Yeah, that's what I was thinking of as well. It's really hard to remember a game as poor as that. Even the pundits said it was ****. They didn't even try and dress it up as a "fascinating contest", it was just that bad.Ukraine v Switzerland in 2006 may well be worst game I have ever seen, and I have had a season ticket in League 2.
I don't think they're as bad as they were in 2010, remember them having a 4-4 draw with Iceland not long ago. Basel are a properly attacking team so hopefully some of that comes through at national level.The Swiss are actually one of the worst teams to watch. Their 1-0 win over Spain in 2010, which gladdened the heart in a "nice seeing the underdogs winning" kinda way, was painful to actually have to sit through. They play with the mindset of the Italians married to the skill level of the English, which is a particularly unwinning combo.
How they're seeded when (say) said Italians (winners in 2006 and Euro runners-up in 2012) and the Netherlands (runners-up last time) aren't is rather mind boggling.
There's at least 10 teams from Africa and Asia.I don't think there are too many weak teams who have made the Cup and none of the big teams missed out, which is great. Ukraine at 20th in the rankings is the highest team to miss out and Cameroon are the lowest ranked country at 59th. I don't really understand the rankings though, have Brazil been punished a fair bit by not having to qualify?
There isn't even 10 teams from those two confederations participating in the Cup.There's at least 10 teams from Africa and Asia.
They got a filthy draw last time out though. And the time before that too.Ivory Coast have been pretty poor for quite a while though haven't they? They were rank at the last WC.
And they have Gervinho.
I think people have this mistaken tendency to look at weaker sides star names and proclaim them to be hardly weak.There isn't even 10 teams from those two confederations participating in the Cup.
Ivory Coast, Ghana, Japan to name a few are hardly weak either.
I suppose we might have a different definition of weak. You might claim any team that is very unlikely to make the final as weak while I'm hopeful that there aren't any teams who have 3 losses, score no goals and let in 12+.I think people have this mistaken tendency to look at weaker sides star names and proclaim them to be hardly weak.
I'm quite confident in predicting that no non-European or South American side will get beyond the 2nd round.
Yeah but that's not the biggest claim in the world because in theory that claim (as near as makes little difference) boils down to saying that no non-European or South American side is in the world's top 8, which I think is fairly obviously true.I think people have this mistaken tendency to look at weaker sides star names and proclaim them to be hardly weak.
I'm quite confident in predicting that no non-European or South American side will get beyond the 2nd round.
Crate of beer of your choice against. With four prank-seeds it's easy to see a 2nd round match a la USA v Ghana.I'm quite confident in predicting that no non-European or South American side will get beyond the 2nd round.