Who will win the FIFA World Cup in South Africa?

Speculation aside, we'll just have to sit back and watch what happens in South Africa this summer. England, Italy, France, Spain, Holland, Slovenia, Serbia, the US, Brazil, Argentina, Cameroon or whoever, it hasn't even started yet Oh what a WC we've got

By the way is anybody here going to South Africa for the WC?

 

While soccer is not a sport I follow in the US, I enjoy the World Cup. The level of competition is much greater in Europe. I will watch, and cheer for the US team in South Africa this year. I think this year they will make it out of group play. The round of 16 will be trickier. Looking at the schedule, if the US makes it out of group play, they will most likely face Germany or Australia. On the other hand we have a solid win against Spain recently, so we are capable of beating anyone on any given day.

 

I think Spain and Brazil probably have the best chance, with Germany and Italy being close behind. England I think won't have any trouble getting the the quarter finals and anything further than that will be the kind of games where the formbook or comparisons on paper means nothing. England have always had talented players, but never performed to full potential - but I think we have a coach in Capello who can push us further to perform. With a fully fit squad then I can see England causing an upset or two.

 

I'd like to think England will find it easy towards the Semis. Then its a possible showdown with Brazil.
That's when we'll see how far the team has come under capello and how he deals with it when the chips are down.
Beat Brazil in the semis and i think we can do it.
Come on England!!!!!

 

The head says Spain, still the team to beat. HOWEVER Brazil can never be counted out. I'd like to see England win a world cup though.

 

Mussolini makes the call that "England midfield are too attack minded..."

Well....good luck to them, if that be the case.

Who wants to see a tournament full of "defensive" teams, getting 1 nil ahead and then crapping around for the rest of the "game". Italian soccer bores me to tears with this concept, and any other country you might name that carry their team tactics firmly in their own half of the field.

We should give an automatic win to the team that spent the most amount of time in the opposition's half of the field.

If you play like Italian first div, you don't deserve to be World Champions.

ENGLISH soccer is famous for it's attackmindedness, rather than boring us all to distraction....give the fans what they want and deserve for their overpriced tickets, namely, a good contest with ATTACKING football.


Nuff said

 

Yeah, you completely misunderstood what I said and ignored the rest of what I said about England.

England in the midfield is missing two things, as I previously mentioned: 1 - The General and 2 - The Bruiser

1 - The General

A player who can dribble the ball well, create plays with his positioning and passing, isn't looking for all the glory (so to speak) but will pounce on the chance to do so.

2 - The Bruiser

A player who is a physical force in midfield, making crunching clean tackles, cleans up in front of the back four, stops the other team at midfield and dishes to the General, launching the counter-attack.


England has neither, which is why they won't win the World Cup this year. Lampard likes to take shots from all over, isn't very defensive-minded, or a good dribbler. Gerrard loves to play off the strikers, somewhat cleaning up behind them, capable of making the right passes in the final third back lacking in the midfield area in regards to controlling the game.

England does have some great defenders, great wing midfielders, and obviously one of the best strikers in the world in Wayne Rooney, but the middle of the midfield leaves much to be desired - England has really never been known for having a great playmaker/dribbler/general.

 

This is true, Musso...

No-one of the likes of Kroif, Maradona or Ronaldinio has ever played for England. Quite true.

The closest they've produced would be Bobby Charleton? Yes?

George Best had the potential, but the drink ruined his career....

David Beckham is not in the same catagory as these two, Charleton and Best.

Yes....England has always lacked that brilliant play-maker that can singlehandedly 'lift' a side from mediocrity on the day, to utter brilliance in the blink of an eye...

Anyway....I AM English, so I have a sentimental want to see England finally win in my lifetime....I just missed out for 1966, (Born '67), so it would be nice to see them do it.

 

Beckham could sure take free-kicks, but defending has NEVER been his strong point (quite the opposite) and he isn't much of a dribbler either - he'd have been a flop if not for his ability to place a ball (esp with free kicks).

I'm only '85 myself, so while I am familiar with those names, i've never see them play. But yes, they've never had that type of player which is what hurts them on the international level.

 

Hold up, your telling me Americans actually know something about soccer.

HAHAHAHAHAHA.

 

I'm a dual citizen, my family is English, and I did grow up there! And you shouldn't be laughing, you're Australian!

 

What do you mean, Australian's are great at soccer, after all we made it to the quarter finals in the last FIFA cup but go robbed by a bad judgement call by the ref against Italy.

 

George Best wasn't English, he played for Northern Ireland.

 

While its still nowhere near the popularity of the other major US sports, soccers fan base is growning rapidly in the US, especially amongst the younger generation.

 

Redcaot - try editing your posts instead of double posting next time.

And I didn't grow up in America, as my response to that part of Tom's post already shows.

Soccer in the US will never attain the level it is in Europe, there are too many other sports (American Football, Hockey, Baseball) that get in the way, plus a completely non-existent 'farm' system.

 

Yes popularity in the US is growing rapidly. They simply need to market the sport better. They had a good chance at this four years ago, following the World cup in Germany. The widespread coverage of these games by ESPN showed that soccer could be a major player in the US sports market. Games got more publicity when Beckem came to play in the MLS, but dropped off again. I personally think it because the level of competition isn't close to that of European teams.

 

MLS is still a joke. Its where retired European players come to play for $$$$$$$$ that they wouldn't be able to make anywhere else. Remember those rumors of Zidane coming out of retirement to play in the US? Even Beckhams move - he is getting old - had a lot to do with $$$$$ too.

 

I knew Americans played soccer I just never thought you were any good.

 

It depends on who you play. Our Womens team is great. Two World cups and three Olympic golds. They are also ranked first in the world. If only we could get our men to play this well.