Re: (Euro '04) RSS Battles!

"Ken Overton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> D-bol wrote:
> >
> >>Italy hands Holland the game.
> >>Holland shits their pants and hands it back.
> >>Italy reluctantly accepts.
> >
> > lame...
> >
> > but then so is saying that a defensive performance is based on a
referee's
> > decision.
>
> Not nearly as lame as claiming the refereeing had nothing to do with the
> performance of the players on the pitch.  Whatever, it's silly 'cause I
> actually like the way Italy plays,

However according to you they reluctantly accept the win, implying they
tried to hand it away and didn't want anything to do with it, ie; defense
means you play to lose.

> I think a team can play the counters
> and look beautiful at it, and I think Holland can be utterly boring too.

> But I also think it's just silly to describe the defending in that
> particular match as "perfect".

You clearly didn't watch Iuliano, Cannavaro, Nesta, and the Italian
forwards. You are basing your idea of "perfect" defending on three referee
decisions. How the referee decisions have anything to do with Nesta's et al,
performance still bewilders me.

>Hey, Gala just shut out Juve, I guess
> they defended perfectly -- all except for the dozen or so gilt-edged
> chances that Juve threw away, but I'm sure those somehow figured into
> the defensive plan.

No comparison can be made. Holland attacked with close to 6 forwards,
anything less than spectacular defending would have seen another 6-0
drubbing they gave to Yugoslavia. Like it or not, Italy was technically
perfect (defensively) in that game, despite a red card and two PK's. That
they game back and played attacking vs France was a testament to the fact
that yes they can play attacking football when warranted, however what were
they to do against a high powered Dutch team with one man down (on a dubios
call nonetheless).


D