91热爆

Minnows? Minnows you say? Well the Europeans must realize that football is a World-Wide game. The European leagues are populated with very good Latin-American and African Players. Let's not forget the humiliation of Spain in 2002, being beaten by the co-host Korea. If Spain was truly a Titan of European football they would have beaten Korea by 3 goals.

The European teams are actually bootom-feeders, they will exit the tournament in the second round. I don't expect Sweden or Poland to advance. England needs to find the back of the net in the next game and Spain and Italy will offer their typical defensive 'turtle' when they debue. If if were not for the Latin Americans or the Africans this would prove to be a very boring tournament. Just look at the sheets.

Thanks for providing the bait for the cross Atlantic rivalry. We shall see who is a Minnow and who is a Shark next week in the standings.

"I also got involved in a heated discussion with some of my overseas colleagues about the quality of the competitors here. Are these the best 32 teams in the world and is it right some the minnows should be playing when several decent European sides didn麓t make it ?"
We hear this kind of debate every year. One thing is so funny to me- European CUp football has not even 20% excitement of World Cup and during the European Cup, this kind of debate does not come to the surface.

I think the world cup is getting like the eurovision song content. Very political and the outcome has almost been decided.

Since this is a blog I would like to tell you about my World CUp MSN Space which is so please give it a visit and leave a comment. It has all the latest scores and match reports by me.

Like any cup competition, the World Cup isn't necessarily about finding out who's the best team on the planet. It's a challenge cup, and the winner is the team who rises to the challenge throughout the tournament. Were Italy the best team when they won it in '82? And can anybody believe that Greece were the best in Europe in 2004? Enjoy the wonderful occasion that the World Cup is - but don't believe that the best team in the world at that time always wins it (unless it's Brazil of course!)

Without doubt the World Cup should be a global festival. It's shouldn't all be about the football - half of the fun and the excitement is in the party atmospheres in the streets, the cultural diversity.

Plus we get to see the European/South American nations and players plenty. I like to see different styles of football from all around the globe. So far, no-one has been embarrassed, every team has put up a good fight and the 'minnows' have looked capable of taking at least a point (maybe with the exception of Costa Rica).

I think the issue of qualification is a tricky one: it should be the best 32 teams, yes, but I think more monitoring of the different continents (outside of Europe) needs to be done to ensure that they are getting the number of slots they deserve. The 91热爆 covered the African Cup of Nations in 2002: then, and this year, it was brilliant.

Perhaps Blatter's idea of using the regional tournaments like the African Cup and the European championship as a route to World Cup qualification is a good one...

The beauty of the WC is in how it raises interest in the game globally. Australia at the moment is a classic example. All over down under people are going soccer mad - because their team are in the WC. If one only picked the top teams - arguably the WC should not be more than 8 teams, as there are only realistically 8 that can win, therefore making the tournament a festival designed to raise awareness and participation of the sport globally is the right way forward.

I completely agree with Global_Citizen, how can so called "minnows" be expected to produce quality players when they arent being inspired to take up the game in the first place. Look at the effect the Ashes had here in the UK. Children of all ages were picking up a bat and ball purely because of the spectacle of the event. Sometimes we just have to realise that everything isnt as meets the eye. It does go just a little deeper than "The best 32 teams"

The world cup is not just about big teams, big players and big money. Some of the most interesting games in any football competition are often the games between smaller teams involving lesser known players. I have always enjoyed watching the early stages of the F.A. cup (when lower division sides take on big name premiership clubs), its always interesting to see how often the big clubs end up struggling against smaller teams. What I would like to know is this- who are these much better teams that Mr. Adderly believes should be at the world cup? Russia? Belgium? Rep. of Ireland perhaps?If they were in the world cup those 3 countries would be happy to get a draw against Sweden, as Trinidad & Tobago did.

Expat Brit in Canada. We always cheer the Canadian Team on when they are trying to qualify in CONCACAF against Trin & Tobag and the like. These smaller teams do not have the skill levels day in and out when you watch them in the qualifying rounds and the Gold Cup et al. As boring as England's 2nd half was V Paraguay it was still a lot better than many games we see Canada play. They are still working toward that level. Their best players play in the UK and MLS. When they get to the WC you see different teams, as their game goes up a few levels, eg Trinidad V Sweden.

Has any one seen the NYTIMES worldcup blog

Nea Saferstein

The minnows and their supporters are what makes this competition great. How boring would it be if the same 32 teams, representing only a small proportion of the footballing world, took part every four years? It is a celebration, not just a competition. A chance for football fans from every continent to get together and enjoy themselves without any political, racial or religious barriers. The only qualifications are that they love football and having a good time.

How do we decide who the "best" teams are anyway? The top 32 in the FIFA rankings? We know what a joke they are. At the end of the day, if a team really is among the "best" then they'll get to the World Cup anyway.

Let's be honest here, we all love watching the minnows humiliate the bigger teams - as long as it's not at our own expense!

I think that the best way to rank the teams would be a league competition between the top 16 over 2 years. Anything can happen in a one off knock out game so a league system would seperate the men from the boys. Just imagine every month or two playing France, Argentina, Germany, (our biggest rivals) also Brazil, Italy, Holland etc.
Much better than playing San Marino, Azerbaijan and likes.

Is Davide Di Vita suggesting that we vote on the winner of the world cup?

Could be interesting. Watch all the games in a League style format and then the whole world votes for the best team (Wogan as host??) and the Brazilians win again!!

Europeans must realize that football is a World-Wide game.

Neal Saferstein