Page 22 of 22

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 1:25 am
by Sunset
wale1974 wrote:
mcal wrote:
Sunset wrote:USA Starting XI

Image



:rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
...everybody watching football you were busy doing fotoshop..shockin' :( :shock:
Bad belle nah serious matter o :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
You guys no get sense of humor... :( :taunt:

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 2:42 am
by Kneedeep
GREENWHITEGREEN wrote:kneedeep,

I believe there was a deliberate attempt to turn soccer into the next La Crosse in the early days, but over the last ten years things are changing and more minority and immigrant kids are coming through. The Federation will learn from countries in this WC such as France, Belgium, England and the Dutch.
We heard this song in 1994. It is not just about recent immigrants. The little leagues and feeder programs are focused on certain groups the corporate sponsors want. If it was simply about money, one sponsor could have put ridiculous ad money in the pockets of Giusseppe(Rossi) or Ibisevic to keep them in red, white, and blue. Perhaps those are not the types of Americans they want to sell the game and their products. They have to choose between winning and dreaming.

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 3:20 am
by Vincent.

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 4:21 am
by bret- hart
Big Shout out to Belguim. :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: Now I can watch ESPN in peace. I no blame yankee. Na Ghana and her useless players I blame. They should have put that useless team out after day 1 :curse:

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 4:56 am
by ElHadary
My priest told me that "Jesus saves". I think he made a mistake, pretty sure in scripture it says, "Tim Howard saves".

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 6:06 am
by bret- hart
If not for poor finishing, it easily could have been 4-0 Belgium b4 the 90min mark. Overrated team. :tic:

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:08 am
by Coach
^Perhaps, but certainly their finest display thus far. Wilmots has some questions to answer, Meertens or Miralas, Dembele or Fellani, or neither...three in midfield or same again. They'll pose Argentina many problems and by all reckoning, should send them out.

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:36 am
by mate
Coach, having re-watched the game in hi definition, I have to admit, Belgium is very good. I don't agree with Yujam that they are much better than the US, but they are better. Technically as individuals. Certainly in possession fluency as a team and in overall football IQ.

That's enough in a game of small margins. Now are they good enough to beat Argentina? After today, I'd say yes, except for one thing...Messi.

Messi is a witch. I agree that his supporting cast is lackluster. Argentina still have no clear style or playing identity. They basically rely on short passing, possession, and Messi magic.

On paper Belgium should send them packing. But something again tells me that the gods of football are favoring Argentina. The witch keeps doing it.

Belgium are a comprehensive side. 4 wins. Ooozing talent. Power, pace, stamina, and psychology, mixed with a good bit of football culture and tradition. The Red Devils look good, don't they?

But so does Messi. And as long as he's playing, I think his side can win. Even against what seems to be an emerging tier 1 side like Belgium.

We will see.

Cheers, Mate

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:25 am
by Heliopolis
I cant believe some of the comments here...Belgium is 'not much' better than the US...the difference between the two teams was Belgium had an 'extra sub' :lol: :lol: :lol:

One team dominated the match from start to finish. One team took like 20 shots on target. One team entered this match with 3 wins out of 3 and no goals conceded from open play. One team has players on the very top clubs in Europe. One team went to the other team's country last year and defeated them 4-2. Guess which team that is?

Belgium is head and shoulders above the US its not even funny. Belgium dominated the US more than it dominated any of its 3 group stage opponents.

Had it not been for poor finishing and Howard being amazing, the match could have very well ended 5-0.

BTW, Wilmots needs to be more careful with his subs. His midfield was exhausted in Extra Time yet he failed to recognize it. Fatigue at the end allowed the US to pressure Belgium the last 10 minutes of the match.

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 9:29 am
by sinequanon
I
IBU
IBULEVE
IBULEVE WILL KILL THE PAIN
IBULEVE WILL KILL THE PAIN
IBULEVE WILL KILL THE PAIN...

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 1:28 pm
by mcal
mate wrote:The difference between fortune and bust is made in moments like Wondolowski missing that sitter. Imagine he actually scored that gift from the football gods? That lack of class is what cost us in the end. Nobody could adequately replace Altidore.

Or could they? I like to now imagine how Julian Green may have done in place of Wondolowski? In his little time on the pitch, Julian looked so much more composed and talented.

Like I said, the US keeps coming on. We have a lot more players in the pipeline.

By the way, my family and I are going to make MLS attendance a regular thing. San Jose Earthquakes baby! We're supporting our US NT team!

:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:


Cheers, Mate
...actually Wondo is a good goal poacher but the gods of football thought otherwise.
I'll be rooting for Belgium to knock off the Argies.
Would hate to see druggie Maradona glorifying his team is in the semis and close to final.
Let the unknowns win it all. Belgium v Costa Rica :thumbs:

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 1:57 pm
by Heliopolis
mcal wrote:
mate wrote:The difference between fortune and bust is made in moments like Wondolowski missing that sitter. Imagine he actually scored that gift from the football gods? That lack of class is what cost us in the end. Nobody could adequately replace Altidore.

Or could they? I like to now imagine how Julian Green may have done in place of Wondolowski? In his little time on the pitch, Julian looked so much more composed and talented.

Like I said, the US keeps coming on. We have a lot more players in the pipeline.

By the way, my family and I are going to make MLS attendance a regular thing. San Jose Earthquakes baby! We're supporting our US NT team!

:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:


Cheers, Mate
...actually Wondo is a good goal poacher but the gods of football thought otherwise.
I'll be rooting for Belgium to knock off the Argies.
Would hate to see druggie Maradona glorifying his team is in the semis and close to final.
Let the unknowns win it all. Belgium v Costa Rica :thumbs:
He was ruled offside on that play...

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 9:50 pm
by wale1974
Heliopolis wrote:I cant believe some of the comments here...Belgium is 'not much' better than the US...the difference between the two teams was Belgium had an 'extra sub' :lol: :lol: :lol:

One team dominated the match from start to finish. One team took like 20 shots on target. One team entered this match with 3 wins out of 3 and no goals conceded from open play. One team has players on the very top clubs in Europe. One team went to the other team's country last year and defeated them 4-2. Guess which team that is?

Belgium is head and shoulders above the US its not even funny. Belgium dominated the US more than it dominated any of its 3 group stage opponents.

Had it not been for poor finishing and Howard being amazing, the match could have very well ended 5-0.

BTW, Wilmots needs to be more careful with his subs. His midfield was exhausted in Extra Time yet he failed to recognize it. Fatigue at the end allowed the US to pressure Belgium the last 10 minutes of the match.
Best comment from a neutral......nothing more to add.

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:57 pm
by kolinzo
wale1974 wrote:
Heliopolis wrote:I cant believe some of the comments here...Belgium is 'not much' better than the US...the difference between the two teams was Belgium had an 'extra sub' :lol: :lol: :lol:

One team dominated the match from start to finish. One team took like 20 shots on target. One team entered this match with 3 wins out of 3 and no goals conceded from open play. One team has players on the very top clubs in Europe. One team went to the other team's country last year and defeated them 4-2. Guess which team that is?

Belgium is head and shoulders above the US its not even funny. Belgium dominated the US more than it dominated any of its 3 group stage opponents.

Had it not been for poor finishing and Howard being amazing, the match could have very well ended 5-0.

BTW, Wilmots needs to be more careful with his subs. His midfield was exhausted in Extra Time yet he failed to recognize it. Fatigue at the end allowed the US to pressure Belgium the last 10 minutes of the match.
Best comment from a neutral......nothing more to add.
Not really the best comment. His thought here was that if Belgium had scored in the first half USA would have just folded its arms while Belgium would start pouring in goals? Yeah...that wouldn't even happen on Playstation. It is the height of opaks!!

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 9:57 pm
by platinum
kolinzo wrote:
wale1974 wrote:
Heliopolis wrote:I cant believe some of the comments here...Belgium is 'not much' better than the US...the difference between the two teams was Belgium had an 'extra sub' :lol: :lol: :lol:

One team dominated the match from start to finish. One team took like 20 shots on target. One team entered this match with 3 wins out of 3 and no goals conceded from open play. One team has players on the very top clubs in Europe. One team went to the other team's country last year and defeated them 4-2. Guess which team that is?

Belgium is head and shoulders above the US its not even funny. Belgium dominated the US more than it dominated any of its 3 group stage opponents.

Had it not been for poor finishing and Howard being amazing, the match could have very well ended 5-0.

BTW, Wilmots needs to be more careful with his subs. His midfield was exhausted in Extra Time yet he failed to recognize it. Fatigue at the end allowed the US to pressure Belgium the last 10 minutes of the match.
Best comment from a neutral......nothing more to add.
Not really the best comment. His thought here was that if Belgium had scored in the first half USA would have just folded its arms while Belgium would start pouring in goals? Yeah...that wouldn't even happen on Playstation. It is the height of opaks!!

Good point. In the dynamics of a game, if Belgium had scored, we've seen enough to suggest the USMNT would have fought to rally back....BUT with the way that particular game was going, it'd simply have meant more space and Tim Howard would have had to repel 50 shots instead of 30. The dynamics of each game are different but it was all too easy for Belgium, the USA didnt show any of the defensive solidity it'd shown in prior games....actually Belgium did what Ghana was unable to do in terms of testing the goalie and exploiting the holes that were there all day.

Belgium played their est game of the tournament and the USA played their worst. We can debate the ifs and buts all day, the facts tell a clear tale, Belgium should have won GOING AWAY.

Re: USA (1) v Belgium (2)

Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:34 pm
by The YeyeMan
sinequanon wrote:I
IBU
IBULEVE
IBULEVE WILL KILL THE PAIN
IBULEVE WILL KILL THE PAIN
IBULEVE WILL KILL THE PAIN...
:lol:

The annoying American dude sat in front of me was the one leading that chant. Credit to the US fans though, they really came in their numbers.