European Championship discussion thread! Americans keep out.

[Brother None]

Me too. Bergkamp ruled, but the problem is that we don't have the players for them. Or at least the players won't work well together. Bah.

Finding players with the same quality as Kluivert ain't hard, bwahahaha

I miss Hasselbaink. Now there was a great underrated player.

I'm hoping Co Adriaanse will become coach. That guy rules.

I'm not. Co Adriaanse is yet another by-the-book coach. Foppe de Haan is the only Dutch coach I know who could pick up and make Holland better than it is. Co would just have us play as well as we always do.

Plus, a lot of "oldies" will retire, changing the game a lot. Stam, Overmars and De Boer are all out and I'm betting some others will retire as well. This leaves room for people like Heitinga, Bouma and Robben.
Too bad Seedorf will probably stay. The guy has great potential, but he fucks it all up in the Dutch team.

Seedorf is a nice midfielder, if he would just stop trying to score.

Heitinga, Bouma and Robben already HAVE room. The real question is who'll be replacing the old generation, these people already played besides them. People who will prolly now be baseplayers are people like van der Vaart and Sneijder. Big meh.

There's some old-generation people I'll really miss, like Stam, Cocu and van der Sar. Stam and Cocu had a bad EC, but I'm hoping they'll pick up the WC.

But RObben and Ronaldo (not Ricardo, tsch) are two different players, Robben uses passes and movement, while Ronaldo uses some nice moves to get past a player.

's not the point, they're both young and impetuous, you'd lose all forward control.

That happens to be the only game I wasn't able to see. But I did see some parts of the game and netherlands was playing much worse than Portugal. You only started to play better when Jorge Andrade scored an own goal and still wasn't enough, I don't think the referee had anything to do with the result but I didn't watch it closely as you said.

And that's not enough to say that Portugal was tilted. If Portugal had been favoured in most matches then I would agree. But if it was only against Netherlands I don't think you can say it at all. Then almost every team was favoured in one or another match because every referee makes errors but it doesn't mean they are helping a team.

Portugal didn't win because of the referee, but that doesn't mean the referee didn't whistle for Portugal. What kind of a line of thought is that anyway? "Portugal deserved to win, so the referee did some good refereeing"

It's, like it or not, a general rule for these competitions. The referees always slightly favour the host. It can be small, it can be huge, but they're always favoured.

To say South Korea only got as far as it did because of how the referees whistled is down-right rediculous, tho'

 

[Francisco M L S G S]

I didn't say the referee was good because Portugal won, I simply said, or at least meant to say, that Portugal played better and the referee had nothing to do with the result.

Maybe the referees do tend to slightly favour the host team but it sure wasn't that much as you initially said.

To say South Korea only got as far as it did because of how the referees whistled is down-right rediculous, tho'

You ought to watch the Portuguese championship believe me, you would change your opinion.

 

[Karkow]

humm... and why's that?

 

[Francisco M L S G S]

humm... and why's that?

No it's not because of Porto!!

It's just that there's corruption in this whole league, from the junior ranks to the first division, I witness that personally. It's not by chance that many of the most powerfull people in portugal are connected to football.

And let's not speak of this. The topic is the EC not the portuguese league.

 

[Karkow]

lol, ok ok, and I agree...

 

[Brother None]

I didn't say the referee was good because Portugal won, I simply said, or at least meant to say, that Portugal played better and the referee had nothing to do with the result.

The referee did have something to do with the result, and the way the game went. But only arguably with the exact resulsts. That's always kind of hard to see

Maybe the referees do tend to slightly favour the host team but it sure wasn't that much as you initially said.

I initially said "Nope, sorry. Yes, it was tilted, but it always is. You probably didn't notice, but there was plenty of homeland pro-Portugal whistling too. It's what happens. "

Plenty doesn't clearly indicate how much. So yer statement is a bit weird

You ought to watch the Portuguese championship believe me, you would change your opinion.

I'm not saying in general. I know there's plenty of corruption and bad whistling around club-football. I'm talking about this specific case. Yes, the referees whistled in favour of Korea. No, they did not do so so much that you could say Korea only got where it got because it was favoured so much.

 

[Francisco M L S G S]

The referee did have something to do with the result, and the way the game went. But only arguably with the exact resulsts. That's always kind of hard to see

Of course, none of us predicts the future. Correct me if I'm wrong but your question is: "If the referee hadn't favoured Portugal, would Holland proceed to the final instead of Portugal?".

I guess we never know. I didn't watch the match completely and I gave my opinion based on the bits of the game I saw. So I really can't say if Portugal was favoured or if the result was fair.

I simply said, or at least meant to say, that Portugal played better and the referee had nothing to do with the result.

It seemed to me Portugal played better but I cant comment on the referee. So I'm sorry for saying that the referee had nothing to do with the result.

Plenty doesn't clearly indicate how much. So yer statement is a bit weird

However it doesn't indicate exactly how much, plenty means "sufficient for" or "more than what's needed".

Anyway. If Portugal's matches were indeed tilted then I'm so daft I didn't even notice

 

[Sander]

That happens to be the only game I wasn't able to see. But I did see some parts of the game and netherlands was playing much worse than Portugal. You only started to play better when Jorge Andrade scored an own goal and still wasn't enough, I don't think the referee had anything to do with the result but I didn't watch it closely as you said.

And that's not enough to say that Portugal was tilted. If Portugal had been favoured in most matches then I would agree. But if it was only against Netherlands I don't think you can say it at all. Then almost every team was favoured in one or another match because every referee makes errors but it doesn't mean they are helping a team.

Yes, the Portuguese played much better and deserved to win, I'm not desputing that. BUT the referee WAS partial to the Portuguese.

Well if he's better than Makaay he sure hasn't shown it in the last years.

He has now.

Differently or not, he helped the team much more than Makaay. But you're right, they are both different but Van Hoijdonk and his physical playing style helped Netherlands achieving victory while Makaay with his mobility didn't find many opportunities and when he did he didn't made use of them.

Yep, but my point was that you shouldn't say one or the other is better when they're simply better. I like Van Hooijdonk, but he makes for ugly play.

In my opinion that's because both are trying to score instead of helping each other and the team. As I said, I didn't watch those preparation matches.

I doubt it. Van Nistelrooy hasn't shown that scoring fever in the preparation matches that did went well, and neither had the others.
I don't know why, but it just wouldn't work.

Finding players with the same quality as Kluivert ain't hard, bwahahaha

Meh, I'm no football expert, and I don't really know what Kluivert is good at. All I know is that a lot of people, including experts, say he's great. *shrugs*

I miss Hasselbaink. Now there was a great underrated player.

Hehe. I love his "Ja, Ja, Ja, Ja!" thingie after the penalty in the qualifiers for 2002. It was repeated endlessly before the match in Portugal.
But I haven't ever seen him play well, not even with Chelsea. He actually sucked with Chelsea.

I'm not. Co Adriaanse is yet another by-the-book coach. Foppe de Haan is the only Dutch coach I know who could pick up and make Holland better than it is. Co would just have us play as well as we always do.

No, I strongly disagree. Co Adriaanse wants to go to a classic play, 4x3x3, because of Dutch history ('74), but he's also a great coach. Every team he's coached ended up doing better at the end of the season he coached, AZ this year was the clearest example of that. They are going to play in the UEFA for the first time in some 27 years (IIRC).

Seedorf is a nice midfielder, if he would just stop trying to score.

Indeed. He's nice, but I haven't seem him really work well in the Dutch team.

Heitinga, Bouma and Robben already HAVE room. The real question is who'll be replacing the old generation, these people already played besides them. People who will prolly now be baseplayers are people like van der Vaart and Sneijder. Big meh.

True. I don't really know anyone who could come in, Van Persie probably, if he manages to become less arrogant at Arsenal, Van Stekelenburg is an up-and-coming keeper, and some AZ players could get in but, meh.

's not the point, they're both young and impetuous, you'd lose all forward control.

True. But I wasn't aiming for a balanced team, I was making a list of players I liked a lot. In the form of a team.

No it's not because of Porto!!

It's just that there's corruption in this whole league, from the junior ranks to the first division, I witness that personally. It's not by chance that many of the most powerfull people in portugal are connected to football.

And let's not speak of this. The topic is the EC not the portuguese league.

One more thing: there was a huge media blow-up just before the EC with a lot of Portuguese referees being "bought" in the 2nd and 3rd divisions of the Portuguese league.

 

[Francisco M L S G S]

I like Van Hooijdonk, but he makes for ugly play.

Greece plays even uglier than Van Hooijdonk (or maybe just ugly in another way) and won the cup. We may not like ugly play but it generally works. Fouls to prevent a counter attack are ugly, but effective.

I doubt it. Van Nistelrooy hasn't shown that scoring fever in the preparation matches that did went well, and neither had the others.
I don't know why, but it just wouldn't work.

It's still a shame you guys couldn't manage to play with 2 strikers. If you could make it work then you would have the strongest attack of the championship.

 

[Brother None]

Hehe. I love his "Ja, Ja, Ja, Ja!" thingie after the penalty in the qualifiers for 2002. It was repeated endlessly before the match in Portugal.
But I haven't ever seen him play well, not even with Chelsea. He actually sucked with Chelsea.

I don't think he ever got enough room to play with. He was one of our hardest hitters, but he was always passed over

I don't watch club-football.

No, I strongly disagree. Co Adriaanse wants to go to a classic play, 4x3x3, because of Dutch history ('74), but he's also a great coach. Every team he's coached ended up doing better at the end of the season he coached, AZ this year was the clearest example of that. They are going to play in the UEFA for the first time in some 27 years (IIRC).

So? All he does is take good teams and pull them up. How? Like any coach does

This is not true to for Foppe de Haan. This is a man who thinks outside the box, who understands the concept of new tactics and team-spirit and applies is with great skill. He's the coach of Heerenveen, and has been for 10 years now. He took that pretty shitty club, tho' you might not remember them being shitty, pulled them into the Eredivisie in his first year and has kept them in the top half, often the top 5 or 10, ever since. This is unequaled, yet people ignore him because they have to stare themselves blind on by-the-book, predictable coaches.

Co Adriaanse is a good coach, but he's an oldskool coach. He just doesn't get it yet, like nobody's really getting it yet. Foppe could lead us to the finals. Co can not.

Greece plays even uglier than Van Hooijdonk (or maybe just ugly in another way) and won the cup. We may not like ugly play but it generally works. Fouls to prevent a counter attack are ugly, but effective.

It's another kind of football. I enjoyed Greece greatly. No, they didn't have flair and they didn't play pretty football, which Portugal had and did, but they understood what team football is really about, and managed to use it in a brilliant way. That's it's own type of pretty football, and I can enjoy it.

It's still a shame you guys couldn't manage to play with 2 strikers. If you could make it work then you would have the strongest attack of the championship.

Well, people don't know it, and you didn't list him, but Robben is actually a fantastic striker with great ball-control. He might even be the best we have, because he, unlike van Nistelrooy, can finish attacks, not just place them in the net.

Makaay/Robben would be a great set of forwards, but if the coach can manage it we'll prolly end up with van Nistelrooy/Makaay with Robben as the forward midfielder.

Of course, none of us predicts the future. Correct me if I'm wrong but your question is: "If the referee hadn't favoured Portugal, would Holland proceed to the final instead of Portugal?".

No, that's not my question. The point is that, eventho' the results were just, the referee whistled in favour of Portugal. Get it through your head already, I've said this 3 times now.

However it doesn't indicate exactly how much, plenty means "sufficient for" or "more than what's needed".

Anyway. If Portugal's matches were indeed tilted then I'm so daft I didn't even notice

If you're in favour of the team, you're less critical of how the referee whistles. Yes, the referees whistled in favour of Portugal. Not heavily, but they did

 

[Francisco M L S G S]

No, that's not my question. The point is that, eventho' the results were just, the referee whistled in favour of Portugal. Get it through your head already, I've said this 3 times now.

I was insisting because I thought you weren't happy that Portugal was being slightly favoured. It's in here now

 

[Sander]

Greece plays even uglier than Van Hooijdonk (or maybe just ugly in another way) and won the cup. We may not like ugly play but it generally works. Fouls to prevent a counter attack are ugly, but effective.

Indeed, but I care little for effective play, I want to see beautiful play.

It's still a shame you guys couldn't manage to play with 2 strikers. If you could make it work then you would have the strongest attack of the championship.

*nods*

I don't think he ever got enough room to play with. He was one of our hardest hitters, but he was always passed over

I don't watch club-football.

Possibly. I still think that you need to show your class in normal competition before being selected for the national team.
Plus, we already have four good strikers. Five would just be overdoing it.

So? All he does is take good teams and pull them up. How? Like any coach does

Besides his completely hilarious press encounters, he's also a really good coach. I don't know how he does it, but getting improvements with EVERY team he has ever coached is really good, and this means that he's a good coach.

This is not true to for Foppe de Haan. This is a man who thinks outside the box, who understands the concept of new tactics and team-spirit and applies is with great skill. He's the coach of Heerenveen, and has been for 10 years now. He took that pretty shitty club, tho' you might not remember them being shitty, pulled them into the Eredivisie in his first year and has kept them in the top half, often the top 5 or 10, ever since. This is unequaled, yet people ignore him because they have to stare themselves blind on by-the-book, predictable coaches.

Bullshit. Foppe is generally seen as a great coach (note that he retired two months ago) and he's made some great accomplishments, but so has Adriaanse. When you look at games played by AZ and by Herenveen last year, Herenveen mainly played defensively and solidly, while AZ showed quite beautiful aggressive football, esepcially in the first part of the season.

Co Adriaanse is a good coach, but he's an oldskool coach. He just doesn't get it yet, like nobody's really getting it yet. Foppe could lead us to the finals. Co can not.

Co Adriaanse is NOT an old skool coach, because old skool coaches don't think offensively, they don't think that the Dutch national team should play beautifully instead of practically and they don't think that 4-3-3 is the best for the Dutch team, in part because it makes for nice football. I haven't seen Foppe make any such claims that make me have faith in him during that daily Sportzomer broadcasts during the EC, while Co Adriaanse came up with super assessments of what went wrong and what went well in games.

Well, people don't know it, and you didn't list him, but Robben is actually a fantastic striker with great ball-control. He might even be the best we have, because he, unlike van Nistelrooy, can finish attacks, not just place them in the net.

Makaay/Robben would be a great set of forwards, but if the coach can manage it we'll prolly end up with van Nistelrooy/Makaay with Robben as the forward midfielder.

I disagree. I think that Robben will remain on the wing, partially because of his good crosses and his ability to get past a man. Plus, people will know about him next year: he's playing for Chelsea.
Also, the strikers of the future will probably be one man in the centre, Van Der Meijde or Makaay on right and Robben on the right, with people like Van Der Vaart, Sneijder and Van Perise behind them.