to me but his model only gives Italy a 40% chance to beat Costa Rica. With CR and a draw both at 30%.

The betting markets see it a bit differently with Italy a huge favorite and Costa Rica paying almost 7:1 to win.
 
whaler11 said:
Nate Silver puts it at 4% for
England to advance. Seems light to me but his model only gives Italy a 40% chance to beat Costa Rica. With CR and a draw both at 30%.

The betting markets see it a bit differently with Italy a huge favorite and Costa Rica paying almost 7:1 to win.
Expand ...

Sometimes, Nate Silver's numbers drive me batty. I know that I'm a bit of a "homer" when it comes to Italy, but if someone generates data that tells them that Italy is only 10% more likely to beat Costa Rica than the likelihood of Costa Rica beating Italy, then they need to take their computer and smash it against a wall...

(and I'm completely aware that I just jinxed my azzurri.....and yes, I know that jinxing isn't scientific either...)
 
.-.
Costa Rica had a damn good qualifying to get to Brazil. They are not bad. The odds of them getting a win or a tie against Italy could easily be 50%, and then England is done.
 
UConnDan97 said:
Sometimes, Nate Silver's numbers drive me batty. I know that I'm a bit of a "homer" when it comes to Italy, but if someone generates data that tells them that Italy is only 10% more likely to beat Costa Rica than the likelihood of Costa Rica beating Italy, then they need to take their computer and smash it against a wall...

(and I'm completely aware that I just jinxed my azzurri.....and yes, I know that jinxing isn't scientific either...)
Expand ...

and if his model hadn't been on the right track about Spain and England I'd question it more. He had URU and ENG at about the same chance to win today so he made me a lot
of money on Uruguay so I'm on his side right now.
 
whaler11 said:
and if his model hadn't been on the right track about Spain and England I'd question it more. He had URU and ENG at about the same chance to win today so he made me a lot
of money on Uruguay so I'm on his side right now.
Expand ...

To be fair, I think that most people, prior to the start of the tourney, had Uruguay beating England. Especially in South America. It was only the Costa Rica game that shook that confidence...until today, of course...
 
progrocks said:
Costa Rica had a damn good qualifying to get to Brazil. They are not bad. The odds of them getting a win or a tie against Italy could easily be 50%, and then England is done.
Expand ...

I hope you're not serious. Costa Rica may indeed win or tie tomorrow, but the idea that the difference between them winning (30%) and Italy winning (40%) being a virtual coin-toss is pretty much laughable. Nobody in the world believes that, except for Nate Silver and perhaps yourself...
 
UConnDan97 said:
To be fair, I think that most people, prior to the start of the tourney, had Uruguay beating England. Especially in South America. It was only the Costa Rica game that shook that confidence...until today, of course...
Expand ...

Well most of the people that wager had England in a big way today. They were a huge favorite.
 
whaler11 said:
Well most of the people that wager had England in a big way today. They were a huge favorite.
Expand ...

What I'm saying is that the line was heavily influenced by the Costa Rica 3-1 victory. Which should tell you what most people think about Costa Rica on the world stage. Costa Rica is not as bad as the world thinks, and not 2 goals better than Uruguay on most days...
 
.-.
UConnDan97 said:
What I'm saying is that the line was heavily influenced by the Costa Rica 3-1 victory. Which should tell you what most people think about Costa Rica on the world stage. Costa Rica is not as bad as the world thinks, and not 2 goals better than Uruguay on most days...
Expand ...

Markets like the World Cup don't move on one result. Especially when it's a European team playing in SA.
 
whaler11 said:
As far as teams starting 0-2 go... that seems to be the best place you could be.
Expand ...

And yet, no team has ever made it through with 2 losses in the group stage. But there can always be a first...
 
intlzncster said:
And yet, no team has ever made it through with 2 losses in the group stage. But there can always be a first...
Expand ...

There will probably never be an 0-2 team with a better chance.
 
whaler11 said:
Markets like the World Cup don't move on one result. Especially when it's a European team playing in SA.
Expand ...

Markets move when a team does the unthinkable and loses to a CONCACAF nobody by multiple goals...
 
UConnDan97 said:
Markets move when a team does the unthinkable and loses to a CONCACAF nobody by multiple goals...
Expand ...

Which might be plausible if they weren't huge favorites. There is so much money driven by models - they don't change that fast.
 
Last edited:
Two big games today. Italy vs Costa Rica and France vs the Swiss.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,322
Messages
4,563,757
Members
10,458
Latest member
Liam Rainst


Top Bottom