brennser wrote:
twas the soft goal that killed us
Both soft goals, if you count the goal at the end of the first leg…Agreed.
Both soft goals, if you count the goal at the end of the first leg…Agreed.
On the Eve of the new Season...
Both soft goals, if you count the goal at the end of the first leg…Agreed.
And since we're talking about next year already, I like the Hernandez signing, depite hating Mexican footballers. He plays hard and dives in like Rooney. He'll have to adjust to the EPL, but should do well given the effort that I've seen him give for Chivas. I do wonder if this hurts United's chances of signing di María though…
vansmack wrote:
And since we're talking about next year already, I like the Hernandez signing, depite hating Mexican footballers. He plays hard and dives in like Rooney. He'll have to adjust to the EPL, but should do well given the effort that I've seen him give for Chivas. I do wonder if this hurts United's chances of signing di María though…
I really think United should stay away from Latin American players..something about Ferguson and Latin Americans does not seem to work for Man U:
Veron, Forlan and Tevez..
Forlan is one of the best strikers in the world and Tevez is a proven winner…. What happened to Veron at ManU will remain one of the great mysteries..he went in as one of the best players in the world (I bought his Man U jersey in Bs. As…) and came out a has been not to mention the 2002 WC debacle..
Frankly, lately Ferguson seems a bit out of it.. his comment about Germans was particularly innane
I'm not sure if I'm forgetting anyone the past 10 years
Antonio Valencia, and he's doing just fine…
Forlan is a bit of a mystery to me. He just couldn't score, depsite many appearances and many chances. He had over 60 appearances and probably just as many chances, but somehow just couldn't finish, save for a handful of goals. Most United supporters aren't surprised at his success at Villarreal - he just needed to find that finishing touch, which he clearly has. He certainly was a frustrating player to watch in Red though.
Veron simply couldn't play without space and the English game didn't lend itself to Veron's style of play. It's not like he was any better at Chelsea so to say that it's SAF's fault is a bit unfair. He was brilliant for United in the Champion's League (where he was afforded space) but the defense in the English game was too much for him, both in Manchester and in London.
We've gone over Tevez a million times and nobody ever doubted his talent. As I've said before, he was let go to City because he wanted to be the highest paid player on the team and United wouldn't do that. Rooney's still outscoring him and United still lead City by a healthy margin, so I still think SAF made the right decision.
Unlike Veron and Forlan, Tevez was the right kind of player for United with his effort and constant hussle - the money just wasn't right. I like the way Hernandez plays and I think he'll also be the right type of player for SAF's tactics. For 6 million pounds and a match in Guadalajara this summer, a bit of a bargain too.
Forlan is a bit of a mystery to me. He just couldn't score, depsite many appearances and many chances. He had over 60 appearances and probably just as many chances, but somehow just couldn't finish, save for a handful of goals. Most United supporters aren't surprised at his success at Villarreal - he just needed to find that finishing touch, which he clearly has. He certainly was a frustrating player to watch in Red though.
Veron simply couldn't play without space and the English game didn't lend itself to Veron's style of play. It's not like he was any better at Chelsea so to say that it's SAF's fault is a bit unfair. He was brilliant for United in the Champion's League (where he was afforded space) but the defense in the English game was too much for him, both in Manchester and in London.
We've gone over Tevez a million times and nobody ever doubted his talent. As I've said before, he was let go to City because he wanted to be the highest paid player on the team and United wouldn't do that. Rooney's still outscoring him and United still lead City by a healthy margin, so I still think SAF made the right decision.
Unlike Veron and Forlan, Tevez was the right kind of player for United with his effort and constant hussle - the money just wasn't right. I like the way Hernandez plays and I think he'll also be the right type of player for SAF's tactics. For 6 million pounds and a match in Guadalajara this summer, a bit of a bargain too.
I remember that Veron was doing very well when he first played for Man U (as I recall in Premier league too as I was watching the Man U games as was all Argentina)…. then all of a sudden he crapped out a few months before the 2002 WC and unfortunately Bielsa (then Argentine national team coach) could not adapt at that late point…
You can't deem the T decision a good one because Man U is ahead of City! Come on! City has nowhere the talent Man U has (despite having Tevez)…I mean imagine City if they had Rooney! OK, you probably don't want to imagine that… :) I mean Man U was really really close to progressing in the Champions and winning League.. I have to think Tevez would have helped…
Hernandez is definitely a "bargain".. then again Mexicans can't really play soccer so I'd be skeptical but who knows….I don't know anything about him…. I just know I've never seen a Mexican player I enjoyed watching..well, maybe el Pajaro who for a while reminded me of Caniggia.
You can't deem the T decision a good one because Man U is ahead of City! Come on! City has nowhere the talent Man U has (despite having Tevez)…I mean imagine City if they had Rooney! OK, you probably don't want to imagine that… :) I mean Man U was really really close to progressing in the Champions and winning League.. I have to think Tevez would have helped…
Hernandez is definitely a "bargain".. then again Mexicans can't really play soccer so I'd be skeptical but who knows….I don't know anything about him…. I just know I've never seen a Mexican player I enjoyed watching..well, maybe el Pajaro who for a while reminded me of Caniggia.
hutch wrote:
Mexicans can't really play soccer
This is the most enlightened thing you've ever said.
And there's no doubt Tevez would have helped, but still not worth the price.
vansmack wrote:hutch wrote:
Mexicans can't really play soccer
This is the most enlightened thing you've ever said.
srsly?
admittedly i don't follow soccer as closely as you lot, but c'mon…
mexicians tend play an ugly game
Let's look at the the stats, sweetcell (and I LOVE to have this debate with my Mexican friends who simply can't comprehend a gringo who knows footie).
The Mexican National team has made the quarterfinals of the World Cup twice in their "long, illustrious" history and BOTH times it was when they were the host country (they enjoy a distinct advantage playing in The Azteca with the altitude, smog and flying bottles of urine).
When they are not the host nation, they've never made it past the second round, getting bounced by the likes of Bulgaria (94) and the US (2002). Not exaclty on par with Germany (98) and Argentina (2006)…
They qualify every year (much like the US) because they play in the CONCACAF region, which is weak - very weak. To illustrate - only 10 of the 40 teams in the region have EVER made the World Cup, and 6 of those have only done it once. It's been dominated by the US and Mexico for some time.
But the real problem for Mexico is that they've reached a platuea while the one advantage they've had over their larger and wealthier northern neighbor has shrunk to a near embarassment (the US is 13-9-8 in it's last 30 games against Mexico in the last 20 years, with all but one of Mexico's win coming in Mexico).
So there you have it. They're not better than the US, and I'm quite certain few will argue that the US play real soccer. Both teams are quite ugly to watch….
The Mexican National team has made the quarterfinals of the World Cup twice in their "long, illustrious" history and BOTH times it was when they were the host country (they enjoy a distinct advantage playing in The Azteca with the altitude, smog and flying bottles of urine).
When they are not the host nation, they've never made it past the second round, getting bounced by the likes of Bulgaria (94) and the US (2002). Not exaclty on par with Germany (98) and Argentina (2006)…
They qualify every year (much like the US) because they play in the CONCACAF region, which is weak - very weak. To illustrate - only 10 of the 40 teams in the region have EVER made the World Cup, and 6 of those have only done it once. It's been dominated by the US and Mexico for some time.
But the real problem for Mexico is that they've reached a platuea while the one advantage they've had over their larger and wealthier northern neighbor has shrunk to a near embarassment (the US is 13-9-8 in it's last 30 games against Mexico in the last 20 years, with all but one of Mexico's win coming in Mexico).
So there you have it. They're not better than the US, and I'm quite certain few will argue that the US play real soccer. Both teams are quite ugly to watch….
im just blown away that there are 40 teams in concacaf
i wish mexico played better football, and i wish they had more quality. but every time the u.s. and mexico play someone gets a boot to the eye or something
i just hope the next generation of u.s. players can string together some passes
i wish mexico played better football, and i wish they had more quality. but every time the u.s. and mexico play someone gets a boot to the eye or something
i just hope the next generation of u.s. players can string together some passes
witness the 2002 round of 16 game….US won 2-0, Mexico had at least one red card and I believe it was a cleat to Claudia Reyna's face….(Or something just as bad involving Cobi Jones….memory fails me)
Congrats Barca. Well earned.
moderators, my recent posts seem to get deleted, not sure why.
You'll never guess what I named my new Chihuahua?
fergie?
wait, chihauhua?
wait, chihauhua?
i would have guess santonio if it wasnt this thread
Anybody catch the London Derby this week? I must say, I normally hate watching matches at White Hart Lane (the viewing angle with the camera on the roof annoys the piss out of me), but ESPN's HD feed with 5.1 suround made that match even more entertaining - and it was already a pretty damn good match. HD might save White Hart Lane…
Oh, and I watched Danny Rose's goal at least 25 times and I was amazed each time….sick.
Oh, and I watched Danny Rose's goal at least 25 times and I was amazed each time….sick.
I really shouldn't be this drunk at quarter of 8 in the morning…
vansmack wrote:
I really shouldn't be this drunk at quarter of 8 in the morning…
ha ha.. I just had a feeling Manchester United would score at the end…
Thats the kind of stuff that separates the big teams- the winners- from the also rans..