Because in a knockout competition 1 game in whicb you werent the better team costs you the competition. Wigan were better than Man City in that match. How can anyone think they werent? The WHOLE POINT of a league competition is it demonstrates which team is the best team on a more consistant basis. Thats what a league is.
Spain won the World Cup in 2010 but yet still lost. Does that mean Switzerland were the best team? Because they beat the team that won it. How about Chelsea winning the Champions' League but finishing 5th in the Prem?
Using statistical logic, if the games really did reveal which team was best, an intransitive triplet could not occur. http://phys.org/news173596887.html
Because qualification came earlier. At that point in which they won they were the best. I dont see how this is difficult to understand.
Erm no. It wasnt a knock out game. On that day Switzerland were better than Spain. If it had happened outside the group stage then Spain wouldnt have won the world cup. Almost every single year a team that win the any domestic league loses a game but they're the best team over the duration of the league competition. Were we better than Liverpool this season? No. We were better than them in one of our games versus them. Do you actually understand what a league is? Nice bit of editing on the 'Im not arguing this time'
No, mine is logic. You deduction is based on opinion. I'll ask you again - how can a team that achieves the sole aim of the game better than the other one NOT be the better team in that game?
Because, as you seem to not be able understand, it is possible for a team to have greater ability than another team, but yet still lose to that other team.
Who mentioned ability? I've never once said that a team can't have better ability than another team yet still lose. But on the day if they lose they didnt show that ability to achieve the aims of football as well as the other one. You seem to keep missing it so i'll keep saying it - the aim of football is to score more goals than the opposition. If a team does that then they are better in that one game. If they do it more consistently throughout a competition then they're the best team in that competition. It's the simplest concept and the entire reason we actually have games and competitions - to prove who is the best. Using your logic teams might as well not actually play each other and instead we'll rate ability on paper and decide who should win.
Qatar WC 2022. Now it appears that France are embroilled in this scandal. Uefa president Platini under pressure to explain secret meetings. Australia have been put on alert as potential hosts subject to the reports findings due / being finished off by June 9th.
Check out the England press conference with Woy and Lampard that has just finished. Some classic questions from the South American media. It was so funny. A transcript of it is to be found on the BBC sport website. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/football/27685756
Oxlade-Chamberlain could be out for anything between 10 and 21 days reports now in Miami. I would keep him as the stand-bys are worse. Ox on one leg is better imo. Sir Trevor Brooking is to retire from his role with the FA after the World Cup.
Stuart Pearce has said that picking Luke Shaw ahead of Ashley Cole is a mistake. Most would agree Stu. Sadly Woy thinks otherwise. Confirmation now from France that Ribery is out of there 23 man squad due to injury. The list of big names missing is getting bigger.
Just looking at some World Cup betting. Suarez 25/1 to be top scorer, 1/4 odds for top 4... So, £50 each way means £100 outlay, £312.50 return if he's top 4, £1,562.50 if he is top scorer. Good bet, no?
I fear what a fit Suarez will do to us. If we get beat by Italy then it could be all over after just 2 games.
Suarez could tear our defence a new one, if him honest. Could get a decent haul against Costa Rica too. After the season he's had, I think he'll be up there with the top scorers. That is, of course, if he doesn't bite someone in the first game...
