They're Flasks Not Beakers, People!!!

Horace said:

the only real players of note in the portugeuse football team are ronaldo, simao & quaresma. plus you have a good manager.

Click to expand...

The players, agreed. The manager..... I don't doubt that he is a good manager, but preaching non violence ( one of IMHO best portuguese players, Sergio Conceição ( one of 5 european players that made a Hat-trick in a European championship ( against Germany in Euro 2000 ) ), was never called to the national team by Mr Scolari because of being sowewhat prone to rage attacks in field ( things like spiting in the referee, not things a la Zidane... ) ) and after that Mr Scolari decides to punch a Serbian player... . Too bad that the ex-coach of Chelsea Football Club wants to go to Italy....

About Beckham: From the games I saw of him against Italian teams and against the Portuguese national team, he is a good passer, but he really doesn't know how to get rid of a man-to man defense. If you dedicate a player to mark him ( even from a distance ), he is a complete waste of a field player. Even in England there are far better players than him like Owen ( been a little forgotten ...) or even Rooney the Tank ( atleast he can get rid of a defensive player )

Horace said:

nani looked pretty crap the other night. still totally unproven in my book. im not a very big deco fan to be honest. he is a player i think is seriously overrated. yes i did forget carvalho i hear pepe is good but have never seen him play.

Click to expand...

Nani will be a good player (I stress the will be ). I don't like Deco too much as well ( he's not consistent enough to build a team around him. Miss you, Figo.... ) and Ricardo Carvalho is simply the best defender of the World ATM. Pepe needs a firm hand but will be a good player if that happens.

Horace said:

nani looked pretty crap the other night. still totally unproven in my book. im not a very big deco fan to be honest. he is a player i think is seriously overrated. yes i did forget carvalho i hear pepe is good but have never seen him play.

Click to expand...

I was also talking about Jorge Andrade, who just recently got injured.

As for Deco, he has a characteristic over other attacking midfielders that, for me puts him a cut over the rest. Most creative midfielders like Ronaldinho, Kaká or Lampard are great and all, but when they have a bad game and all of their moves go wrong, they become a real problem for their teams, especially if their teams rely on them for their attacks. They don't fight for the ball and it's like playing with one player less. Deco, however, even when he has bad games keeps fighting for the ball, and recovering the ball left and right. This means he almost never becomes a liability for his team.



This is not off topic, at all....

Portugal has a good defence.(Ferreira,Jorge Andrade,Carvalho,Miguel and with Vitor Baia)
Costinha is not bad too and Ronaldo.Forward is not problem,he is a legend; Pauleta.
Portugal is weak at the middle Nani,Figo they are useless for now And i dont like the style of Deco.If Quaresma plays good...

Beckham is much better than Deco or Quaresma in my Opinion.

blitzkrieg1980 said:

American football is vastly more strategic than most sports i can think of. It is a slow moving, time based strategy game that relies evenly on the physical ability of its players AND strategic strength of coaches and quarterbacks. Yes, it is slow moving, but I would think that most civ fans would enjoy watching a game that relies so heavily on strategic thinking. I could be wrong , though, but I don't think I am

Click to expand...

No, it's just you don't know the other sports well enough to know the strategies.

To treat American Football with the same disrespect you show other sports: Gridiron is where two lines of people dressed up in oversize novelty foam pads bounce into each other, while a frightened bloke called a quarterback desperately throws the ball away before anyone can bump into him, hoping a fast-running player on his team will be able to catch it further up the field. And every time a play fails, they'll spend fifteen minutes perving on some scantily clad girls with pom-poms dancing about, before deciding to do go and bounce into each other again. And that's why it's the only sport in the world where at its biggest event (the Superbowl) spectators are likely to say to each other "wake up, it's the half-time break -- something interesting might be about to happen".

whb said:

No, it's just you don't know the other sports well enough to know the strategies.

To treat American Football with the same disrespect you show other sports: Gridiron is where two lines of people dressed up in oversize novelty foam pads bounce into each other, while a frightened bloke called a quarterback desperately throws the ball away before anyone can bump into him, hoping a fast-running player on his team will be able to catch it further up the field. And every time a play fails, they'll spend fifteen minutes perving on some scantily clad girls with pom-poms dancing about, before deciding to do go and bounce into each other again. And that's why it's the only sport in the world where at its biggest event (the Superbowl) spectators are likely to say to each other "wake up, it's the half-time break -- something interesting might be about to happen".

Click to expand...

Actually I agree with Blitzkreig in that football americano is incredibly strategic. The sport is just so incredibly specialized, making strategic decision making often times happen before the game and then must be adapted later while keeping everyone working as one cohesive unit. Name a sport that requires more coaches, or a sport that is more specialized than football. Football europa is definately less strategic, but I'm not trying to downgrade it in any way or take anything away from any other sports.

hoopsnerd said:

Actually I agree with Blitzkreig in that football americano is incredibly strategic. The sport is just so incredibly specialized, making strategic decision making often times happen before the game and then must be adapted later while keeping everyone working as one cohesive unit. Name a sport that requires more coaches, or a sport that is more specialized than football. Football europa is definately less strategic, but I'm not trying to downgrade it in any way or take anything away from any other sports.

Click to expand...

In what way do you claim soccer to be "less strategic" -- that appears to be a very blank unsubstantiated assertion.

I doubt anyone on the list has accurate statistics as to the number of coaches per team for different sports, but at a first guess I would imagine cricket to have the most different kinds of coach [in absolute rather than per team], probably followed closely by rugby union.

You're a tool. I know plenty about soccer, tennis, and baseball. You know squat about football.

Moderator Action: Warned! - Flaming
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889