• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

2014 FIFA World Cup |OT4| What can European men do against such reckless heat?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The shit FIFA rankings worked to have very unbalanced groups, can't believe two teams for this group will go to the Ro16 and teams like Italy/Uruguay, Ghana/Germany/Portugal will be eliminated.

I think seeding based on the ranking is bad. I thought based on the World Cup qualification performance would be better, but then I looked at UEFA qualification and Belgium had the 3rd best performance, so... "Bad luck".

This group isn't worthy of Maracanã, that's for sure, waste of seats.
 
untitled-43gkjt.gif
 
What?

1. both A and B final games are on the same day. 1A plays on 28th, 1B plays on 29, so 1B has an extra day of rest.

2. Really? They have to beat or tie Cameroon to be sure to qualify. And to chose whom? Both teams are good. And how is this bad for Netherlands?

I get your first point, absolutely agree with you there. The thing is: group B always played after group A - and now it's the other way around.

2. Obviously, The Netherlands doesn't want to play against Brazil. Chili probably has the same concerns and won't want to play Brazil either. Brazil has a strong team (although, honestly, performed badly the previous two matches) + 'home side advantage'.
The Netherlands (and Chili) are just worried that Brazil will go like "We'll lose/draw so we won't have to play (The Netherlands / Chili) because we think that team is stronger than the other".

EDIT I don't really care, though. I'm just explaining the concerns from both The Netherlands and Chili.
 
If Chile beats Netherlands to top group B, I wouldn't want to play against them if I would be Brazil. So, I don't understand this logic.

Edit:
S¡mon;117720359 said:
2. Obviously, The Netherlands doesn't want to play against Brazil. Chili probably has the same concerns and won't want to play Brazil either. Brazil has a strong team (although, honestly, performed badly the previous two matches) + 'home side advantage'.
The Netherlands (and Chili) are just worried that Brazil will go like "We'll lose/draw so we won't have to play (The Netherlands / Chili) because we think that team is stronger than the other".

And that's why I think that it would have been worse to have Chile - Netherland AFTER Group A, as they would have both tried not to play against Brazil.
 
Listening to the ESPN Brit keep pissing about how fucking boring the game is makes keeping the game on worth it.
 
So basically, you're worried Brazil is kind of shitty and won't play to win the group.

I don't really care either way. I was just saying what people in this thread are saying.

It doesn't really matter to me because someone's going to have that advantage and there's no way to make it perfectly fair unless you just want to play everyone's third match at the same time.
 
I missed the USA match, were they good?

I didn't find them particularly impressive. They have tremendous trouble against more technically skilled players from what I saw against Ghana. So the match against Portugal will be pretty hard to win for them I would think. They really lucked out that Ronaldo isn't playing at any rate, so perhaps Portugal will be inefficient with their chances.
 
Let me rephrase that, if Chile wins against Netherlands, Brazil will end up second in their group. Calling it now.

Not happening.

S¡mon;117719879 said:
I get that. I also get Van Gaal's complaints.

I don't really care, though. I just hope Brazil will play fair (and not deliberately lose or win). Also, if you want to be World Champions, you should be able to beat any opponent.

Brazil will beat Cameroon no matter what.
The only way Brazil ends up in second is if Mexico absolutelly destroys Croatia.

I don't see that happening.
 
This World Cup has had so many exciting matches, but there have been a few - including this one - that are really extremely boring.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom