Isegrim

Gemmill jinxed it tbh. Double wanker fancy dan lecturer accountant he is.

Good result, we could easily have conceded four or five, but kept it interesting until the end...

Hooray, a wasted freekick by Emre...

Still thinking we don't need to score tonight tbh...

You could sell it to some Shpursh fan, if only they were to send enough fans over there. Though, maybe Baggio is interested...

Thankfully a goalless draw is enough for us...

Sevilla just getting the equaliser in the fourth minute of injury time and forcing the game into extra time... Goal by the 'keeper I forgot to say.

It was clear, that last week wasn't a true reflection of their style and attacking ability. It's typical Dutch stuff. We really could have done in avoiding this stupid second goal last week. Hopefully Glenda gives them a right bollocking now.

To be fair, that was rather the boards fault than Hitzfeld's. He was just spending the money given to him and I doubt he had any insight view into the balance sheets. Also a lot of mistakes who put Dortmund on the brink came in the time after Hitzfeld, where they kept on spending but without the necessary success to fund transfers, i.e. missing out the CL.

Ok, that's sensible of course. It was just after one fan more or less considered Wenger to be an average manager as he "just" won 3 titles in the English league (+ various cups), but failed in Europe. I think that is a bit harsh. Hitzfeld might be the better tactician and motivator, but when it comes to Europe there isn't that much between the teams and a lot down to the better form on the day, the right tactics and luck. Even for a Jorman team I'd pick Wenger ahead of Hitzfeld as I regard Wenger as the more progressive type.

Coming from a discussion with Bayernfans on a Jorman forum after Hitzfeld signed a new contract. What do you consider is the bigger achievement. What Wenger has done at Arsenal in the last ten years or what Hitzfeld achieved with Bayern and Dortmund. And if you look at both who would you rather want to manage Newcastle.

Also regarding Zathras main grief, the ranking of the USA below a country like Scotland... If you look on a short term base, i.e. the results between March 2006 and March 2007, you get this: Scotland W 4, D 1, L 2 USA W 4, D 2, L 4

The ELO ratings make as much (or as little) sense to me as the FIFA system. I don't see that much of a diference in that regard. I guess that because of the huge difference between the structure of all confederations, but especially between UEFA and the rest, it will be impossible to get a "fair" rating system. The only "fair" system would be for every nation to play every nation, but that is impossible. And imho UEFA is the most competitive confederation as there are not only two teams who dominate everything as is in most other confederation (maybe with the exception of Africa). And with teams only playing a few games every year I think a four-year-circle is the best reflection of world football as only this secures that competitive games from the top teams of all confederations against each other (i.e. during the world cup) are taken into consideration and give a reflection of the strength of the confederations.

Allthough the US can't really complain imho. Mexico got seeded because of their involvement in the Confederations Cup 2005 (although this is a shit competition) and did well. All what the US (as they are the better team) had to do was to qualify instead of Mexico there. I don't think either deserved a seed. I'm not complaining that Mexico got a seed and the US didn't; I'm simply complaining that Mexico got a seed. So what do you want? First you are complaining about "the formula" that means that European results do have more weight than Concacaf ones. Then you are complaining that Mexico (despite being a Concacaf team) getting seeded at the World Cup as as a reflection of their past success in friendlies, the Gold Cup (and as a result of this in the Confederations Cup). You have totally lost me, really.

Speaking of it, there is hardly a day at the moment here in Jormany without clubs confirming signings for next season...

And so is the rest of us modern not tynesidebased KK-double-wanking-bandwagon jumpers...

I can see them scoring in the first 20 seconds now...

Practicing shooutouts wouldn't do English football any harm though...

It was tested on various youth levels in Germany when I was young but got cancelled after only one year (iirc), because it doesn't really make a difference.

Allthough the US can't really complain imho. Mexico got seeded because of their involvement in the Confederations Cup 2005 (although this is a shit competition) and did well. All what the US (as they are the better team) had to do was to qualify instead of Mexico there.

Sorry, but I still don't understand what point you are trying to make. The ranking is calculated on a pure mathematical base of points accredited to matches over a certain period. So the fact that America are dropping down despite winning a game can for example be down for certain games from four years ago not being considered any more or something similar. And the fact that Mexico are ranked higer is just because they collected more points in that period. Nothing else (well, of course you could consider cheating...).

Has nothing to do with Mr. Jekyll Leazes though...

Every team in Germany does it. They only have to install convertible seats in case they qualify for a European competition. The "funny" thing is only that we still have fences...

Don't worry, I guess the US will play some GREAT tournament or qualification games agaist some Caribbean islands soon and shoot up in the rankings as they always do... U-S-A U-S-A... Yes, because that's what I was saying in my post. You only wonder why the USA dropped down while other teams stayed in their place... And this is just down to the way of the calculation. I guess in the cases of Spain and England their results were unaffected while in the case of the USA some positive results from the past weren't included in the period of calculation any more. http://fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/rank/pr...,2540,3,00.html And yes, friendly matches do count, although with not much importance, but as I said, you'll probably soon shoot up due to participating in a major tournament like the Concacaf-Cup and getting loads of points for it. The whole ranking is pure nonsense - but especially if people try to take in serious in any way...