PDA

View Full Version : European football championships



carlsson
June 14th, 2004, 01:02 PM
Sweden - Bulgaria 5-0! (sorry if the BBS is populated by any Bulgarian or related people)

After Italy - Denmark 0-0, it suddenly looks promising to play Italy next...

vic user
June 14th, 2004, 01:49 PM
damn, i should have known you would have told the scores :)

i haven't watched them yet :)

i am surprised bulgaria fell apart so much, as i have heard good reports about them

typical italy with that very conservative coach they have
a shame, since they have such offensive weapons, if only they were allowed to play offensive!

i am a neutral for this tournie, so i just want good play all around!

was that eng - fra game wild or what?

chris

carlsson
June 15th, 2004, 07:18 AM
You don't have to open the thread if you're afraid it contains dangerous information. :D

Bulgaria is a typical moody team. If successful, they probably can create small wonders, but if losing the grip, they seem to let go. Yesterday we were lucky though with two goals within a minute in the middle of a period under pressure from the Bulgarian team.

Italy supposedly relaxed due to the warm weather, but I dunno... they should be more used to hot weather than more Northern teams.

I read an anecdote from China about a guy who liked to watch the European championships via satellite in the middle of the night. His wife forbid him, as he was supposed to get up in the morning and drive the kids to school, but he persisted with watching France - England at 2 AM.

The wife didn't realize this until the very last minute, when her husband "became loud" as Zinedine Zidane scored twice within a minute. She got out of bed, hit her husband in the head with the remote control and told him that she would make sure no more football was watched.

According to the anecdote, he has complained to the governing party (!) about his wife not respecting the human rights which for him includes watching football in the middle of the night. :roll: :lol:

vic user
June 15th, 2004, 08:14 AM
I got to watch the ita - den game, and it was a lot better than i expected.
there were tons of chances for both sides.

the ger - hol game ought to be interesting, but what am i saying? all the games are interesting!

i hope that guy in china can persuade his wife to capitulate, and yes it is his God given right! :)

chris

carlsson
June 15th, 2004, 12:52 PM
Germany-Holland is said to be one of the most fierce games, based on old "traditions" like the spitting exchange in 1988. In particular now after some Dutch player brought up the WW2 and Nazi German occupation of Holland right before this game.. not the most clever way to prepare.

vic user
June 16th, 2004, 05:22 AM
There is so much history (both soccer and non soccer related) with European countries, I guess there is bound to be some wicked rivalries. i have little knowledge about who hates who etc.. though

What an incredible goal VanNistelrooy (spelling?) got.
man that guy is good.

well, i know you are looking forward to every Sweden game, but i am looking forward to the last games of the group stage, since there should be some pretty desperate teams.

i wonder if porutgal will choke today?

chris

carlsson
June 16th, 2004, 10:46 PM
The latest news is that Totti (ITA) may face (1) a three game suspension for .. yep, spitting a Danish player in the face (2) and generally acting unbalanced in the last game. It is not yet decided, but most experts say that if UEFA doesn't suspend him for that, they will lose their face (3).

Italy of course have plenty of other top players, but one striker less should be good news for Sweden, when we face (4) them next.

vic user
June 17th, 2004, 04:55 AM
i am looking forward to the ita - swe game, but probably not as much as you :)

i thought totti played well last game, so i think italy will miss him. totti sure has a short fuse, doesn't he? i wonder if the guy he spit on also plays for Lazio? :)

that por - esp game on saturday is going to be quite the one to watch as well i think.

the cro - fra game should be good today

chris

carlsson
June 17th, 2004, 10:25 PM
Rumors say that Italy will rebuild the team completely (even change formation to 4-4-2) rather than replacing Totti with another forward.

Yes, POR-ESP will be an important game for both teams after Greece surprisingly only has to draw an unbalanced Russian team to go through, i.e. only one of Portugal or Spain would make quarter finals unless Russia finds team morale to defeat the Greek.

I'm participating in some for-fun Swedish based toto, but I'm doing terrible so far in predicting scores and winning teams. Much worse than the WC98 when I was one Atlantic Ocean away from winning a barbeque grill:

I took part of ESPN competition which theoretically only was open for US and maybe Canadian residents, but people worldwide participated. The final result of the competition was an US person at 1st, someone in Israel (!) on 2nd and me from Sweden on 3rd. It took a while until ESPN could publish an official winner's list, excluding all the top results from non-eligable people.

To make it even more interesting; all the predictions except for tiebreaker questions about how many goals would be scored in the final were public for everyone to see and copy into their own predictions. In ESPN you can team up with your friends, and a dozen or so managers from EEFL did. Needless to say, I was the only one to perform well, but if they had known, someone of the US managers could've copied my sheet and won themselves a Budweiser (?!) sponsored barbeque grill... :lol:

vic user
June 18th, 2004, 04:15 AM
that's pretty cool about the bbq! well, at least you know you won it, kind of :)

i think spain will either beat or draw with portugal, and greece and spain will move on.

i think teams better be wary of greece, and i think that if they meet england in the quarters (yes england is a long way from securing a birth) greece will take them

did you see that second goal of croatia against france? holy smokes that was a nice effort!

go to get back to work, but i hope you have fun watching on the weekend!

chris

carlsson
June 18th, 2004, 01:51 PM
I just got back online after a sweaty Italian game. The Swedish commentators asked themselves why Italy couldn't put up a such good play against Denmark as they did tonight, but they were also aware that Italy is very good in playing under pressure.

Hm, if SWE-DEN ends 1-1 and ITA-BUL ends 2-0, I suppose a draw will decide which of Italy and Denmark goes through. Theoretically, both teams play at the same time and somewhat close to eachother, so maybe they could pack a bus and drive over to the other stadium for a penalty shoot out. Many people dislike penalty shoot outs, but at least it would be more fair than a draw.

vic user
June 18th, 2004, 03:04 PM
what a great swedish equalizer!

i read somewhere, that if teams are tied on points, then goals scored, etc... they will then look back at their euro qualifying records to determine who goes through.
very strange

chris

carlsson
June 19th, 2004, 09:56 AM
Everyone say something different. Today I read that if the number of points is the same, you compare the results from games between the tied teams (so goal difference vs #4 is useless). The team who has scored most goals against the other tied teams go through, and if it still is a draw, maybe you look at total goal difference etc.

This means that no matter how many goals Italy defeats Bulgaria:

* if Sweden and Denmark play 0-0, Sweden and Italy go through
* if Sweden and Denmark play 1-1, Sweden goes through and there has to another way to separate Denmark and Italy (goals vs Bulgaria?)
* if Sweden and Denmark play 2-2, Sweden and Denmark go through

Of course, if either team wins the game, there will not be a tie at all.

vic user
June 19th, 2004, 06:54 PM
that cze - hol game was really good. what a great eiro so far!
man, if not for those keepers, could have been a 6-5 game easy

one thing that is exciting about euro for me, versus world cup, is that there are only 16 teams to make it to the final is amaxing unto itself, and then you get grouped with strong teams once you make it to the quarter finals, INMO, you have done really good.
I am not saying that getting to the w.c. is easier than the euro finals, but that the odds of you running into a really hard opponent at the final event, has a higher probability in the euro, than the world cup.

here are my predictions anders, for the quarter final draws:

greece vs. england

spain vs. france

czech. republic vs. denmark

sweden vs. germany

i hope i did not screw up the group pairings
chris

carlsson
June 21st, 2004, 03:59 AM
I dunno about more difficult. The EC2004 had 15 spots plus Portugal (host), while the WC2006 qualifyers are:

Europe: 13 out of 51 teams (25%) + Germany (host)
Africa: 5 out of 25 teams (20%)
Asia: 4.5 out of 32 teams (14%)
South America: 4.5 out of 10 teams (45%)
North/Central/Caribbean: 3.5 out of 34 teams (10%)
Australia/Oceania: 0.5 out of 12 teams (4%)

vic user
June 21st, 2004, 04:12 AM
Although I think your percentages only reflects the difficulty in getting to the final, but...

I think the overall skill level of Euro teams is higher than the rest of the world, and thus you have a better chance at running into a lesser opponent (in the opening round of the wc final) than in the euro.

there is a higher chance that soccer minnows make it to the wc final than the euro

chris

carlsson
June 22nd, 2004, 06:55 AM
I see what you mean, but I think most of the world is getting closer in skill difference. We'll see two years from now if it was a fluke that an Asian team went to semi finals, and how far the best of the African ones can get.

Yesterday I watched the two games at the same time using two 28" TVs next to eachother. It was not my idea (I was at my boss' place), but it was quite a special sensation trying to concentrate on two balls and four teams at the same time. It's like "ooh, almost goal to the left" and "ooh, almost goal to the right".

I'll be leaving for a vacation trip on Saturday, so maybe I'll miss the semi finals but will be back home again on July 4th, which as you know is a very special date (no, I'm not referring to the Independence Day now).

vic user
June 22nd, 2004, 07:13 AM
that's neat about the 2 tv things, and i can't imagine how many times people would have loved to do just that

i guess they had the games on the same time yesterday then?

here in canada, they had the cro-eng game on at 18:45 UT i think, and then about 15 minutes after the first match ended, they started the fra-sui game.


hope you have fun on your time off!

chris

carlsson
June 22nd, 2004, 01:57 PM
Yep, the last last two games in each group are played in parallel, and then it is up to the TV broadcaster to select one, delay the other or switch between them. When you have access to plenty o'satellite dish channels, it was not very difficult to find two showing one game each; in this case one German and one Swedish channel (displaying games played in Portugal between England-Croatia and France-Switzerland to a TV audience with Chinese, Italian, German and Swedish, which makes nine exclusive nationalities if one can count like that.)

Did I mention I'm going to Italy? :P

vic user
June 23rd, 2004, 04:47 AM
oh, i would love to go there! my daughter is in love with venice!

i hope you remember to wear your "denmark 2 - 2 sweden" t-shirt :)

ciao!

chris

carlsson
June 23rd, 2004, 06:09 AM
I better not talk football at all unless I want to be beat to the ground or worse - today reports are that some "supporters" throw eggs, make threats over phone and email and even cuts the tyres of the cars belonging to staff in the Danish consulate. I realize it is only a few culprits who take such actions, but to me it blackens the whole population.

Of all the talk about cheating and rigged game, I like the Spanish comments best; something along the lines of "probably it was rigged to end 2-2, but so what - we've also done things like that (and the Italians probably have too and shouldn't whine)".

vic user
June 23rd, 2004, 06:31 AM
and if the italians had played better in the first two games, then they would have their fate in their own hands, and not have to worry about other scorelines, os i have no pity for them, although i will miss seeing some good players, but that could be said about the other teams going out too

i think it is hilarious that the score ended 2-2, as you could see both teams wanted badly to win

chris

carlsson
June 23rd, 2004, 11:27 PM
So what do you think about the Czech Republic? I didn't have chance to see the game, but reports said that Germany got robbed from a few penalty chances and a couple of hands in CZE. Despite that, it is a show of depth to basically put your 2nd line on the field and win 2-1 over the silver medalists from the last WC.

Thursday: ENG-POR. Despite home field advantage, I think England goes through.
Friday: FRA-GRE. France should be superior, but haven't really aced yet.
Saturday: SWE-HOL. The optimists still believe in Sweden, but I think Holland will have an easy game.
Sunday: CZE-DEN. As I mentioned above, the Czechs seem both strong and well balanced.

That would make the semi-finals England-Holland and France-Czech Rep if I'm not mistaken. Quite possible with a reprise of either ENG-FRA or HOL-CZE, which both were astonishing games.

If England would win it all, the English people would get quite self-appointed (?), but on the same time they and particularly mr Eriksson are worth some success, if nothing else so to quiet the critics.

vic user
June 24th, 2004, 04:44 AM
man, did germany ever come out flying in the second half, and tons of shots, but none in the net :)

that first goal by the czech. rep. was amazing! and kahn almost and i mean almost saved it. a great one to watch in slow mo


Thursday: ENG-POR. Despite home field advantage, I think England goes through.
Friday: FRA-GRE. France should be superior, but haven't really aced yet.
Saturday: SWE-HOL. The optimists still believe in Sweden, but I think Holland will have an easy game.
Sunday: CZE-DEN. As I mentioned above, the Czechs seem both strong and well balanced.

i think you are probably right about the eng-por game, but i find the english have a suspect defence especially on set pieces. brutal

i think the greeks will have met their match against france, and i expect them to tear the greeks apart.

i don't know about the swe-hol game, to tell you the truth. i think it will come down to better tactics, so i think coaching and subs will have a big impact in this one

i don't think the danes will be able withstand the czechs too. they seem really pumped.

i hope my vcr timer works today ;)

chris

carlsson
June 24th, 2004, 07:07 AM
Heh. How about watching a whole 90 minutes, but in slow motion to make it something like 5-6 hours of entertainment? :lol:

Sweden have some serious defence and midfield problems. We'll see which players are not injured and available for play. A few years ago the managers experimented a little with a 3-5-2 lineup in a friendly tournament, but it never succeeded. I wonder if that should be possible to try again, with three central defenders, two defensive midfielders, two wings, one playmaker in the middle and the two forwards as usual. If nothing else, they would totally confuse the opponents who expect to see 4-4-2 with a diamond in the middle.

vic user
June 24th, 2004, 07:31 AM
i don't know what leagues you get there on tv, but i get brazilian league, and i really like their style of play.

i find they run with the ball a lot, and also will take on defenders, rather than lob it around

quite amazing i find, how much diversity of style there is in the leagues around the world

chris

carlsson
June 24th, 2004, 09:35 AM
Wasn't Brazil the first national team to utilize four defenders in their revolutionary 4-2-4 lineup in WC 1958 (by coincidence played in Sweden)? Up to then, most teams had played 3-2-5 AFAIK. It took another couple of years before another forward was moved back to the midfield.

vic user
June 24th, 2004, 10:16 AM
i think you are right

i have a 'history of soccer' book, or something like that, and they talk about the evolution of formations and such, and there was a mention of the brazilians bringing about some formation changes, etc... i guess sweden is the place that the world really took notice of pele then

i was watching some old FA cup games, and i am ever glad they got rid of the back pass to the keeper and be allowed to handle the ball. the first time i saw it happen, i couldn't believe the keeper was getting away with it, and then i realized i must be watching old rules :) and only 2 subs back then too it seems!

chris

carlsson
June 25th, 2004, 07:46 AM
Yep, two subs until sometime into the 90'ties - maybe it was internationally introduced with WC1994? If you check the old football manager games, they will only allow you two subs, as the rules were like that when the game was written.

I suppose the forwards of the 30'ties and 40'ties were slightly more interested in defensive play than they generally are today, or else the scores would be more in the 20-20 range than 1-1. Imagine a 5-3 man advantage in every attack for both teams.

Oh well, it looks like my first QF prediction didn't work out. Let's see if any of the others do.

Jorg
June 25th, 2004, 01:41 PM
Well, uptill knowI think its one of the most fascinating European Championships I have seen!
(France just lost from Greece in the QF)

vic user
June 26th, 2004, 03:25 AM
yes! I knew Anders and I couldn't be the only soccer fans!

this has been an intense euro hasn't it?

chris

p.s. well Anders, looks like you and me should get into fortune telling ')

chris

Jorg
June 26th, 2004, 04:41 AM
Yes, well as tonight is Sweden - Holland, and I am Dutch, this is going to get interesting :D

vic user
June 26th, 2004, 07:05 AM
and anders is swedish ;)

good luck to you both, as i am a neutral

chris

Jorg
June 26th, 2004, 08:44 AM
That means you HAVE to watch, to be able to decide if the one who wins deserved it :D

Otherwise Anders and me are going to make this a looooooooooooooooong topic :P

Jorg
June 27th, 2004, 01:56 AM
Uh-Oh.

That was a lottery.

vic user
June 27th, 2004, 02:49 AM
both teams had their chances, that's for sure, in normal time.

you guys must have been very tense during the pk's !

chris

vic user
June 27th, 2004, 01:07 PM
well, who do you think will end up in the finals?

my gut feeling is holland vs. czech rep.

chris

carlsson
July 4th, 2004, 07:29 AM
I missed the whole QF due to flight and bus connection. I even missed the PK shootout due to "dinner". I slept through the POR-HOL semi final but will probably see the final tonight. I think Portugal with their home field advantage will take revenge on Greece.

vic user
July 5th, 2004, 05:28 AM
Too bad you missed the shootout and all the extra time.

well, that wasn't the greatest final match, but credit to the greek team and their coaching staff. really organized.

loved the fireworks after the macth!

chris

carlsson
July 5th, 2004, 12:45 PM
And only 1.5 months to the Olympic Games.. held in Greece! There is a football tourney too, although it doesn't have much of a status and some people would prefer to exclude it alltogether.

The Italian U21 team, unlike e.g. the Swedish one, is qualified for the Olympic tourney, and the rules say that you are allowed to enhance the team with a few older (professional) players. During the POR-HOL game, the Italian TV had a televote whether Totti should be selected for the Italian side, but more than 50% of the voters thought not! :P

vic user
July 5th, 2004, 02:10 PM
if long distance spitting ever becomes an olympic sport, Totti has a good chance of winning gold :)

i was really hoping that the canadian women's team would make it, but mexico defeated them in the qualifiers.

i really hate the canadian oplympic commitee...
they will only give money to teams or people they think have a really good chance at getting a medal.

so soccer in canada (although tons and tons of people play it here, more than hockey believe it or not) they get hardly any money, yet bob sled people get tons. how many bob sledders are there in canada? not a hell of a lot. does this fairly represent people's interests, or does it represent greed for a medal count.

i wish they would stop focussing on medals, and focus on just competing against the rest of the world in a great event like the olympics. to me the olympics are about trying your best and not about getting medals.

chris

carlsson
July 8th, 2004, 05:28 AM
Dunno if Totti really is the "worst" in his discipline. At least he didn't spit someone right into the face from what I understand.

I think most countries have the same philosophy about which athletes to grant money to. Ideally it should be those who have a chance for gold in a sport where sponsors are not interested. A top athlete in a popular sport will probably have enough money to keep on with the activity anyway, and for those who are so-so it would only be welfare to give money.

Sweden is sending a significantly smaller group this year than to Sydney 2000, although travelling distances etc are shorter. I don't know if that would be a factor though.

vic user
July 9th, 2004, 06:55 AM
too bad about all that sponsor stuff and money being involved in what should be amateur sport

i am also against sending NHL players and the like. i like only amateurs going, but the line is so blurred now.

and with the push for gold and sponsor money, people wonder why there is rampant drug use in olympics??

chris

carlsson
July 12th, 2004, 12:55 AM
I think more or less everyone who are qualified for the Olympics these days are professional, using the old definition of the word. In the 40'ties, you would get banned for life if you accepted as much as $10 for winning a competition.

If it is about money, where should the line be drawn? State grants, paid expenses, charity donations, accepting no money at all? Is it about how much you're allowed to practise in your sports - if you are unemployed or for other reasons can do it full-time, you should not compete against those who have a day job to attend to?

Drugs and doping I'm also against, but I think that even the most money pure amateur would be convinced to try something that doesn't have side effects, can't be tracked but gives you an instant boost on performance. Maybe even more so those who have a day job and can't build muscles, reflexes, skills etc all day.

Of course, everyone should compete on equal terms when it comes to access to the arena, living, food and no starters money. Maybe prize and record money, but everyone should be eligible, unlike in some golf tournaments when an amateur player wins but has to be excluded from the official winners' list (and no prize) because he or she is an .. amateur.

carlsson
July 31st, 2004, 02:53 PM
Oh, on the subject of starters' money, on Friday I watched yet another one of the athletics meets before the Olympics (not sure which meet it was, since reports said that three different international meets were held on the same evening, all in the UK, or I misunderstood something).

Anyway, Yelena Isinbayeva set a new world record in pole vault, 4.90 m which is an increase by one cm over her previous record. This time she had competition from Svetlana Feofanova up to this height, so it was part of the original plans to go 4.60 - 4.70 - 4.80 - 4.90. After successfully clearing 4.90 with lots of room to go, Yelena had no reason to try even higher as she already had received the $50,000 one gets for a world record. Better save 4.91 or 4.92 for the next competition and cash as much as possible. I think Sergey Bubka did something similar when he was competiting, but he seldom had 5-10 cm safety margin...

I was thinking that if starters, prize and record money are meant to be granted, maybe the arrangers could make a table on how much you get:

* $20,000 if you break the record by 1 cm / 0.01 s / 0.1 s (depending on event)
* $30,000 if you break the record by 2 cm / 0.03 s / 0.5 s etc
* $50,000 if you break the record by 5 cm / 0.10 s / 1 s and so on

Ok, this is much off-topic and nothing us in the VC Forum could ever steer, but would it make sense to pay after performance and not placing as a way to give the audience (!) the best possible run for the money? It is almost like the result lists in decathlon and heptalon where you get a number of points depending on your result, not your position compared with the others.

vic user
August 3rd, 2004, 04:43 AM
i wonder if you could also tie it in with personal bests as well?

i have always wished they would adopt some kind of performance based wage system in the NHL.

too many times you see a player play great on their final year of contract, sign a big fat new contract, and then screw around for a couple of seasons after that.

give everyone the same rate, and then factor in performance bonusses.

chris

CP/M User
August 4th, 2004, 02:30 PM
As long as Manchester loose I'll be happy. (ER? Is that the same
soccer league?)

Cheers,
CP/M User.

vic user
August 4th, 2004, 04:18 PM
i am not a fan of man u as well, but they sure have some fine players.

especially like ryan giggs, imo.

wish he was canadian, but who am i kidding? he would simply end up playing for wales or england anyway, via some grandparent being born there or something :)

chris

carlsson
August 4th, 2004, 11:56 PM
What about Canada invading or buying out Wales from Great Britain? You're all part of the Commonwealth, so it is not totally unthinkable.

Now it is about eight days to the Olympics. For some reason, I thought it starts tomorrow (Friday), but I must have misplaced the dates. The latest report says that only 40% of the tickets are sold, but the most attractive events surely are sold out since long ago. Some of the arenas are not quite finished yet - lacking electricity, dirt in the swimming pool etc - but the Greek have at least a week to finish.

The costs were projected around $5.5 billion, but have rocketed to $7.2 billion and some analytics believe it will not end until $12 billion, which maybe makes the Greek asking the European Union for support. Hm, although it is a fun event, it is a shame that it has to cost so much, but I suppose in these figures, there are more than a handful people making a big profit as entrepreneurs and caretakers.

CP/M User
August 5th, 2004, 12:59 AM
"carlsson" wrote:

> What about Canada invading or buying out Wales from
> Great Britain? You're all part of the Commonwealth, so
> it is not totally unthinkable.

'Nor is Australia or New Zealand! You wouldn't want to see
that happening now would you? If that were to happen then
all reminant remains of Aust & NZ would be wipped off the
face of the earth & would be the biggest hole in the Earth.
Remember Easter Island?

> Now it is about eight days to the Olympics. For some
> reason, I thought it starts tomorrow (Friday), but I must
> have misplaced the dates. The latest report says that
> only 40% of the tickets are sold, but the most attractive
> events surely are sold out since long ago. Some of the
> arenas are not quite finished yet - lacking electricity,
> dirt in the swimming pool etc - but the Greek have at
> least a week to finish.

It's hard to believe we rely on so much technology just
for the Electricity. Back in 1896, Electricity was in it's
infancy, I can't imagine what those Swimming Pools were
like either. Back in the Ancient Times it must of been so
different (no Electricity - unless it was harnessed from the
Gods), Men were only allowed to watch the games since
the athletes were naked. From what I remembered from
school though, was the crowds were supposed to be huge.

> The costs were projected around $5.5 billion, but have
> rocketed to $7.2 billion and some analytics believe it
> will not end until $12 billion, which maybe makes the
> Greek asking the European Union for support. Hm,
> although it is a fun event, it is a shame that it has to
> cost so much, but I suppose in these figures, there are
> more than a handful people making a big profit as
> entrepreneurs and caretakers.

Now it's all big money, big business. They show it on telly
(well the bits they want to show you, not the bits you want
to see) & all for something which dates from the ancient
times. Sure, it'd be more professional athlete wise, but
the idea's virtually the same. There'd be more sports to
contend in wouldn't there?

As for Drugs in sport, as an Australian, I have no pity for
those who take drugs regardless of relign, colour, race,
even if their Australian (I don't give special
conseriderations to -ANYONE-), they know they are doing
the wrong thing (even if it's a headache tablet), cause
it should be based on the Athlete on the day & if they just
can't cut it, then so be it!

Cheers,
CP/M User.

carlsson
August 6th, 2004, 05:11 AM
What about Canada invading or buying out Wales
If that were to happen then all reminant remains of Aust & NZ would be wipped off the face of the earth & would be the biggest hole in the Earth.

Err.. I didn't suggest a war, just some "redistribution of property" (in this case Ryan Giggs and whatever else Wales has to offer). If for example Canada would like to rule New Zeeland, blowing it into pieces would not make much left of it to rule over. :wink: But no, I was not entirely serious. Much easier for Chris to apply for Welsh citizenship and get a new favourite football team. In athletics, it is perfectly possible for a country to buy a star athlete and make him compete for the new country, but FIFA does not yet allow this, so moving Giggs would not help.


Men were only allowed to watch the games since the athletes were naked. From what I remembered from school though, was the crowds were supposed to be huge.
Maybe there was a connection between nudity and big crowds of men? :P

CP/M User
August 11th, 2004, 04:28 AM
"carlsson" wrote:

>>> What about Canada invading or buying out Wales

>> If that were to happen then all reminant remains of
>> Aust & NZ would be wipped off the face of the earth
>> & would be the biggest hole in the Earth.

> Err.. I didn't suggest a war, just some "redistribution
> of property" (in this case Ryan Giggs and whatever
> else Wales has to offer). If for example Canada would
> like to rule New Zeeland, blowing it into pieces would
> not make much left of it to rule over. ;-) But no,
> I was not entirely serious. Much easier for Chris to
> apply for Welsh citizenship and get a new favourite
> football team. In athletics, it is perfectly possible for a
> country to buy a star athlete and make him compete
> for the new country, but FIFA does not yet allow this,
> so moving Giggs would not help.

Sorry, I didn't explain myself properly. From an
environmental point of view, if Australia were taken
over, the environment would never get fixed! ;-(

It's a disaster which occured from the days of the settlers
unfortunately. Though it's all a matter of how were we
mean't to know?

>> Men were only allowed to watch the games since the
>> athletes were naked. From what I remembered from
>> school though, was the crowds were supposed to be
>> huge.

> Maybe there was a connection between nudity and big
> crowds of men? :P

You mean it's something which has been going on for
that long? No wonder I don't want to expose myself to
-anybody- & -everybody- around!

Cheers,
CP/M User.

carlsson
August 12th, 2004, 04:49 AM
Sorry, I didn't explain myself properly. From an environmental point of view, if Australia were taken over, the environment would never get fixed! ;-(
Oh, you mean new animals and plants get implanted, overtaking the native ones? Yeah, I know about the rabbits et. al. Some nature program on TV told about how you try to extinguish the rabbits, and that one of the only and best natural enemies is the dingo, but

1) the dingo can hunt just any animal, maybe preferring slower ones
2) many dingo are shot for selling the skins

They had tried to implant fox in Australia, but while the fox can hunt rabbits elsewhere in the world, those in Oz had found easier (native) targets and thus the fox itself had become a nature danger rather than solution.

Oh well. Looking back at the past 30-40 years of wars, I don't know if introducing new species into a foreign country has been one of the most prominent actions after a war has been "won". Rather exploiting the natural assets of the new land.

CP/M User
August 12th, 2004, 02:29 PM
"carlsson" wrote:

>> Sorry, I didn't explain myself properly. From an
>> environmental point of view, if Australia were
>> taken over, the environment would never get
>> fixed! ;-(

> Oh, you mean new animals and plants get
> implanted, overtaking the native ones? Yeah, I
> know about the rabbits et. al. Some nature
> program on TV told about how you try to
> extinguish the rabbits, and that one of the only
> and best natural enemies is the dingo, but

Heh! Don't I just change the subject so well.

Rabbits were introduced with settlers.

> 1) the dingo can hunt just any animal, maybe
> preferring slower ones
> 2) many dingo are shot for selling the skins

As far as I know, Dingos are more common in
warmer areas of Australia, it's an interesting
point raised, cause I don't recall having seeing
any Dingos in our State (unless there held
captive, or are a pet or something).

> They had tried to implant fox in Australia, but
> while the fox can hunt rabbits elsewhere in the
> world, those in Oz had found easier (native)
> targets and thus the fox itself had become a
> nature danger rather than solution.

Actually, these were introduced with settlers too &
were actually brought over to that they had
something to hunt. Foxes & feral cats have had a
devistation effect to the local wildlife, reducing a
significant number of creatures which hunt other
creatures, which results in an over abunance of
a creature. That in turn has a bad balance onto
the environment.

> Oh well. Looking back at the past 30-40 years
> of wars, I don't know if introducing new species
> into a foreign country has been one of the most
> prominent actions after a war has been "won".
> Rather exploiting the natural assets of the new
> land.

Certainally it's not a war thing, but like you said if
one country takes over another country, then the
ol' one would struggle to survive that's more after
a war would occur. In Wars diseases could be spead
more easily. One such disease introduced here,
unfortunately, might of been quite by accident, but
has serious effects to which brings our plant life to
it's demise by attacking it's system. It's so small
that a microscope is required, but can be spead
easily from Humans/Animals without realising.

Cheers,
CP/M User.

carlsson
August 13th, 2004, 08:22 AM
In Wars diseases could be spead more easily.
So make sure these enemies invading your land are sterilized. :P

As an attempt to steer the argument somewhat back to sports and Olympics, I read today that the hotel in Cyprus where parts of the Swedish team is staying before the games open, has a master chief in the kitchen and a certificate that the cleaning staff keeps everything really clean (no risk of diseases or otherwise). It is important, as noone of the athletes want to risk illness due to the food or habitat. I think I have never heard about a cleanness certificate though.