Sport Today

> Good sterotype. I saw yugoslavian, dutch, english...almost players
> from every country diving.

> >> About 6 yellow cards for Italy, 3 for Holland.
> >Historically. I am talking the contribution to football, notr just
> >this one game....

> So you'd be surprised to find out that we suffer more fouls than we
> make in half of our matches.

> Bullshits. In no sports you play well when your game takes you
> nowhere.

> >> Claudio Mantelli

> >> Remove SPAMMERSF*CK from my email address to reply

> Claudio Mantelli

> Remove SPAMMERSF*CK from my email address to reply

> > Italy didn't play a boring game, they played a boring tournament.
> > If spoil tactics become successful, they it will be necessary for
> > a "can't beat 'em then join 'em" attitude to emerge. It won't just
> > be those horrible Italians, it will be everyone - as has happened
> > with the cheating and diving. The game will go downhill.

> "It will be everyone"?

> Is this the first year you follow football?

> Italy has no monopoly to the "let's play spoiling and pray
> for a break" style of football. It has been there all the time.
> USA in 94 against Brazil, Sweden in 94 against
> Brazil, Norway in 1998 and 2000, Argentina in 90, Brazil in
> 74, Spain in 84, Czechoslavia in 1962, Uruguay in 1970,
> Uruguay in 1999 Copa America, West Germany in 1986,
> Ireland in 1990 and 1994, Aston Villa in the 2000 FA Cup final,
> Newcastle in the 1999 FA Cup final...

> Most of these teams get decent results by using this tactic. USA
> losing 1-0 to Brazil is a very respectable result. By playing a
> wide-open game, it can easily be 4-0.

> I mean, this is not the first time an inferior team plays this
> type of game and hopes for the best, and it won't be the last
> time.

> > > Italy didn't play a boring game, they played a boring tournament.
> > > If spoil tactics become successful, they it will be necessary for
> > > a "can't beat 'em then join 'em" attitude to emerge. It won't just
> > > be those horrible Italians, it will be everyone - as has happened
> > > with the cheating and diving. The game will go downhill.

> > "It will be everyone"?

> > Is this the first year you follow football?

> > Italy has no monopoly to the "let's play spoiling and pray
> > for a break" style of football. It has been there all the time.
> > USA in 94 against Brazil, Sweden in 94 against
> > Brazil, Norway in 1998 and 2000, Argentina in 90, Brazil in
> > 74, Spain in 84, Czechoslavia in 1962, Uruguay in 1970,
> > Uruguay in 1999 Copa America, West Germany in 1986,
> > Ireland in 1990 and 1994, Aston Villa in the 2000 FA Cup final,
> > Newcastle in the 1999 FA Cup final...

> > Most of these teams get decent results by using this tactic. USA
> > losing 1-0 to Brazil is a very respectable result. By playing a
> > wide-open game, it can easily be 4-0.

> > I mean, this is not the first time an inferior team plays this
> > type of game and hopes for the best, and it won't be the last
> > time.

> Thank you for proving my point.

>This is true, but it's an Italian tactic adopted by these teams, that was
>always
>the point.

>How many of them are real fouls? Most are dives, I think this proves the
>diving point.

>Not true, you can play well but get nowhere if you are cheated....

>I am not advocating excessive attack. I think France are a good
>team to watch. Enough said?

> >> Football is a game that provides the win to the team that scores 1
> >> goal more than the opponent.
> >> Criticizing excessive defense has the same meaning of criticizing
> >> excessive attack.

> >I am not advocating excessive attack. I think France are a good
> >team to watch. Enough said?

> What France? The France that won WC98 without a striker, reaching the
> final after beating Paraguay at the last minute of overtime with a
> header by Blanc, and beated Italy on penalties?
> Or the France that has been dominated by Denmark (!) and massively
> defended against Spain and Portugal?

> I see. Can you tell me who and when invented it?
> Just a couple of names of the ones you remember...in case you know
> any, of course...

> >How many of them are real fouls? Most are dives, I think this proves the
> >diving point.

> Funny logic :) A proves B that proves A
> Unfortunately it doesn't work...

> >Not true, you can play well but get nowhere if you are cheated....

> > Thank you for proving my point.

> Nope. Your point is DISPROVEN.

> You have no such justification. Why is Italy blamed for ***JOINING***
> an already used, somewhat successful, approach of the game?

> No, INVENTING

>> Funny logic :) A proves B that proves A
>> Unfortunately it doesn't work...

>Italy get awarded a lot of fouls against them by the referee because they
>dive a lot. Doesn't mean they were fouls. Quite simple really.

>hacking, diving, timewasting, etc. All cheating.

>No, the France that beat Italy in the Euro 2000 final and have Zidane and
>Henry, players the like of which Italy have never had.

>They do play a different game, France play as winners, Italy as losers,
>how different can you get? !!!   ;)

> >> > Not necessarily.
> >> > In the last 50 years, Italy won one WC and no European Cup, which
is
> >the
> >> > same mark as England and France and way below the mark achieved
by
> >> > more offensive-minded countries such as Brazil, Argentina or
> >Germany.

> >> You forgot to mention the first 50 years.  But heck that doesn't
> >count.

> >In the first 50 years there was no such a thing as CATENACCIO, which
is
> >a post WW-II invention.

> Again two errors in that statement. IF we talk about the last 50 years
it
> brings us to 1950. Since WC soccer started in 1930, the first 50 years
would
> bring us to 1980. Somewhere in between we have an overlap of about 30
years
> from 1950 to 1980. If we believe that catennacio (as you erroneously
do)
> started post WWII (which it didn't) then it DID exist in the first 50
years
> of World Cup soccer. However, we CAN throw all of that out the window
since
> it evolved after 1970. Something you seem to not know, amongst other

> Maybe Frnace will play better on sunday.
> Till now their record is BY FAR different.

> >Italy made it to more
> >EC finals, but if the point is to prove that the Catenaccio is a
winning
> >strategy, then wins are what we should focus on, aren't they?

> You talk about catenaccio and includes everything in it.
> Even Sacchi, the man the farthest from catenaccio.

> >Just one WC for France ? Last time I checked 1984 was less than 20 years
> >ago ...

> Last time I checked there was no WC 1984. You mean EC, no?