dude handballed it, and he was all "not in my house" and then the ref was all like, damn straight, not in my house, and he redcarded his ass. then the ghana dude came in for the pk and was all like "AFRIIIIICCAAAAA" but he kicked it too hard so the goalie was all like, "yessuah".
then it went to pk's and they both made the first two, then uraguay makes it and ghana misses, and uraguay's all like "hell yeah", then the next chump for uraguay misses it, and ghana's like, "haha, shit yeah, motherfucker." but then the dude kicks it straight at the goalie and the goalie's all like, "ill be taking that" so then the fifth uraguay dude comes up and he's all amped up to take the PK, and he charges the shit out of the ball, and ghana's goalie is all like "oh shit, what the hell is this motherfucker doing" and then uraguay's dude just chips it past the goalie as he's leaping across the line, and he's just standing there, cool as a cucumber
-- from an interwebs conversation, trying to put into words exactly how nuts it was.
-- Knuttel
Showing posts with label soccer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label soccer. Show all posts
6.23.2010
5.18.2010
THE CHAMPIONS
:cue awful champions league theme song:
I dunno, maybe I don't get it cos I'm not one of those fancy pants European types.
Maybe I don't get it cos I'm also aware of the CONCACAF Champions League, in addition to the UEFA version (I don't think I hear them say UEFA, in either abbreviations or in full during the song).
In any case, I digress.
This Saturday (a step up from last year, when it was Wednesday) Bayern Munich and Internazionale Milan will meet in the Champions League finals. The game will be held in Madrid, Santiago Bernabéu Stadium, the field of Real Madrid.
Real Madrid was, for many decades, a willing acceptor of privileges at the behest of the Franko dictatorship. This means that many of their titles should be considered null and void, or at the very least include asterisks. While many Champions League level teams boast many international studs, the Real Madrid teams that won the first decade of Champions League play was basically the Spanish national squad.
They have played against one another 4 times, twice as a result of being in the same group in the 88-89 UEFA Cup, the other two as a result of being in the same group in the 2006-2007 UEFA Champions League. The record stands as 2 wins for Bayern, 1 win for Inter, 1 draw.
Bayern Munich has won the Champions League 4 times, the last time being 2001, and has been the runner up 3 times.
Internazionale Milan has won the Champions league twice, the last time being in 1965, and has been the runner up another two times. All of these were achieved by using Catenazzio, a strategy that uses boredom to lull the refs, spectators, and sometimes the other team asleep.
Both of these teams are going for the treble, having both won their league titles by points and by the league cup.
Both of these teams are most notable for carrying all time soccer great, legend, and sometimes alter-ego of the Knuttel, Lothar Matthaus, for extended periods of time. Lothar had two stints with Bayern Munich -- 1984-1988, 1992-2000. He had one stint with Internazionale in the meantime -- 1988-1992.
So who wins the game? BREAKDOWN
History in the Champions League final -- Bayern
Geographic proximity to Madrid -- Inter
Tenure of Lothar Matthaus -- Bayern
Not having Marco Matterazi -- Bayern
Goalkeeping -- Inter
Defense -- Bayern (by a hair)
Counter-attack -- Bayern
Mid Field -- Bayern
Forwards -- Inter
Bayern 6 - Inter 3
It is closer than it looks though. This game, by no means, should be a runaway. The stregnths of Bayerns Center defense, attacking outside backs, and midfield should be enough to keep Inter busy. If they can get through, their forwards are better (forwards plural, I do realize Bayern has Klose, just little else), and their more experienced goal keeper should keep Bayern at bay.
As long as the game doesn't devolve into the Cattenazzio that Inter made famous in the 60s, the game should be enjoyable.
-- Knuttel
I dunno, maybe I don't get it cos I'm not one of those fancy pants European types.
Maybe I don't get it cos I'm also aware of the CONCACAF Champions League, in addition to the UEFA version (I don't think I hear them say UEFA, in either abbreviations or in full during the song).
In any case, I digress.
This Saturday (a step up from last year, when it was Wednesday) Bayern Munich and Internazionale Milan will meet in the Champions League finals. The game will be held in Madrid, Santiago Bernabéu Stadium, the field of Real Madrid.
Real Madrid was, for many decades, a willing acceptor of privileges at the behest of the Franko dictatorship. This means that many of their titles should be considered null and void, or at the very least include asterisks. While many Champions League level teams boast many international studs, the Real Madrid teams that won the first decade of Champions League play was basically the Spanish national squad.
They have played against one another 4 times, twice as a result of being in the same group in the 88-89 UEFA Cup, the other two as a result of being in the same group in the 2006-2007 UEFA Champions League. The record stands as 2 wins for Bayern, 1 win for Inter, 1 draw.
Bayern Munich has won the Champions League 4 times, the last time being 2001, and has been the runner up 3 times.
Internazionale Milan has won the Champions league twice, the last time being in 1965, and has been the runner up another two times. All of these were achieved by using Catenazzio, a strategy that uses boredom to lull the refs, spectators, and sometimes the other team asleep.
Both of these teams are going for the treble, having both won their league titles by points and by the league cup.
Both of these teams are most notable for carrying all time soccer great, legend, and sometimes alter-ego of the Knuttel, Lothar Matthaus, for extended periods of time. Lothar had two stints with Bayern Munich -- 1984-1988, 1992-2000. He had one stint with Internazionale in the meantime -- 1988-1992.
So who wins the game? BREAKDOWN
History in the Champions League final -- Bayern
Geographic proximity to Madrid -- Inter
Tenure of Lothar Matthaus -- Bayern
Not having Marco Matterazi -- Bayern
Goalkeeping -- Inter
Defense -- Bayern (by a hair)
Counter-attack -- Bayern
Mid Field -- Bayern
Forwards -- Inter
Bayern 6 - Inter 3
It is closer than it looks though. This game, by no means, should be a runaway. The stregnths of Bayerns Center defense, attacking outside backs, and midfield should be enough to keep Inter busy. If they can get through, their forwards are better (forwards plural, I do realize Bayern has Klose, just little else), and their more experienced goal keeper should keep Bayern at bay.
As long as the game doesn't devolve into the Cattenazzio that Inter made famous in the 60s, the game should be enjoyable.
-- Knuttel
3.27.2010
Champions League Quarter Preview
Now, let's take a break from the NCAA March Madness tournament, as march is winding down. I bring to you, from the other side of the ocean, SOCCER -- specifically the Champions League.
Champions League is like their equivalent to Major League Baseball -- it has the best teams from one region (MLB - North America, CL - Europe) from one sport (MLB - baseball, CL - soccer), all from different countries (MLB - USA, Canada, the south; CL - France, Italy, England, Spain, Germany, Russia, etc).
And now for my completely unbiased preview of upcoming Champions League play
Shit yeah, motherfucker
Anyways.
The games are played in pairs - one home and one away for each team. Winning both games guarantees advancing. If both games tie or end with one win/one loss, then goals are added up. The team with more goals advances. If that doesn't do the trick, then away goals count for more, and the team that scored more away advances. IF that doesn't declare a winner, then they play overtime or something in the last game.
Matchups are as follows:
Olympique Lyon vs Bordeuax
Bayern Munich vs Manchester United
Arsenal vs Barcelona
Internazionale Milan vs CSKA Moscow
Naturally, we all know Lyon is going to advance like a truck (a renault truck?) past oblivious Bordeaux. That's a given. What's not given, though, is why UEFA (the european soccer FIFA or whatever) decided to pit these two against eachother. Clearly UEFA is afraid of the dominance that is Ligue 1, and they are scared of France dominating the world of soccer, much like Zinedine Zidane dominated the belly of Marco Materazzi. By pairing these two teams against eachother, UEFA doesn't have to worry about 2 French teams being left in the semi-finals, and then 2 French teams facing off for the title. This way, they can nip it in the bud, deal with one at a time, divide and conquer.
I'm onto your games UEFA.
Bayern Munich vs Manchester United
This would be interesting if it were FC Shalke 04 vs Manchester City, but alas we're given these two teams instead. And it's not like they even have all their awesome players -- Ollie Khan, Lothar Matthaus, Christiano Ronaldo, George Best -- ALL GONE. All moved to the greener pastures of other, better, teams or retirement; or in the case of George Best, the green beneath him is simply his own vomit.
Arsenal vs Barcelona
Arsenal is an interesting story in that despite having the only undefeated team in the modern history of the English Premier League, they managed to remain completely irrelevant. This is also in addition to the fact that they are essentially London's team (yeah, I know London has like 20 teams, but only Chelsea recently actually plays dece). Yep. Irrelavent despite being from the capital city of the country who claims to have invented the sport (though to be fair, I think the English would claim invention of the potato if you gave them the chance). But alas I stray, point being, best player on that undefeated team is currently on Barcelona, who happen to be reigning Champions League Champions (sounds a bit redundent, hey I know, Europe isn't really known for refinement and culture). This best player (from Arsenal, he's probably not the best on Barcelona, at least not at this point in time) -- Thierry Henry, longtime legend of French soccer, who gloriously single handedly defeated Ireland to qualify France for the 2010 World Cup. Just saying.
Internazionale vs Moscow
The other team from Milan, the team that manages to not be more Evil than AC Milan (by holding scum like Marco Materazzi on the roster) faces down this years eastern europe cinderella story (fuck, I thought this was soccer, not basketball). Personally, I was looking forward to a Turkish team holding that title this year, or maybe even Olympiakos from Greece. Sparta Praha also would've been pretty dice, but they just haven't been the same since the fall of the Soviet Union. Anyways, of all the games, this is probably the one I am least likely to watch.
Predictions are for suckers and psychics (read:suckers)
-- Knuttel
Champions League is like their equivalent to Major League Baseball -- it has the best teams from one region (MLB - North America, CL - Europe) from one sport (MLB - baseball, CL - soccer), all from different countries (MLB - USA, Canada, the south; CL - France, Italy, England, Spain, Germany, Russia, etc).
And now for my completely unbiased preview of upcoming Champions League play
Shit yeah, motherfucker
Anyways.
The games are played in pairs - one home and one away for each team. Winning both games guarantees advancing. If both games tie or end with one win/one loss, then goals are added up. The team with more goals advances. If that doesn't do the trick, then away goals count for more, and the team that scored more away advances. IF that doesn't declare a winner, then they play overtime or something in the last game.
Matchups are as follows:
Olympique Lyon vs Bordeuax
Bayern Munich vs Manchester United
Arsenal vs Barcelona
Internazionale Milan vs CSKA Moscow
Naturally, we all know Lyon is going to advance like a truck (a renault truck?) past oblivious Bordeaux. That's a given. What's not given, though, is why UEFA (the european soccer FIFA or whatever) decided to pit these two against eachother. Clearly UEFA is afraid of the dominance that is Ligue 1, and they are scared of France dominating the world of soccer, much like Zinedine Zidane dominated the belly of Marco Materazzi. By pairing these two teams against eachother, UEFA doesn't have to worry about 2 French teams being left in the semi-finals, and then 2 French teams facing off for the title. This way, they can nip it in the bud, deal with one at a time, divide and conquer.
I'm onto your games UEFA.
Bayern Munich vs Manchester United
This would be interesting if it were FC Shalke 04 vs Manchester City, but alas we're given these two teams instead. And it's not like they even have all their awesome players -- Ollie Khan, Lothar Matthaus, Christiano Ronaldo, George Best -- ALL GONE. All moved to the greener pastures of other, better, teams or retirement; or in the case of George Best, the green beneath him is simply his own vomit.
Arsenal vs Barcelona
Arsenal is an interesting story in that despite having the only undefeated team in the modern history of the English Premier League, they managed to remain completely irrelevant. This is also in addition to the fact that they are essentially London's team (yeah, I know London has like 20 teams, but only Chelsea recently actually plays dece). Yep. Irrelavent despite being from the capital city of the country who claims to have invented the sport (though to be fair, I think the English would claim invention of the potato if you gave them the chance). But alas I stray, point being, best player on that undefeated team is currently on Barcelona, who happen to be reigning Champions League Champions (sounds a bit redundent, hey I know, Europe isn't really known for refinement and culture). This best player (from Arsenal, he's probably not the best on Barcelona, at least not at this point in time) -- Thierry Henry, longtime legend of French soccer, who gloriously single handedly defeated Ireland to qualify France for the 2010 World Cup. Just saying.
Internazionale vs Moscow
The other team from Milan, the team that manages to not be more Evil than AC Milan (by holding scum like Marco Materazzi on the roster) faces down this years eastern europe cinderella story (fuck, I thought this was soccer, not basketball). Personally, I was looking forward to a Turkish team holding that title this year, or maybe even Olympiakos from Greece. Sparta Praha also would've been pretty dice, but they just haven't been the same since the fall of the Soviet Union. Anyways, of all the games, this is probably the one I am least likely to watch.
Predictions are for suckers and psychics (read:suckers)
-- Knuttel
5.30.2009
A second look at that Wolverine movie thing
Due to the subject matter of the movie being so pressing for the world of comic books, I have decided to take a second look at X-Men Origins: Wolverine (though it's probably more like x-men oranges:tangerine, amirite?), this time observing the final, completed project.
I feel I should explain how this viewing came to be. Well, it was Wednesday, and some friends and I were watching the UEFA Champions league game in Center City in a bar, and being drunk and suggestible, we decided it was a good idea to watch that wolverine movie, i think as a joke, but does it really matter at this point?
First things first
What was different from the leak to the finished product? If you recall, the leak came out a month ahead of the planned theater release, the special effects look unfinished all around, and they claimed they had to add a scene or two.
Well, the scenes that looked really unfinished (as in stand in computer graphics) were finished, but that was pretty much it. Aside from the final fight with "deadpool", there was little to none done to improve the special effects of the movie. In fact, I waited through the credits to see that final clip that was rumored (meh). The real joy from doing this was seeing how short the actual credits were. For a movie of that production value scale, it was extremely small in fact -- compare to waiting till the end of one of the Matrixes (probably reloaded) to see that clip, the credit list was monstrous. It's as if they simply plan on passing out x:men movies as quick as possible, knowing that they're a sellable commodity, even when they suck (see: X3).
Oh, and the "younger" Professor X looks like a clown. And, little nit picking note here, but didn't Prof X lose his ability to walk sometime in the 50's or 60's (not sure of the exact date/year, but Lucifer dropped a rock on his legs or something before he founded the X men). The bulk of the wolverine movie appears to take place in the 70's -- that's another thing, for something that needs to rely so strongly on convention and proven methods of writing workable "dramatic" matierial, the action is spread out over a veeerrrryyy long period of time, and that's not even counting the "throwaway" intro showing what Wolvie and Sabretooth did from the mid 1800's (before Canada, let alone the NW territories existed) until they got kicked out the the AMERICAN army during Vietnam.
The worst part may actually still be the deadpool treatment. It appears as if somehow during the course of that month when the movie was leaked and outrage stormed, one of the gaff boys or whatever was actually decided to pick up a (and i mean a, singular) deadpool comic and tried coaxing the director to throw some shit in there. The result was really only two things -- his face is scarred (though not that much, and not because of cancer) and at one point the area around his eyes was black, like his mask (except this was on his skin, as a reaction to shooting cyclops' optic blasts). I wouldn't be surprised to go back and look at the credits and see T-Ray as a producer.
I'm still puzzeled as to how they could have screwed it up that much. Really. The humor was there though, in a mystery science theater 3000 sort of way. Still no consolation.
I feel I should explain how this viewing came to be. Well, it was Wednesday, and some friends and I were watching the UEFA Champions league game in Center City in a bar, and being drunk and suggestible, we decided it was a good idea to watch that wolverine movie, i think as a joke, but does it really matter at this point?
First things first
What was different from the leak to the finished product? If you recall, the leak came out a month ahead of the planned theater release, the special effects look unfinished all around, and they claimed they had to add a scene or two.
Well, the scenes that looked really unfinished (as in stand in computer graphics) were finished, but that was pretty much it. Aside from the final fight with "deadpool", there was little to none done to improve the special effects of the movie. In fact, I waited through the credits to see that final clip that was rumored (meh). The real joy from doing this was seeing how short the actual credits were. For a movie of that production value scale, it was extremely small in fact -- compare to waiting till the end of one of the Matrixes (probably reloaded) to see that clip, the credit list was monstrous. It's as if they simply plan on passing out x:men movies as quick as possible, knowing that they're a sellable commodity, even when they suck (see: X3).
Oh, and the "younger" Professor X looks like a clown. And, little nit picking note here, but didn't Prof X lose his ability to walk sometime in the 50's or 60's (not sure of the exact date/year, but Lucifer dropped a rock on his legs or something before he founded the X men). The bulk of the wolverine movie appears to take place in the 70's -- that's another thing, for something that needs to rely so strongly on convention and proven methods of writing workable "dramatic" matierial, the action is spread out over a veeerrrryyy long period of time, and that's not even counting the "throwaway" intro showing what Wolvie and Sabretooth did from the mid 1800's (before Canada, let alone the NW territories existed) until they got kicked out the the AMERICAN army during Vietnam.
The worst part may actually still be the deadpool treatment. It appears as if somehow during the course of that month when the movie was leaked and outrage stormed, one of the gaff boys or whatever was actually decided to pick up a (and i mean a, singular) deadpool comic and tried coaxing the director to throw some shit in there. The result was really only two things -- his face is scarred (though not that much, and not because of cancer) and at one point the area around his eyes was black, like his mask (except this was on his skin, as a reaction to shooting cyclops' optic blasts). I wouldn't be surprised to go back and look at the credits and see T-Ray as a producer.
I'm still puzzeled as to how they could have screwed it up that much. Really. The humor was there though, in a mystery science theater 3000 sort of way. Still no consolation.
11.16.2008
BOYCOTT THE NFL
To begin, let me assure everyone, this is not because the Eagles just tied the Bungles. This is about a disease which is plaguing the entire league.
The Quarterback is being overprotected.
The quarterback can slide down anywhere on the field, instead of being tackled down, if he so chooses. The quarterback cannot be hit below the knees behind the line of scrimmage. The quarterback cannot be hit in the head behind the line of scrimmage. The quarterback cannot be hit after he releases a pass behind the line of scrimmage. Now it seems the quarterback cannot be hit at all.
WHY?!!??!?
Last time I checked, the quarterback is a normal position, just like any other position on the field. Why is he given precedence? Even as the position is slowly moving back to accepting "athletes" to play it (after the doldrums of slow qbs which hung like a parasite in the 70s and 80s), it seems the NFL is slowly rejecting the notion that these players are equals of their teammates.
Why don't we just dress all of the quarterbacks up in tutus. That way at least the other team knows they should just prance around him and tap him down, as opposed to hitting him down.
Seriously, I think at this point it would actually be manlier to sit through The Notebook than to watch any given quarter (let alone a whole game) of an NFL game.
Personally, this is not a very tough decision on my part. I had previously boycotted the last super bowl, after I decided the best result of that game would be a natural disaster to destroy the stadium and all inside. I found a good alternative in the puppy bowl, voiced by none other than the legendary Harry Kalas, who is known nationally as the voice of NFL films since '75, back when they actually played football (locally, the legendary voice of the Phillies. Side note, why the hell is he not voicing the Phillies World Series DVD? That is an outrage, and I may think about putting a bounty of Bud Selig's head for that). I've also had a personal boycott on the Madden Series, since it has become total crap since it gained the right to be the exclusive NFL game, and a boycott on Reebok's NFL gear crap, for similar reasons.
Even though my Nittany Lions are effectively out of the BCS title picture (by default of having one loss as a Big Ten team, total bullshit. Florida's loss was at home to under .500 Ole Miss, shouldn't they be disqualified?) I think I will stick to watching only NCAA football. The way of deciding the champion may not be nearly as organized and coherent, but at least I know I will be watching football when I watch one of those games, even if one or both of the teams is playing a spread offense.
I think, as it stands, Italian League soccer may actually be manlier than NFL, even with all of their dives and flops and general delays.
Think about that.
--Knuttel
and another thing -- just because someone who isn't the normal quarterback may be lined up to take a snap directly, usually from shotgun, doesn't make it a "wildcat" formation. Sometimes its just, oh I dunno, someone else lined up to take the snap from shotgun. The wildcat formation is a modern variation on a very distinct old formation called the Single Wing.
The Quarterback is being overprotected.
The quarterback can slide down anywhere on the field, instead of being tackled down, if he so chooses. The quarterback cannot be hit below the knees behind the line of scrimmage. The quarterback cannot be hit in the head behind the line of scrimmage. The quarterback cannot be hit after he releases a pass behind the line of scrimmage. Now it seems the quarterback cannot be hit at all.
WHY?!!??!?
Last time I checked, the quarterback is a normal position, just like any other position on the field. Why is he given precedence? Even as the position is slowly moving back to accepting "athletes" to play it (after the doldrums of slow qbs which hung like a parasite in the 70s and 80s), it seems the NFL is slowly rejecting the notion that these players are equals of their teammates.
Why don't we just dress all of the quarterbacks up in tutus. That way at least the other team knows they should just prance around him and tap him down, as opposed to hitting him down.
Seriously, I think at this point it would actually be manlier to sit through The Notebook than to watch any given quarter (let alone a whole game) of an NFL game.
Personally, this is not a very tough decision on my part. I had previously boycotted the last super bowl, after I decided the best result of that game would be a natural disaster to destroy the stadium and all inside. I found a good alternative in the puppy bowl, voiced by none other than the legendary Harry Kalas, who is known nationally as the voice of NFL films since '75, back when they actually played football (locally, the legendary voice of the Phillies. Side note, why the hell is he not voicing the Phillies World Series DVD? That is an outrage, and I may think about putting a bounty of Bud Selig's head for that). I've also had a personal boycott on the Madden Series, since it has become total crap since it gained the right to be the exclusive NFL game, and a boycott on Reebok's NFL gear crap, for similar reasons.
Even though my Nittany Lions are effectively out of the BCS title picture (by default of having one loss as a Big Ten team, total bullshit. Florida's loss was at home to under .500 Ole Miss, shouldn't they be disqualified?) I think I will stick to watching only NCAA football. The way of deciding the champion may not be nearly as organized and coherent, but at least I know I will be watching football when I watch one of those games, even if one or both of the teams is playing a spread offense.
I think, as it stands, Italian League soccer may actually be manlier than NFL, even with all of their dives and flops and general delays.
Think about that.
--Knuttel
and another thing -- just because someone who isn't the normal quarterback may be lined up to take a snap directly, usually from shotgun, doesn't make it a "wildcat" formation. Sometimes its just, oh I dunno, someone else lined up to take the snap from shotgun. The wildcat formation is a modern variation on a very distinct old formation called the Single Wing.
7.02.2008
On the hatred of talking heads
I've recently come to hate talking heads quite a bit. Yes, I realize being a news anchor can be a thankless job -- receiving credit for bad news, while none for good -- but the manner in which the current television news media is run is simply deplorable.
No, I am not talking about small production local newscasts. Being part of a large market, I'm not used to seeing smaller budgeted local productions with an even smaller resource of news.
I'm talking about the national markets. Seriously, this is the "big leagues" of news. These are supposed to be the best. I'm not gonna even touch on ESPN, that's simply way too easy (unless you want your daily fill of arena football with sub-par presentations of soccer and hockey). This is about the bigguys -- CNN, MSNBC, FOXNews.
They simply have no shame in being objective. While I do understand that it is virtually impossible to be objective in one's reporting (even the manner in which facts are presented can skew one way or the other), at least try. I recently heard a newscaster sign off by saying how many days it has been since Bush declared victory in Iraq. Oberman signs off by trying (and I really do emphasize trying, cos it's just that bad) to channel Edward R Murrowes by saying "good night and good luck." FOXNews almost never addresses both sides of any single issue. Lou Dobbs is (or was, not entirely sure if its over) obsessed with the recent food poisoning outbreak with tomatoes. I mean, you watch the news to try and watch the news to become more informed about general happenings around the world, and there's always someone there trying to shove an agenda down your throat.
Yes, I know Bush is a failure as a president, but he's probably not as dumb as everyone thinks of him, I mean, it's hard to explain how a full fledged man idiot could win two terms of office without calling half the country stupid. And no, that's not a red/blue state issue, look at an election result map, I mean a real one. If you can find one that does percents, by county or state is fine, you'll see that half of all of the country voted for him, maybe a little bit more than half in the "red" states, and a little bit less than half in the "blue" states, but half the country voted for him -- twice.
Yes, I know when Edward R Murrowes was saying "good night and good luck" it meant something. But you know what, all of the media outlets, in particular Hollywood, were under attack by McCarthy at the time. His freedom of speech was very much in jeopardy. When Olberman does it, never is there a second his ability to say what he does (and he often continues without thinking) in danger of being hindered. He only is in jeopardy of losing his job from his employer. And I kinda hope he does, but I know if he does, he's gonna blame it on Bush and the Republicans somehow.
And FOXNews, seriously, when you guys are having a debate on an issue, it usually helps to have people of differing opinions and/or backgrounds to discuss the issue. I know the "conservative" view (if you actually believe in the liberal/conservative split) is underrepresented by the other networks usually, but compensating doesn't help. It actually just makes it seem ameteurish. And when separate views are shown, it usually quickly escalates to a shouting match. Can't this be solved through logical discourse? I think it just shows neither side knows what the hell they're talking about so they mask it by being loud.
Being the loudest does not make you the rightest. And sometimes the squeaky wheel doesn't get the grease; sometimes the squeaky wheel gets chucked and replaced by a shiny new one.
-Knuttel
No, I am not talking about small production local newscasts. Being part of a large market, I'm not used to seeing smaller budgeted local productions with an even smaller resource of news.
I'm talking about the national markets. Seriously, this is the "big leagues" of news. These are supposed to be the best. I'm not gonna even touch on ESPN, that's simply way too easy (unless you want your daily fill of arena football with sub-par presentations of soccer and hockey). This is about the bigguys -- CNN, MSNBC, FOXNews.
They simply have no shame in being objective. While I do understand that it is virtually impossible to be objective in one's reporting (even the manner in which facts are presented can skew one way or the other), at least try. I recently heard a newscaster sign off by saying how many days it has been since Bush declared victory in Iraq. Oberman signs off by trying (and I really do emphasize trying, cos it's just that bad) to channel Edward R Murrowes by saying "good night and good luck." FOXNews almost never addresses both sides of any single issue. Lou Dobbs is (or was, not entirely sure if its over) obsessed with the recent food poisoning outbreak with tomatoes. I mean, you watch the news to try and watch the news to become more informed about general happenings around the world, and there's always someone there trying to shove an agenda down your throat.
Yes, I know Bush is a failure as a president, but he's probably not as dumb as everyone thinks of him, I mean, it's hard to explain how a full fledged man idiot could win two terms of office without calling half the country stupid. And no, that's not a red/blue state issue, look at an election result map, I mean a real one. If you can find one that does percents, by county or state is fine, you'll see that half of all of the country voted for him, maybe a little bit more than half in the "red" states, and a little bit less than half in the "blue" states, but half the country voted for him -- twice.
Yes, I know when Edward R Murrowes was saying "good night and good luck" it meant something. But you know what, all of the media outlets, in particular Hollywood, were under attack by McCarthy at the time. His freedom of speech was very much in jeopardy. When Olberman does it, never is there a second his ability to say what he does (and he often continues without thinking) in danger of being hindered. He only is in jeopardy of losing his job from his employer. And I kinda hope he does, but I know if he does, he's gonna blame it on Bush and the Republicans somehow.
And FOXNews, seriously, when you guys are having a debate on an issue, it usually helps to have people of differing opinions and/or backgrounds to discuss the issue. I know the "conservative" view (if you actually believe in the liberal/conservative split) is underrepresented by the other networks usually, but compensating doesn't help. It actually just makes it seem ameteurish. And when separate views are shown, it usually quickly escalates to a shouting match. Can't this be solved through logical discourse? I think it just shows neither side knows what the hell they're talking about so they mask it by being loud.
Being the loudest does not make you the rightest. And sometimes the squeaky wheel doesn't get the grease; sometimes the squeaky wheel gets chucked and replaced by a shiny new one.
-Knuttel
6.30.2008
On Euro 2008 and maybe more
Yesterday the finals for UEFA 2008 was held, the Euro cup or whatever. Spain won 1-0. I had previously predicted a 2-1 victory for Spain.
Spain had the more dominant play for the majority of the game. It was much closer in the first half, with Lahm commanding runs down the left flank. However, he made a defensive mistake (though not huge, just got outplayed) that gave Fernando Torres his, and Spain's, only goal. He was subbed out at the half for Munchen Teammate Jansen. Germany never quite had the same offensive touch. Despite Schweinstagger's efforts, as well as Ballack's and Podolski's, Germany just had problems operating, and even when the opportunity presented itself, could not finish.
My choice for player of the game would be Sergio Ramos, who seemed to be a part of most of the successful offensive plays, and nearly all of the successful defensive stands. Ironically, I'd say the worst play of the game came from Spain's left wing (Silva?), who only seemed to have a right foot. So many opportunities presented themselves to him as left footed shots, however, he often had to stop and turn into center traffic, or spend extra time stopping the ball to get to his right foot, and this either resulted in the defender clearing it or giving time for Jens Lehman to get into position. Cesc Fabregas was also a minor disappointment. Though he had some good plays early on, he was never really able to establish himself as a force on the field, and once the game was clearly away, he was subbed out for a more defensive minded mid fielder.
It was a hard fought game, but Spain was just the better team. I'd shudder to think what would've happened if David Villa was healthy. Germany didn't lose this game. Spain simply won it.
Maybe more:
So I'm reading this book now, called 1421. It's about Chinese navigation in the 15th century. At first the sings said by the book seem plausible on some level, but you want some more evidence to believe it. The evidence is never shown. In some cases it is simply made up (mylodons were believed to be extinct since the BC's, though may have existed until 1500, though if they did, they certainly did not exist in numbers to be feasible for overseas trade). While some of the voyages made by the fleets of Zheng He are more believable than others, the slopshod and irresponsible use of minuscule amounts of evidence and a lot of imagination make them all seem more unbelievable. His ultimate proof lies with the similarities between Chinese and certain Native American DNA's. This proof only shows that there is some link between them, such as the migration over the Bering land bridge during the ice age. There is little evidence of the Chinese reaching America, and even less that they colonized and intermingled. Putting the eventual European exploration of the American west coast roughly at 150-200 years after the Chinese reached there would mean any Chinese colony should still bear a remarkably Chinese characteristic, something not noted.
It's simply a huge leap of faith that until 1421, the Chinese only knew China, Korea, Japan, Indonesia, and the coast of the Indian Ocean, but in the two years afterwards - 1421 - 1423, managed to discover the cape of good hope, the west coast of africa, brazil, argentina, tierra del fuego, the falkland islands, antartica, australia, new zealand, fiji, peru, chile, mexico, california, the carribbean, and Alaska -- basically everything else in the world besides Europe.
This particular leap offers little padding.
Spain had the more dominant play for the majority of the game. It was much closer in the first half, with Lahm commanding runs down the left flank. However, he made a defensive mistake (though not huge, just got outplayed) that gave Fernando Torres his, and Spain's, only goal. He was subbed out at the half for Munchen Teammate Jansen. Germany never quite had the same offensive touch. Despite Schweinstagger's efforts, as well as Ballack's and Podolski's, Germany just had problems operating, and even when the opportunity presented itself, could not finish.
My choice for player of the game would be Sergio Ramos, who seemed to be a part of most of the successful offensive plays, and nearly all of the successful defensive stands. Ironically, I'd say the worst play of the game came from Spain's left wing (Silva?), who only seemed to have a right foot. So many opportunities presented themselves to him as left footed shots, however, he often had to stop and turn into center traffic, or spend extra time stopping the ball to get to his right foot, and this either resulted in the defender clearing it or giving time for Jens Lehman to get into position. Cesc Fabregas was also a minor disappointment. Though he had some good plays early on, he was never really able to establish himself as a force on the field, and once the game was clearly away, he was subbed out for a more defensive minded mid fielder.
It was a hard fought game, but Spain was just the better team. I'd shudder to think what would've happened if David Villa was healthy. Germany didn't lose this game. Spain simply won it.
Maybe more:
So I'm reading this book now, called 1421. It's about Chinese navigation in the 15th century. At first the sings said by the book seem plausible on some level, but you want some more evidence to believe it. The evidence is never shown. In some cases it is simply made up (mylodons were believed to be extinct since the BC's, though may have existed until 1500, though if they did, they certainly did not exist in numbers to be feasible for overseas trade). While some of the voyages made by the fleets of Zheng He are more believable than others, the slopshod and irresponsible use of minuscule amounts of evidence and a lot of imagination make them all seem more unbelievable. His ultimate proof lies with the similarities between Chinese and certain Native American DNA's. This proof only shows that there is some link between them, such as the migration over the Bering land bridge during the ice age. There is little evidence of the Chinese reaching America, and even less that they colonized and intermingled. Putting the eventual European exploration of the American west coast roughly at 150-200 years after the Chinese reached there would mean any Chinese colony should still bear a remarkably Chinese characteristic, something not noted.
It's simply a huge leap of faith that until 1421, the Chinese only knew China, Korea, Japan, Indonesia, and the coast of the Indian Ocean, but in the two years afterwards - 1421 - 1423, managed to discover the cape of good hope, the west coast of africa, brazil, argentina, tierra del fuego, the falkland islands, antartica, australia, new zealand, fiji, peru, chile, mexico, california, the carribbean, and Alaska -- basically everything else in the world besides Europe.
This particular leap offers little padding.
6.27.2008
6 26 post 2
Finally got a chance to watch both of the Euro 08 semifinal matches.
From that outcome, I predict Spain to win the whole thing, Turkey to win the third place game.
Germany, while impressive on the first touch with the ball, could never seem to really carry it much past the back line. They seemed timid, maybe they were just being conservative and only taking shots down field when they had them. By that same token, it was Turkey who lost the game, despite never being out of it, not Germany who won it.
Spain's victory was against Russia, who had moments of good play, though nothing to show for it. Perhaps they just lacked a finisher, or perhaps they put too much effort into dismantling the dutch. But Spain's whole midfield came down and played defense, and would spring brilliant counter-attacks in the blink of an eye, with Silva, Iniesta, Torres, David Villa, and the like just throwing it back quickly. Also, Xavi's goal was amazingly impressive and aware. Abandoning his post as holding midfield, he saw an opportunity for a goal, and rushed into the box wide open.
Spain just seems to be clicking on all cylinders at the moment, much like the dutch were in group play. Sadly, that did not work out for the dutch, but Spain's midfield is just more cohesive. More importantly, I haven't seen many flaws in the backline either. Germany has had problems with the two center backs, the wingbacks being caught up field, and Lehman giving up goals that should never be. I just don't see Ballack and Schweinstagger willing their team to victory, not at this stage.
Prediction:
Spain 2-1 Germany
From that outcome, I predict Spain to win the whole thing, Turkey to win the third place game.
Germany, while impressive on the first touch with the ball, could never seem to really carry it much past the back line. They seemed timid, maybe they were just being conservative and only taking shots down field when they had them. By that same token, it was Turkey who lost the game, despite never being out of it, not Germany who won it.
Spain's victory was against Russia, who had moments of good play, though nothing to show for it. Perhaps they just lacked a finisher, or perhaps they put too much effort into dismantling the dutch. But Spain's whole midfield came down and played defense, and would spring brilliant counter-attacks in the blink of an eye, with Silva, Iniesta, Torres, David Villa, and the like just throwing it back quickly. Also, Xavi's goal was amazingly impressive and aware. Abandoning his post as holding midfield, he saw an opportunity for a goal, and rushed into the box wide open.
Spain just seems to be clicking on all cylinders at the moment, much like the dutch were in group play. Sadly, that did not work out for the dutch, but Spain's midfield is just more cohesive. More importantly, I haven't seen many flaws in the backline either. Germany has had problems with the two center backs, the wingbacks being caught up field, and Lehman giving up goals that should never be. I just don't see Ballack and Schweinstagger willing their team to victory, not at this stage.
Prediction:
Spain 2-1 Germany
6.26.2008
Post 1, thursday 26
Sports:
Donadoni of the Italian FA was fired today, after losing to Spain in the quarter-finals of Euro 2008 recently. While the game was lost in PK's officially, it was only unnaturally elongated by the persistence and dedication to the method of flopping by Italy. Hopefully this spells an end to this awful portrayal of football, but unfortunately, it may signal a return to catenazzio, which is way worse. I heard they re-hired the coach who won WC 06, but what that exactly means is unclear. The team is in bad shape for the future, with an aging back line, and few rising stars in the mid-field. Luca Tony can hold down the lone striker position, but their offense seems toothless without Totti.
I shall write later about Spain v Russia, hopefully
Politics:
Two supreme court decisions were handed out recently.
One deals with the death penalty, as it relates to rape cases. While I find the crime of child rape very reprehensible, to warrant it with the death penalty, I cannot agree with. That is why I agree with the decision the Supreme Court agreed upon. The decision stated that while the crime is awful and causes years and years of anguish, the final result is not as irrevocable and irreconcilable as death itself. While it is saving the lives of criminals, this decision saves the lives of two individuals in Louisiana, and reverses laws on the books in several other states.
As it stands to my knowledge now, there are only two crimes that warrant, under law, the death penalty - murder and treason. My personal beliefs lie in that there should be no death penalty. I think it doesn't actually solve any crimes, and the investment the court system must put into a capital crime case is actually higher (in order to make sure they are killing the right guy, you wouldn't want the wrong guy to die for a crime) than keeping a man behind bars for life. While this decision, I think, didn't deal specifically with a constitutional matter, it had to be done in order to unite national law.
Moreover, if the decision had been the reverse, I believe it could have started a snowball effect as to what crimes can constitute capital punishment. While I don't think it could get so extreme, that could result in petty theft causing death. More realistically, it could have eventually resulted in a night of poor decision making resulting in the death penalty for drunken vehicular manslaughter. Kudos for stopping the snowball effect.
The other decision dealt directly with a constitutional matter, Amendment number 2 of the bill of rights. In a great decision, the court decided, yes, it is legal to hold a gun, as is stated in the constitution. Who would've thought? Thank god it is a slap in the face to liberals, who prefer to pick and choose which rights of the constitution we should have, while parading around the limits of the first amendment. It is also, in a way, a slap in the face to conservatives. Perhaps they will be more grateful of the bill of rights, now that their gun rights have been protected judicially by them. Perhaps now they can stop complaining about "liberal courts and judges legislating from the bench."
More specifically on the matter, this is not an umbrella decision, upholding everybody's right to "bear arms." There are provisions, as their should be. Convicted felons have restricted gun access, as do the mentally ill. The right to guns should be available, but only to those who can exercise it without endangering the people themselves.
This means that cities and states which are opposed to guns cannot just throw a law out there which states guns are illegal. If this decision is that unwanted by the people, than it would take a full amendment to state it, making it only the second amendment to overturn another one. Moreover, I think it would result in the first reversal of an amendment which reverses another amendment. This decision remained consistent with the constitution, and it would take a full constitutional matter if it is decided that guns are not a right.
Hopefully it shuts up pompous liberal assholes, talking about the danger of firearms, but sadly I think it will make them louder. Thankfully this is a life post, and they will not be voted off simply because whoever the president is does not like them.
-Knuttel
Donadoni of the Italian FA was fired today, after losing to Spain in the quarter-finals of Euro 2008 recently. While the game was lost in PK's officially, it was only unnaturally elongated by the persistence and dedication to the method of flopping by Italy. Hopefully this spells an end to this awful portrayal of football, but unfortunately, it may signal a return to catenazzio, which is way worse. I heard they re-hired the coach who won WC 06, but what that exactly means is unclear. The team is in bad shape for the future, with an aging back line, and few rising stars in the mid-field. Luca Tony can hold down the lone striker position, but their offense seems toothless without Totti.
I shall write later about Spain v Russia, hopefully
Politics:
Two supreme court decisions were handed out recently.
One deals with the death penalty, as it relates to rape cases. While I find the crime of child rape very reprehensible, to warrant it with the death penalty, I cannot agree with. That is why I agree with the decision the Supreme Court agreed upon. The decision stated that while the crime is awful and causes years and years of anguish, the final result is not as irrevocable and irreconcilable as death itself. While it is saving the lives of criminals, this decision saves the lives of two individuals in Louisiana, and reverses laws on the books in several other states.
As it stands to my knowledge now, there are only two crimes that warrant, under law, the death penalty - murder and treason. My personal beliefs lie in that there should be no death penalty. I think it doesn't actually solve any crimes, and the investment the court system must put into a capital crime case is actually higher (in order to make sure they are killing the right guy, you wouldn't want the wrong guy to die for a crime) than keeping a man behind bars for life. While this decision, I think, didn't deal specifically with a constitutional matter, it had to be done in order to unite national law.
Moreover, if the decision had been the reverse, I believe it could have started a snowball effect as to what crimes can constitute capital punishment. While I don't think it could get so extreme, that could result in petty theft causing death. More realistically, it could have eventually resulted in a night of poor decision making resulting in the death penalty for drunken vehicular manslaughter. Kudos for stopping the snowball effect.
The other decision dealt directly with a constitutional matter, Amendment number 2 of the bill of rights. In a great decision, the court decided, yes, it is legal to hold a gun, as is stated in the constitution. Who would've thought? Thank god it is a slap in the face to liberals, who prefer to pick and choose which rights of the constitution we should have, while parading around the limits of the first amendment. It is also, in a way, a slap in the face to conservatives. Perhaps they will be more grateful of the bill of rights, now that their gun rights have been protected judicially by them. Perhaps now they can stop complaining about "liberal courts and judges legislating from the bench."
More specifically on the matter, this is not an umbrella decision, upholding everybody's right to "bear arms." There are provisions, as their should be. Convicted felons have restricted gun access, as do the mentally ill. The right to guns should be available, but only to those who can exercise it without endangering the people themselves.
This means that cities and states which are opposed to guns cannot just throw a law out there which states guns are illegal. If this decision is that unwanted by the people, than it would take a full amendment to state it, making it only the second amendment to overturn another one. Moreover, I think it would result in the first reversal of an amendment which reverses another amendment. This decision remained consistent with the constitution, and it would take a full constitutional matter if it is decided that guns are not a right.
Hopefully it shuts up pompous liberal assholes, talking about the danger of firearms, but sadly I think it will make them louder. Thankfully this is a life post, and they will not be voted off simply because whoever the president is does not like them.
-Knuttel
unprepared part 2
So I actually had two ideas to write about, this one I am even more unprepared for, and I did intend it to be my second post. I had originally planned to launch this yesterday (seriously, these things take like 5 minutes to set up), published with the "bump" article. Therefore the article for Wednesday would have been about an event which happened Wednesday, and if I had watched the whole thing, would have been able to write better about.
here I go anyway
Turkey 2-3 Germany
I have been following the Euro 2008 tournament quite closely. In fact, I almost wish I had been writing this a week or so earlier so I could talk about Christiano Ronaldo's huge defensive error which cost Portugal the game against Germany the round previous. A side note -- a friend of mine is quite crestfallen at his seemingly complete transfer to Real Madrid.
In any case, Turkey v Germany.
You would think, my name being Knuttel, and how I often go by the moniker -- Lothiar Matteus (after German football great Lothar Matthaus) -- I would want Germany to win. For the most part this is incorrect. Now that Turkey has lost, I want Germany to win, but I was pulling for Turkey, I guess it must be that underdog thing. Also, over the course of the year, I became enthralled by the play of Fehnerbace in the Champions League (how fitting if they had beaten Chelsea) and by the play of the Altintop twins, Hamit and Halil. Hamit is a midfielder and plays for Bayern Munchen; Halil is a forward/winger and plays for FC Shalke 04, both were born in Germany and play in the German Bundesliga. I don't know why Halil was left off the Turkey roster for the tournament, and perhaps it is something I missed entirely, but I really feel if he had been on the team, Turkey would have been in a lot better shape.
The first goal by Turkey seemed more accidental than anything else, though in today's game, you must get every goal which may come your way. Some call them garbage goals, others call them hustle goals. Being a Philadelphia Flyers fan, I really don't care how it gets in the net, and if the goalie plays it poorly, the forward has every right to get in his face and make him look like a fool. But from the goalie side of this, Jens Lehman really baffles me. Most goalies get on hot and cold streaks, but they last games each. Jens seems to make an awful play and give up an easy goal one minute and then fly to the opposite side of the net to rob a sure goal the next. His streaks last minutes, perhaps hours most of the time.
The first goal by Germany showed great tactical maturity by the coaches. The 4-4-2 is an outdated formation, I think, at least when all lines are flat. While Germany has 4 midfielders and 2 forwards of starting quality, you'd think they might use that, as in 06 i believe. Instead, they use a 4-2-3-1, like France used to get to the WC finals in 06, and Roma has used of late. They moved Lucas Podolski to the left wing, and in this first goal, he played it like a true winger. He had an amazing cross to Bastian Schweinstagger, who rushed in from the right wing and hammered it in, echoing a goal of his against Portugal in the prior game.
Ballack played the CAM/CF position, the one Zinedine Zidane held, and if anyone in the game out there is to continue his legacy, it is Ballack. My heart wants me to say it is Karim Benzema of OL/France who will continue his legacy, but being an OL fan, I know he is best as a pure striker, and as a second option on the wing. The 08 tournament, I think, proved he is a hesitant CF, and is more comfortable getting open and finishing off plays than setting up others. His current ability is staggering, and his potential signals only improvement. Perhaps someday he can be a CF, but for now, he would do better as a pure striker.
Now for the unpreparedness, I did not get to see much of the rest of the game, including no other goals (I know, Lahm scored in the 90th to win it, so dramatic, like Degrassi dramatic), but the lightning flashed a light so we could see the fallacies of ESPN, conspirators against sports not names Football, Basketball, Baseball, Nascar, Poker, and Bowling. Yes, I know the last three aren't sports, but don't tell ESPN that, at least there's some variety. But here is what the lightning showed - THE ANNOUNCERS FOR THE GAME WEREN'T EVEN THERE. They were in America, probably ESPN headquarters/legion of doom -- Bristol, Connecticut. ESPN, for shame. You are the world's largest sports channel, and you can't even ship your announcers overseas for the biggest sport in the world? Are you that oblivious?
As for what I saw, besides the goals, it looked as if Germany was going to win it anyway, just from a possession standpoint in the first half, but when Turkey got in the penalty box area, they harrassed them. Germany's defense gets points here for not letting up too many good shots, but bad points for not being able to clear it well enough and steal possession away in your own territory. My guess is the game turned into a midfield battle, with Germany's overwhelming midfield talent just overwhelming them. Just a thought, but Podolski rushing up to a forward position with Lahm filling in the left wing, backs centering up, seems like a real good strategy. Maybe I'll add more insight after I watch the game fully, though it is more likely I will move onto a different topic entirely.
-Knuttel
here I go anyway
Turkey 2-3 Germany
I have been following the Euro 2008 tournament quite closely. In fact, I almost wish I had been writing this a week or so earlier so I could talk about Christiano Ronaldo's huge defensive error which cost Portugal the game against Germany the round previous. A side note -- a friend of mine is quite crestfallen at his seemingly complete transfer to Real Madrid.
In any case, Turkey v Germany.
You would think, my name being Knuttel, and how I often go by the moniker -- Lothiar Matteus (after German football great Lothar Matthaus) -- I would want Germany to win. For the most part this is incorrect. Now that Turkey has lost, I want Germany to win, but I was pulling for Turkey, I guess it must be that underdog thing. Also, over the course of the year, I became enthralled by the play of Fehnerbace in the Champions League (how fitting if they had beaten Chelsea) and by the play of the Altintop twins, Hamit and Halil. Hamit is a midfielder and plays for Bayern Munchen; Halil is a forward/winger and plays for FC Shalke 04, both were born in Germany and play in the German Bundesliga. I don't know why Halil was left off the Turkey roster for the tournament, and perhaps it is something I missed entirely, but I really feel if he had been on the team, Turkey would have been in a lot better shape.
The first goal by Turkey seemed more accidental than anything else, though in today's game, you must get every goal which may come your way. Some call them garbage goals, others call them hustle goals. Being a Philadelphia Flyers fan, I really don't care how it gets in the net, and if the goalie plays it poorly, the forward has every right to get in his face and make him look like a fool. But from the goalie side of this, Jens Lehman really baffles me. Most goalies get on hot and cold streaks, but they last games each. Jens seems to make an awful play and give up an easy goal one minute and then fly to the opposite side of the net to rob a sure goal the next. His streaks last minutes, perhaps hours most of the time.
The first goal by Germany showed great tactical maturity by the coaches. The 4-4-2 is an outdated formation, I think, at least when all lines are flat. While Germany has 4 midfielders and 2 forwards of starting quality, you'd think they might use that, as in 06 i believe. Instead, they use a 4-2-3-1, like France used to get to the WC finals in 06, and Roma has used of late. They moved Lucas Podolski to the left wing, and in this first goal, he played it like a true winger. He had an amazing cross to Bastian Schweinstagger, who rushed in from the right wing and hammered it in, echoing a goal of his against Portugal in the prior game.
Ballack played the CAM/CF position, the one Zinedine Zidane held, and if anyone in the game out there is to continue his legacy, it is Ballack. My heart wants me to say it is Karim Benzema of OL/France who will continue his legacy, but being an OL fan, I know he is best as a pure striker, and as a second option on the wing. The 08 tournament, I think, proved he is a hesitant CF, and is more comfortable getting open and finishing off plays than setting up others. His current ability is staggering, and his potential signals only improvement. Perhaps someday he can be a CF, but for now, he would do better as a pure striker.
Now for the unpreparedness, I did not get to see much of the rest of the game, including no other goals (I know, Lahm scored in the 90th to win it, so dramatic, like Degrassi dramatic), but the lightning flashed a light so we could see the fallacies of ESPN, conspirators against sports not names Football, Basketball, Baseball, Nascar, Poker, and Bowling. Yes, I know the last three aren't sports, but don't tell ESPN that, at least there's some variety. But here is what the lightning showed - THE ANNOUNCERS FOR THE GAME WEREN'T EVEN THERE. They were in America, probably ESPN headquarters/legion of doom -- Bristol, Connecticut. ESPN, for shame. You are the world's largest sports channel, and you can't even ship your announcers overseas for the biggest sport in the world? Are you that oblivious?
As for what I saw, besides the goals, it looked as if Germany was going to win it anyway, just from a possession standpoint in the first half, but when Turkey got in the penalty box area, they harrassed them. Germany's defense gets points here for not letting up too many good shots, but bad points for not being able to clear it well enough and steal possession away in your own territory. My guess is the game turned into a midfield battle, with Germany's overwhelming midfield talent just overwhelming them. Just a thought, but Podolski rushing up to a forward position with Lahm filling in the left wing, backs centering up, seems like a real good strategy. Maybe I'll add more insight after I watch the game fully, though it is more likely I will move onto a different topic entirely.
-Knuttel
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)