Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

B-Real

Members
  • Content Count

    4,441
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About B-Real

  • Rank
    Youth Team

Biography

  • Biography
    \

About Me

  • About Me
    Belgium, Antwerp

Interests

  • Interests
    soccer, hip-hop music, films

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Royal Antwerp FC

Recent Profile Visitors

3,004 profile views
  1. I think the quality of football has been pretty mediocre and sometimes even bad. But you got to admit that the "turns and twist" and the surprise exits have been pretty exciting. I also feel that there are some teams like France and Uruguay that are starting to grow in the tounement.
  2. From what I hear from people around me almost everyone kinda expects us to easily beat Japan and be eliminated after Brazil. (with a cautionate "but Brazil haven't been playing that great so far") Also when you realistically look at the tournement I feel France, Uruguay, Croatia, (home team) Russia and (maybe even) Mexico had a more impressive tournement than us so far. You got to be honest, Belgium-England was a game between 2 reserve sides, and with Panama and Tunisia our group was maybe the weakest of the first round. A bit surprised the Colombia comment. Because again "in my surroundings" nobody really seems to care about England, whether they win the thing or not, as they were "just an opponent in the group phase" When I visit these boards it seems like the Belgium-England rivalry is actually a thing?
  3. I hear what you're saying, I just don't understand it. Are you saying they didn't deserve to go through because they didn't play as well as they wanted? Or are you saying purpose is the keyword here? So a team that goes through after a cross ending up in the nets does not deserve to be in the next round? Because basically that would exclude pretty much every team. Every team aims for 3 wins and every chance resulting in a goal. But that's just not happenng. And in the end they relied on the the rules of the tournament which said the best top 3 teams were through to the next round.
  4. I don't understand why that actually matters. The goal of the group stages is to acquire enough points to proceed to the next round, which they succesfully did. There seems to be this weird obsession with some English users on this forum that somehow you need to win the match within 90 minutes otherwise the result is deemed invalid, set by the rules determined in this time and place.
  5. Nah Greece were still worse. Portugal had some shaky defensive moments combined with some nice moments of flair by Ronaldo, Nani or Sanchez which defintely added to the entertainment. Greece was basically parking the bus for 90 minutes and waiting for that one counter.
  6. Gave it a 6/10 as well. Maybe 4-5 attractive games which I really enjoyed, no super memorable great games you'd remember more than 2 years from now, lots of mediocre games and I think about 4 really dire ones. At the end not a very attractive tournament with a (deserved but) not very attractive champion. I still wish they'll go back to 16 team next time.
  7. The Christano Ronaldo marketing machine working full hours again. Even when another player scores when Ronaldo is has been sitting on the bench for almost a full hour, it's all thanks to him ofcourse.
  8. I find it very comforting that even great teams like Germany have these rubbish players like Schweinsteiger in their squad and getting regular gametime, despite everyone except the manager knowing they'll have zero impact on the game. It's like Brazil WC 2014's Fred.
  9. In all fairness I'm pretty sure we won our group and Wales came in second. (we lost the quarter final though, details)
  10. Croatia were the best team in tournament until they were beaten (fair and square). I don't see why it would matter that it happend during extra time.
  11. It wouldn't be the most glorious or sexy champion but at the end of the ride - whether it's after 90 or 120 minutes - they've shown themselves better than their direct oppononts and that's all that matters surely?
  12. Wow that's amazing. Especially considering I'm saying the exact opposite in the paragraph you're quoting me on.
  13. Let's be honest, everyone in this thread knows Scholes was not even close to being the best midfielder of his generation, although granted he was pretty great. The fact Zidane supposedly said it, is a bit suspect to say the least. So if it's not one of the 2 first options, you're kinda implying he's a blatant fool. (which would kinda depreciate the previous argument that a world class player has some sort of superior foolproof judgement or sense when it comes to rating other players)
  14. Apparently (supposedly) highly-rated Icelandic attacker who players for AZ. Plays for Iceland National -U17. Read somewhere about a month ago that his mother is Belgian and therefor Belgium is interested in having him as well. Trained with our national -U17 2 months ago. Truthfully first thing I heard about him as well.
  15. Speaking of Iceland talents, how good is Jonatan Ingi Jonsson?
×
×
  • Create New...