the bandwagon phenom of the world cup and a few other things.

since the first round is over so... here we go.

nothing against women

im glad they enjoy their worldcup. but its pretty mother-effing annoying listening to all these clueless, ridiculous comments over the sport i treat as a religion.

feel free to adore crisitiano's abs, cannavaro's dolce underwear, villa's beard BUT please go easy on "OMFG. japan and korea played SOOO WELLL." they didnt. they played well a few years ago. thats it. and even that was controversial in 2002. not going to go there. NORTH korea played well.

kim jong il's boys

the most impressive team imo. lived up to their style and level of play in the qualifying rounds. showed up and performed against not any other brazil but DUNGA's no-bs, euro-paced brazil.

a lot of commitment and balls playing with a 5 man line with an extra dedicated dmf. the goal was pure clutchness on the other hand.

the shakespearean tragedy

like my friends have pointed out. its not england without its tragic downfall. beckham's red, robinson's miskick, lampard and gerrard's penalty etc.

everyone has seen this. no excuses BUT GIVE THE DUDE A BREAK. hes the third string keeper. capello was not stupid. he knows joe hart is better. but dude is injured ok?

question: messi, best player ever

i would beg to differ. id like to call messi the perfect soldier. as he probably is the fastest dribbler with the highest degree of precision to have ever existed coupled with finishings in the realm of a world class striker.

but the term BEST i would still like to keep that limited to zizou. id call him the mastermind, the ultimate general if messi were to be the perfect solider.

in simpler terms zidane = xavi's holding ability + fabregas' release speed and vision + size of lampard/gerrard/ballack + maybe 70-80% of ronaldhino's flair + sneijder's duality with legs 80-90% maybe + iniesta's dribbling + a worldclass players' but definitely not the best shooting/freekick/crossing + kobe/jordan's coldbloodedness.

as a playmaker. id prefer ronaldhino his prime over messi as a matter of style.

spanish stubborness

switzerland has a long tradition of putting up an ironclad defence in tournaments. but i still expect spain to beat them or at least a tie. id say luck was involved with the goal and the dull 0-1 result.

was very disappointed with iniesta and silva at first but when i think about it later on. its perfectly reasonable that they didnt show up. their game face was on but with a deep d-line. these winger types cant do anything. these guys are not the cut and shoot type like cristiano. spain isnt the heading type either (that is why navas didnt work).

spain will continue to struggle with the problem of a lack of depth in offence. its fun to watch skillful build ups. but sometimes aerial attacks is an more effective option against defensive teams. sieging dont even work for barca and they are much better trained than a national side. until torres picks up his form (whether its finishing off the wideout/deeplying villa's passes or to catch one of them crosses). spain will need some luck vs. these kind of teams.

thats all for now.

more on playing d as a dmf.

honest self evaluation.
not a creative player. not a great midfielder. but i think im pretty decent on d as a dmf myself. in like a amateur league level.
anyways. just had a frustrating league game over the weekend. therefore, feel like saying something about the position and the game.

in regular leagues that ive played or was invited to drop in for a game or 2. a lot of times players expect the barbarian inside me to run around in the midfield scaring normal folks away. i cannot stress/emphasize anymore the fact that dmf DO NOT just RUN a hell of a lot more than regular midfielders. we dont. maybe just a little. just look at gattuso in a ucl game. he ends up with around 11-12km. maybe just a km or 2 more than average. not that much more in a 90 minute game considering most midfielders do around 10 km.



brief summary of how i see the position should be played:

1) d comes first. i always play better somehow when i keep that in mind and avoid too many forward runs.

2) stay behind and watch out for counter attacks and those shady bastards dwelling deep. o man. i hate these offside strikers. and how a lot of cb ignores them. pisses me off.

3) hustle the ballhogs or anyone whos slow-with/sticks-to the ball.

4) ignore the calls unless its a card

5) identify the star player and frustrate the hell out of them.

6) body check, play physical.

7) look for the dominant foot and try to do what basketball players do. give them room on their weak side.

8) convert possession and try to avoid clearance as much as possible.

9) try to hit the player with possession from a blind spot.

10) when not hustling down the ball. look for the open players to cut down the options or for fast coverage when a pass in made.

11) drop DEEPER when theres noone to hustle or when the other teams good with the ball. let them do whatever in their half. keep it packed on your own 1/3.

12) hide behind a player when manmarking. cut in if theres a pass.

p.s. a big part of defending is teamwork because of the size of the field. i gotta work on this part. sometimes gotta admit that its not easy to be on the same page with the other defenders.

lets kick off this season.

been a while since the last update. dont worry.
im still here. not dead. keeping this all alive.

havent been able to come up with anything even though we are a month into the new season. nothings really that interesting. even the kaka ronaldo buyouts. dont have much to say about those guys even as a real fan.

fortunately, the manchester derby was exciting enough.
in summary. id say.
first half: utd more chances, but city's was closer.
second half: utd dominated.
great performances from bellamy. how unlikely.
utd gave 2 away. rio as eccentric as always.
doubt adebayor's presence makes a difference.
neither is scholes.
the real difference is robinho and van der sar.
berbatov just felt like a poor man's ibrahimovic.

not saying the ref is biased.
but i felt 95 would be the right amount.
30 seconds for the goal and 30 seconds for the substitution.
this is just way lucky.
compare to what i think were consistent and temperamental buildups form teams like chelsea and liverpool last year.
however, utd could have took it easy if it wasnt for those two retarded mistakes.
props to giggs though. definitely a living legend whether you a utd fan or not.

freaks.

interesting.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/story?id=647804&sec=global&root=global&cc=4716

the true face of football.

the picture says it all.

http://madeinbrazil.typepad.com/madeinbrazil/2009/05/sky-is-not-the-limit-for-gisele.html

the flanks.

today, im gonna bitch about side midfields, wingers, side backs and wing backs. heres what i think, correct me if im wrong.

as far as i can tell, wg and smf have "functional" differences versus sb and wb differs only in "style".

the role of wg and smf are pretty distinct. wg are usually pacy and strong on the dribble in terms of stats. they stay up and out wide stretching the defense. traditional wg plays on the side of their dominant foot, crosses in down low by the goal line. modern wg plays on the opposite flank, crosses are less common and more cuts are made inwards for open shots or perhaps into the box. wg are the keys to counter attacks. they are there to exploits 1 on 1 situations against sb. they dwell around the corner of the box lot of times waiting for these openings. wg do well when the game is fast but normally dont perform when the game is slow and when its not 1 on 1. its pretty obvious what a wg is.

smf are completely different. their individual styles vary. these days i dont think they matter as much as they used to because the traditional 442 does not perform anymore. the style of crossing in from both flanks are not particularly effective against the zonal system these days. also the rise of the sb/wb undermines the role and importance of the smf. usually an exceptionally talented player would play in the middle or move up to the wings rather than kept in the smf position to be more effective. position wise very few talent exist. the flanks are always covered by dmf and sb/wb. or wg. in my opinion, ronaldhino can somewhat be classified as a smf although he exhibits wg and amf (here i regard amf as the dead center ones or else it defeats the purpose of the discussion i.e. lamf, ldmf) qualities. raphael van der vaart is probably the closest smf we have in this generation of footballers, i.e. on the side but not a wg, but still i would consider him as a smf and amf hybrid because of his tendencies to move center at times. david beckham is what i would consider a true smf. fixed to the sideline. early crosses. no reliance on pace etc. he contributes to the team on the side with the central playmakers unlike the wg which are pretty much lone gunmen. very very few players could stay out that wide and away from the front and contribute to the plays. at one point i saw some potential in david bentley but i guess i was wrong. camoranesi, i would classify as a right leaning amf rather than a smf. so ya... a rare kind...

finally, sb and wb. we all know what a sb is. the wb, however, is relatively new. they are seen as ultra offensive sb's or even wg playing deep in their own halves. but to me i dont think there is a fundamental difference between the role of these 2 positions. i believe it is a matter of style. position wise sb and wb are essentially the same in real life i.e. not we11, pes, fifa. they are part of the d line. so called wb's like dani alves, carlos, bosingwa, cafu are said to play much more upfield; this in my opinion, is simply a temporary (but in some of these cases permanent off position. haha.) offset. it is not ideal but is definitely necessary in order to create a mismatch down the flanks: 2 v 1; sb/wb+mf/wg v sb/wb. on top of that, like i mentioned previously, the sb/wb complements the wg these days since they are placed on the opposite end of their stronger foot. if you look at the wb position functionally, it is virtually the same as the sb. they are not exempt from their duty to defend. if you look at it from the sb angle, notable sb like zambrotta, maldini, grosso, finnan, evra they all move up for crosses and support. just like any wb does. so to me there really is not a fundamental difference. the major difference lies in the balance of  defense v. offense.

these days commentators tend to over emphasize on differentiating players like they are chesses and creating new labels for formations such as 41212, 4411. its just a little extreme. there has always been supporting strikers in 442 or dedicated amf in 451. a lot of times these differences are completely unnecessary and creates only confusion. football is an art. not an exact science.

madrista.

http://www.thespoiler.co.uk/index.php/2009/05/08/manchester-city-offer-real-madrids-raul-e40m-deal

im gonna burn the city down if this happens. but i guess. at least robinho recommended.