:-k

No.....Vuvuzela's and the Jabulani ruined it.

this even though my two favourite teams made it to the final it still pisses me off.

yes the best world cup of all time, its an African World cup =d> =d> =d> =d> =d>






Edited by goulam: 12/7/2010 07:42:59 AM

Poll lacks "Not by a fucking long shot" option.

This.

Group stages were arse, it picked up in the Knockout rounds, but the Final pretty much sums up this world cup.

Far too many polls recently.




Spot on.

Funky for president!

Couldn't have phrased it better.

Definitely not. Germany was much much better in football terms.

I will start by saying that i am the only person i know who watched the matches and hardly noticed the vuvuzelas. and i think the ball was fine, and lack of preperation showed. I can think of only one goal which i would have said was caused by it, that being the forlan free kick spinning too ways.

Secondly, i only started watching football in my early teens so Japan was the first world cup i realy watched. This by far has been the worst world cup i've seen. The football was lower than the previous two, which has been sad considering there were more stronger teams leading into this tournement. The drama was very much so lacking, and i cannot think of many world cup "classics" (the dutch brazil possibly being one of the few). Of the top of my head, i can remember Japan VS AUST- Italy VS Germany- Holland VS Portugal- Germany VS argentina, Argentina VS Mexico from the last tournement.

The facilities were the best by a long way as was the hospitality of the people

For me yes becasue España won!

Considering I've only watched two World Cups, Germany was far better than South Africa not only because there was no vuvzelas but because there was a much better atmosphere at the games and the playing quality was a lot better too.

Who said yes hahaha.

Was good but if anyone thinks this was the best World Cup they have not seen a World Cup before

+1

True the football in the group stage was a shame, the ball and the horns killed it off.

Not the best WC by far
Will remember Spain's perfomances v Germany as one of the best, than Germany v Argentina and also Uruguay V Gana especially hand ball and what come after.Also most Forlan's goals. This is all part of WC Football?
Vuvuzvelas hope this is last we heard of them but I accept them as they are part of S/A culture same as Mining hats and large glases.

Would like to forget:
1/ The Ball
2/ Refereeng controversy England's Goal
3/ Red/Yellow cards in group stages
4/ France's coach not shaking hands with S/A coach (Perrera?)
5/ Most of all Pim's coaching!

Well the thing is this is the first world cup i really watched. So I can't really judge.

Unlucky you, really haha.

it was that fucking octopus that ruined it for me :evil:

Agreed again.

I had no issues with them either, I only had an issue with the SBS commentating.

I also think the whole 'the ball is rubbish' arbument is a load of bollocks being spouted by the teams who were unable to play with it due to short sighted exclusive ball use signings.

In terms of football quality, probably closer to one of the worst. Germany were really the only team that "did" it for me this time. Have to admire the way Spain totally controlled the play, but would like to see more goals from them.
Germany '06, and USA '94 for mine (except the '94 final).

facilities are you kidding?

did you even see those space ship stadiums from Korea & Japan... now there was some fucking facilities

i don't think the Vuvezela was that big of a deal, the ball to an extent but i don't think any teams really came and reached there full potential (besides Germany) it was like as if they were all going through the motions and never reaching top gear which was rather disappointing that only one team did so... quality of football was eh when you compare it to the quality football that was created in 02' and 06', there wasn't a match that really captured the imagination besides Germany against Argentina for mine (and abit of France v South Africa)... like look back at the 06' there was a bundle of top quality entertaining matches i.e Germany 4-2 Costa Rica, any of Spain's group matches, the two Australia matches, Spain France Rd of 16 etc etc etc... all in all rather dull and dissapointing

Edited by The Doctor: 12/7/2010 05:32:42 PM

Overall it was an average WC. Most games were dominated by defensive tactics. Teams like Brazil, France, England, Holland, Italy, with so much talent, playing mostly rubbish football. The 1/4 finals were the definate highlight. The Jabulani was terrible, so many mis-timed crosses and passes by the best players in the world. Could not have been merely coincidental. Wouldn't be a WC without the usual refereeing contoversies etc. Makes for great conversation. The Lampard 'goal' and Suarez red card the picks.

Friends that attended SA did say that it was an awesome experience. Very 'African' unlike the precision and perfection of Germany.

Best WC for me was Mexico in '86 by an absolute mile. Probably just at a time b4 football was completely taken over by the marketing and tv guru's.



Edited by smfc and proud: 12/7/2010 05:51:28 PM

As bad as this thread should be a question of how bad, not best ever?

For me, this was the worst I've seen. Aside from the Vuvuzelas & Jabilani this is probably the first World Cup where so many world stars have failed to fire. From memory, at all previous world cups the acclaimed players lit up the tournaments with their skills. Not this time. Mexico 70 still the yardstick by which all other tournaments are measured.

This WC was soo far behind Germany is nearly all aspects. In 2006 there was a football atmosphere, without the spin.

SA and FIFA love to tell us how good it was and how the country proved us all wrong, whereas a good event does the talking for itself. In an interview with the BBC, a FIFA rep said that in this WC FIFA did just about all the organising, which is something that made it 90% harder than 4 years earlier. Germany ran the organising and only double checked things with FIFA when required. He was on the verge of saying it was a disaster, yet diplomacy held him back. You could hear it is his voice though, with frustration creeping in.

For all the talk Danny Jordaan did about the organising his team did, I think more thanks should go to FIFA for trying to save the event. It was not looking good for a long time, and at times looked close to falling apart at the seems, but miraculously it did finish, to the best of their ability.

Africa did a decent job in hosting, but I am sure FIFA would agree that it was all too early for them to host it. If they had their chance to do it all again for the 2010 event, I am sure it would be elsewhere.


Edited by Heart_fan: 13/7/2010 03:20:51 PM

Edited by Heart_fan: 13/7/2010 03:21:14 PM

People say that yes, but by saying 'African' it is just a way of saying its better than they had expected it to be. Going in with very low expectations and that being exceeded is not really being a true guide of the events success. Every comment that is made is that it is a great 'African' WC, which is a differenciation from a great WC.

For South Africans, the true fact is that crime will likely skyrocket again as the police are moved away and the jobs dry up also. The whole bringing people together message will work just as well as the '95 Rugby WC did, which in the end saw short term gains and long term pain again. I hope I am wrong, but thats the common feeling it seems.

Edited by Heart_fan: 13/7/2010 03:28:46 PM

For me, it was the best World Cup ever for as long as I have been alive.