Awrite mates,I understand that the majority of people from our part of the world,Trinidad, are supporters of Brazil and to a greater degree African teams.I was also the same but I have changed my way of thinking about 10 years ago.I have seen so much football from those teams and sometimes it is difficult to believe that I am looking at Brasil,or say,Nigeria,Ghana or even SA.I dont intend to follow blindly the masses who still live on the past of a Brasil of the 70s,they are now quite a comparable team with anybody and not better by miles as some of you would have people believe.No one is denying the individual skills of the South Americans but over the last 10 or 15 years things are levelling out.
We keep "bad mouthing" our own TT players but yesterday's performance by KAKA.....what do you expect me to say?WELL YOU AND I KNOW HE PLAYED WELL UP TO HIS EXOTIC NAME...kaka!!!!
I wouldn't have minded if it was Jones,Scotland or Stern but this Brasilian,isn't he some kindah God,as for Robinho
the less said the better,he playes one good match every 5 in the EPL.Lets not forget that SA is not even the 4th best African team,they put 2 defensive mid fielders out there and shut out the whole Brasilian mid field,complete lock out,arnt they superior footballers,superior skills,superior football brain,what a shame SA didn't put away that early header,dont forget we beat SA 2 years ago.The only parallell I can draw from this match is Chelsea vs Tobago United,as you have noticed I haven't said anything about African football,that is simple,there is nothing to be said.I'll say again USA to beat Brasil,I hope you blokes dont start to cuss me now coz I've still got feelings for Africa and South America,not the same like when ah was young and blind.
No need to
still have "feelings for Africa and South America" boss, you can go and wrap yourself up in a red, white and blue flag and nobody'll oppress yuh for it. It ain't no scene. What you're suffering from is a severe case of waggonism. The funny thing you saying here is your implication that Brazil hasn't played any attractive football for their
real fans' liking since the 70's. I could only laugh at that because while it may be arguable that the 1970 is the greatest team to ever win a World Cup, they looked absolutely terrible in Germany and were overshadowed by the host nation's performance (as Peru can attest to) in '78, and Brazil's game has changed (arguably out of necessity) ever since. Sounds like you're using the age-old soundbite that commentators use of Brazil's fans wanting to still see them play "the beautiful game" as only they can play it and that isn't going to happen against today's opposition. You think the usa is going to come out in anything more than a defensive-counterattacking posture on Sunday? Think again. They'll stack up their defense and.....well, you know the rest. The African teams are still a work in progress. Progress being the operative word.
I rel like these people who SWEAR that the usa's success somehow is "great for concacaf" is mind boggling. I didn't see Australia's success do anything for Fiji or Papua New Guinea.
Good performances by CONCACAF teams in the World Cup bring benefits to the region in the form of more places for CONCACAF teams at the World Cup.
In the 2002 World Cup both the USA and Mexico -- 2 out of the 3 CONCACAF teams there -- advanced from their group. That success was instrumental in getting the region a half spot for 2006: the same half spot that T&T used to qualify!
Currently Mexico is the only team in the region that has a seed for the next World Cup draw. This is because they consistently advance from their group at the WC finals. The USA's win against Spain, and the overall good performance in the Confederations Cup, will boost our rankings for sure. It still probably won't be enough to get us a seed for the 2010 draw, although that could happen if we win the Gold Cup. But it's still a long shot.
At any rate, if you want to see CONCACAF continue to hang onto that half spot for WC qualification -- and possibly earn another one -- then you should want to see the USA, Mexico and other teams from the region (like CR) perform well on the big stages.
Listen, zip head, your last sentence embodies the one point I have been making all along, except, it doesn't apply to Costa Rica, who is already a member of the upper echelon of concacaf. Any success they enjoy will only be seen as a return to form and not any improvement of the confederation. To some extent, the same applies to El Salvador. It's the OTHER TEAMS IN THE REGION that have to step up AND CONSISTENTLY PLAY WELL (and while that may especially apply to Canada, it especially applies to T&T, Jamaica, Cuba and Haiti and maybe even Guyana) in order for the confederation as a whole, to gain some modicum of respect. I want you to go here:
http://www.socawarriors.net/forum/index.php?topic=44732.0 read question 11 and see how it applies to you in this particular discussion. Here are some facts for you to consider: Ever since the original WC in 1930 up until 1978, concacaf was ALWAYS given either 1 or 2 slots, and I want you to hold on to that point, but consider the following: As the wheels of colonization started falling off, African nations in particular, started emerging to the point that they no longer had to go into a playoff between themselves and other confederations and CAF first started consistently getting their lone slot in 1970. Just ONE SLOT. Fifa made this change while the field for the WC was still only 16 teams. There have twice been expansions to the field from 16 to 24 in 1982 and from 24 to 32 in 1998. Over that period of time, concacaf has gained 1.5 additional slots and CAF has gained 4. I am well aware of Trinidad having used that .5 slot to qualify for Germany and we can thank expansion and jack warner for that. Now, if fifa decides with their mafia self to further expand the field from 32 to 36 or even 40 teams (because, remember, since the break-up of USSR, more and more teams are now emerging from Europe, and fifa is, after all, a European organization) maybe we can expect to get a slot or two, maybe. But even so, if the bottom-dwelling European and Asian and African teams start showing vast improvement across the board as opposed to the same teams over and over again, and the same three top teams in concacaf keep getting results, who do you think fifa are going to give those extra slots to? concacaf? You would have to be a jack-ass to believe that. As it is, if we don't show consistency and produce results with that .5 slot in the playoffs against other confederations(now with CONMEBOL) we just might lose it for real because the other confederations are showing improvement across the board. If the
other concacaf teams don't improve, teams numbered 1 through 3 will always be a Mexico, usa and Costa Rica, and team number 3.5 will always be a T&T or Jamaica or Guatemala that would have a hard time playing off against any other confederation. You can afford run your mouth and wave your flag because the usa is the likeliest team to be in the top 3, year after year and whether or not they get seeded has everything to do with their OWN performance and not anybody elses.