Argentina result tonight....

Bobalicious93

Lost 6-1 to Bolivia :eek::eek::eek:

So does this confirm to us that Maradona has no clue when it comes to management, or is it too soon?

JPA

Could be the freaky altitude in Bolivia.
But I haven't seen the match or anything so I don't know.

Bubs101

Bolivia have a sick home record because of the altitude of Laz Paz. Even still 6 is a bit much

Headshot

I found out the score in another thread:mad: (spoiler needed imo)

im honestly shocked by that score

Maradona played 3 won 3
tbh he shouldnt have gotten the job in the first place,I was hoping Argentina would win the WC but I highly doubt it now

Elonex

Probably shows Maradona you can't play 3-4-3 all out attack away from home

mike65

Brazil were held in Ecuador and Argentina lost both against high altitude opposition. Something to remember when betting (I forgot).

SlickRic

~Rebel~

anyone know the Argentinian starting 11?

Mgoraf

Juan Carrizo, Javier Zanetti, Gabriel Heinze, Emiliano Papa, Martin Demichelis, Maxi Rodriguez (Angel Di Maria 56'), Javier Mascherano, Luis Gonzalez (Marcos Angeleri 68'), Fernando Gago, Lionel Messi and Carlos Tevez (Daniel Montenegro 75').

mike65

No wonder they lost!

anonymous_joe

That doesn;t sound like the line-up for a 3-4-3.

In fairness, playing at altitude leads to odd results.

Mgoraf

Was 433 I think :S

redout

Argentina my arse. Sure did anyone notice Portugals group ? They are in a spot of bother to say the least.


1. Denmark 5Pld 13PTS
2. Hungary 6Pld 13PTS
3. Portugal 5Pld 6PTS
4. Sweden 4Pld 6PTS

Headshot

enjoy

mike65

Delighted that Ronaldo will not get the chance to wind up Rooney in 2012!

pickarooney

Sweet. Hardly a high-speed encouter

x in the city

lol


ya well playing at 21,000 feet or whatever it is cant be easy.

Id say Irish players would die at that level, ears popping for 90 minutes, dazed and confused...

bit like argie really.

Headshot

mike65 wrote: »

Delighted that Ronaldo will not get the chance to wind up Rooney in 2012!

thats queiroz gone

hopefully people will see he's ****ing useless

joe123

I thought Fifa were banning matches played at grounds over a certain altitude?

pickarooney

joe123 wrote: »

I thought Fifa were banning matches played at grounds over a certain altitude?

They did for a while because Pele and his mates bitched about it being soo unfair to have to play in the mountains, but then they saw sense and allowed it again. It's not as though places like Bhutan can go play at sea level.

x in the city

Argentina looked a mess, that altitude has to had the whole team messed up.

must be impossible to compete with bolivia when they are at home. you would want to train at the summit of K2 for a few weeks to have any chance

kinaldo

Maradona was all for these countries playing at altitude.

It will be interesting to see his reaction and how he bounces back.

This is surely one of Argentina's worst ever humiliations.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

5starpool

redout wrote: »

Argentina my arse. Sure did anyone notice Portugals group ? They are in a spot of bother to say the least.


1. Denmark 5Pld 13PTS
2. Hungary 6Pld 13PTS
3. Portugal 5Pld 6PTS
4. Sweden 4Pld 6PTS

Uniteds next manager imo

pierrot

It's your home advantage any you are entitled to that (the altitude). Just in the same way as a team from a warm climate going to play in Russia for example.

Bubs101

To give you an idea, Bolivia have only lost one game at home this campaign but haven't won one away. In 2002 qualifying Bolivia were unbeaten at home, beat Argentina but lost every away game.

Overall it makes no difference to the group because Bolivia are too bad to qualify for any big tournament and everyone beats them at home and struggles away so it balances out

Craft25

redout wrote: »

Argentina my arse. Sure did anyone notice Portugals group ? They are in a spot of bother to say the least.


1. Denmark 5Pld 13PTS
2. Hungary 6Pld 13PTS
3. Portugal 5Pld 6PTS
4. Sweden 4Pld 6PTS

What's the betting portugal finish 2nd & we get them in a playoff!

Maradona is a total mess! or at least he was last time i saw him speak1

tdv

Argentina's lack of Riquelme was seen against Bolivia in La Paz. Everyone speaks of how fast Messi and Agüero are, but in a match like that, you need a player that gives the team a pause.... & Riquelme is great at slowing play down & giving everyone a breather.

Galvasean

Wow, when first saw the OP I dismissed it as an April Fools day joke

newballsplease

Both great athletes

pickarooney

Bubs101 wrote: »

Overall it makes no difference to the group because Bolivia are too bad to qualify for any big tournament and everyone beats them at home and struggles away so it balances out

They were in the world cup in 94. Remember Marco Etcheverry, Bolivia's greatest ever player finally qualified for the WC in the States, got injured, recovered miraculously in time to make it for the group stages and got sent off after 10 minutes?

Bubs101

pickarooney wrote: »

They were in the world cup in 94. Remember Marco Etcheverry, Bolivia's greatest ever player finally qualified for the WC in the States, got injured, recovered miraculously in time to make it for the group stages and got sent off after 10 minutes?

Completely forgot about that though I suppose considering how small the South American qualifying group is that every team will make it at some stage

kinaldo

Bubs101 wrote: »

Completely forgot about that though I suppose considering how small the South American qualifying group is that every team will make it at some stage

It's by far the toughest qualifying section in the world. Given that Brazil and Argentina will always dominate, that leaves 2 out of 8 to go through. I don't think Venezuala have ever made it, and Ecuador only made it for the first time in 2006 (they also play at very high altitude in Quito).

Edit: forgot that there's also the playoff spot which traditionally pits Uruguay against the Aussies.

Quint

pickarooney wrote: »

They were in the world cup in 94. Remember Marco Etcheverry, Bolivia's greatest ever player finally qualified for the WC in the States, got injured, recovered miraculously in time to make it for the group stages and got sent off after 10 minutes?

I remember that, Erwin Sanchez was usefull aswell

patmac

Nothing to say really.
From FIFA.com
Diego Maradona said every Bolivian goal was a stab in his heart after his Argentina side suffered a stunning 6-1 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa™ qualifying defeat at high altitude against the rank outsiders.

Maradona, who avoided blaming the altitude of La Paz which lies 3,600 metres above sea level, gave credit to his opponents and said he suffered alongside the Argentine public. Before becoming Argentina coach, Maradona had backed Bolivia's campaign on matches at high altitude, taking part in a charity match in La Paz alongside President Evo Morales last year. The ban was later overturned.

"I suffered with them (the Argentine public)," Maradona told reporters. "Every Bolivia goal was a stab in my heart. If we had dreamed this was going to happen before the game, we would have thought it was impossible," added Maradona, who himself appeared to be struggling for breath in a packed news conference room.

"We have to give merit to Bolivia who were better than us in every part of the field," he went on. "There is nothing to say. They beat us well and now we have to start all over again. Bolivia played a great game and hit the target with every attack. They all played well from the goalkeeper to the last substitute."



As for shock results what about group 1 in Africa:
28/03/09 16:00 Accra Togo 1:0 (1:0) Cameroon
28/03/09 20:00 Casablanca Morocco 1:2 (0:2) Gabon

Meteor will be happy.

Bubs101

kinaldo wrote: »

It's by far the toughest qualifying section in the world. Given that Brazil and Argentina will always dominate, that leaves 2 out of 8 to go through. I don't think Venezuala have ever made it, and Ecuador only made it for the first time in 2006 (they also play at very high altitude in Quito).

Edit: forgot that there's also the playoff spot which traditionally pits Uruguay against the Aussies.

It's not the hardest, Europe is. In South America, there are so few teams, only two dominant ones and 4 and a half places that it means it's much more likely that a team will have qualified for one World Cup than Europe. You only need to hit form once and once you hit that form you don't need to dominate the group, just finish fourth. In Europe a bad team needs to hit form, beat out one or two or Europe's best teams and finish top because if they get the playoffs they're probably going to get another top European team who'll have more knockout pedigree

kinaldo

Bubs101 wrote: »

It's not the hardest, Europe is. In South America, there are so few teams, only two dominant ones and 4 and a half places that it means it's much more likely that a team will have qualified for one World Cup than Europe. You only need to hit form once and once you hit that form you don't need to dominate the group, just finish fourth. In Europe a bad team needs to hit form, beat out one or two or Europe's best teams and finish top because if they get the playoffs they're probably going to get another top European team who'll have more knockout pedigree

In South America they have to play 18 games, many in extreme conditions of heat and altitude unlike anything in Europe. Over 5 campaigns it may be likely that a team like Peru or Ecuador can sneak in, but that doens't make it an easier campaign than European qualification, and is nothing compared to the amount of times you will see a team like Scotland or Norway qualify out of an easy group. The seeding system here also means that Europe's elite have it far easier than Argentina and Brazil.

Bubs101

kinaldo wrote: »

In South America they have to play 18 games, many in extreme conditions of heat and altitude unlike anything in Europe. Over 5 campaigns it may be likely that a team like Peru or Ecuador can sneak in, but that doens't make it an easier campaign than European qualification, and is nothing compared to the amount of times you will see a team like Scotland or Norway qualify out of an easy group. The seeding system here also means that Europe's elite have it far easier than Argentina and Brazil.

They grew up in the heat and altitude, it doesn't affect them as much. They play the same opposition each campaign and every campaign which makes it easier to prepare. I think it's harder for the average teams, like Paraguay and Uruguay who would probably have a better time of it in Europe but for Venezuela, Bolivia, Peru and ecuador it's much better. As for the seeding system making it harder for Brazil and Argentina, it doesn't really because there's so much room for error. How terrible would one of their campaigns have to be to not finish 5th? It's much easier for them

luckylucky

kinaldo wrote: »

In South America they have to play 18 games, many in extreme conditions of heat and altitude unlike anything in Europe. Over 5 campaigns it may be likely that a team like Peru or Ecuador can sneak in, but that doens't make it an easier campaign than European qualification, and is nothing compared to the amount of times you will see a team like Scotland or Norway qualify out of an easy group. The seeding system here also means that Europe's elite have it far easier than Argentina and Brazil.

I'd agree it's a more arduous qualifyign campaign but I'm not so sure if I agree that it's tougher to qualify from. I'd say it's roughly on a par. The likes of Norway, Scotland and you could include many more teams like Bulgaria, Belgium, Ireland, Denmark etc etc are perhaps historically on average (obviously at any given time one of these teams can be very strong.. Belgium early 80s, Ireland early 90s, Denmark early 90s) more or less on par with the examples of Ecuador and Peru. Also Brazil and Argentina seem to manage to qualify just about everytime - afaik I don't think Brazil has ever failed to qualify, that might suggest that they do have it easy or maybe that's just down to the strength of both these footballing nations .

kinaldo

Bubs101 wrote: »

They grew up in the heat and altitude, it doesn't affect them as much. They play the same opposition each campaign and every campaign which makes it easier to prepare. I think it's harder for the average teams, like Paraguay and Uruguay who would probably have a better time of it in Europe but for Venezuela, Bolivia, Peru and ecuador it's much better. As for the seeding system making it harder for Brazil and Argentina, it doesn't really because there's so much room for error. How terrible would one of their campaigns have to be to not finish 5th? It's much easier for them

It's a far more gruelling campaign overall, especially for Argentina and Brazil given that the bulk of their players are based in Europe and have to fly half way across the world and back 18 times no less. Home advantage is huge but there are almost no easy games away from home.

Also, they don't all grow up playing in extreme heat and altitude, and the fact that they have to play the same teams twice every 4 years is no advantage. Familiarity works boths ways anyhow.

but for Venezuela, Bolivia, Peru and ecuador it's much better.

these 4 teams currently occupy the bottow 4 positions.

Meanwhile, Paraguay are top while Argentina are in danger of slipping out.

Brazil only ended up 4th in 2002 and went on to win the World Cup that year.

Daemonic

patmac wrote: »

Maradona, who avoided blaming the altitude of La Paz which lies 3,600 metres above sea level, gave credit to his opponents and said he suffered alongside the Argentine public. Before becoming Argentina coach, Maradona had backed Bolivia's campaign on matches at high altitude, taking part in a charity match in La Paz alongside President Evo Morales last year. The ban was later overturned.

That is a savage altitude. Having been skiing at a similar altitude I found even walking around was hard work, really can't imagine playing football :eek:

redout

Headshot wrote: »

thats queiroz gone

hopefully people will see he's ****ing useless

wtf sort of statement was that ?

From Headshot........

redout

The qualifying is a joke. North America CONCACAF I think it is should be mixed with COMMENBOL that way the USA and Mexico want get such easy rides to the finals every four years and would help spice up the whole North - South America qualifying campaign.

Headshot

redout wrote: »

wtf sort of statement was that ?

From Headshot........

one of sense

some utd folk were hoping for him to be the next utd manager
pfft no thanks

I didnt like the tactics he employed at utd too

Frisbee

redout wrote: »

The qualifying is a joke. North America CONCACAF I think it is should be mixed with COMMENBOL that way the USA and Mexico want get such easy rides to the finals every four years and would help spice up the whole North - South America qualifying campaign.

Mexico have won one game so far. No easy ride

redout

Headshot wrote: »

one of sense

some utd folk were hoping for him to be the next utd manager
pfft no thanks

I didnt like the tactics he employed at utd too

United with Queiroz
3 League titles
1 League cup
1 Champions league

and also

1 League cup runner up
1 FA cup runner up

I for one think we done admirably in his five seasons at United. We reached four finals, won two and won 3 league titles. One can hardly say he made us play bad ?

Headshot

redout wrote: »

United with Queiroz
3 League titles
1 League cup
1 Champions league

and also

1 League cup runner up
1 FA cup runner up

I for one think we done admirably in his five seasons at United. We reached four finals, won two and won 3 league titles. One can hardly say he made us play bad ?

I cant argue with those stats(dame you and your stats)

just didnt like him having so much control at the club

Queiroz was heavily rumoured to be one of the main reasons for team captain Roy Keane's departure from Manchester United in November 2005. According to Keane, he did not like the way Queiroz was given so much responsibility as if he were manager of the club and Keane did not like the tactics that Queiroz employed

redout

Fair enough man but I have seen Ferguson on camera say that Queiroz helped us so much with all his different training techniques etc that really benefited the team. He more or less changed a lot of the way the team started to train. I think he has some older players at Portugal now who are not as good as they once were (Deco being a big one) and not so many good quality spring chickens which were there in previous years past. Like Nani ffs !

Headshot

redout wrote: »

Fair enough man but I have seen Ferguson on camera say that Queiroz helped us so much with all his different training techniques etc that really benefited the team. He more or less changed a lot of the way the team started to train. I think he has some older players at Portugal now who are not as good as they once were (Deco being a big one) and not so many good quality spring chickens which were there in previous years past. Like Nani ffs !

I wont miss his defensive tactics anyway

Bubs101

kinaldo wrote: »

It's a far more gruelling campaign overall, especially for Argentina and Brazil given that the bulk of their players are based in Europe and have to fly half way across the world and back 18 times no less. Home advantage is huge but there are almost no easy games away from home.

Also, they don't all grow up playing in extreme heat and altitude, and the fact that they have to play the same teams twice every 4 years is no advantage. Familiarity works boths ways anyhow.

Yeah but the gulf in quality between Argentina and Brazil is ridiculous and any quality players from the other countries are all based abroad so it makes very little difference if any. They also play each other far more then twice every four years. Copa America runs every two years as well

kinaldo wrote: »

these 4 teams currently occupy the bottow 4 positions.

Meanwhile, Paraguay are top while Argentina are in danger of slipping out.

Brazil only ended up 4th in 2002 and went on to win the World Cup that year.

Those teams occupy the bottom four positions now but Venezuela are the only ones never to make it and they have a much better chance of making it then the bad teams in Europe. Say Venezuela get a good crop of players at the same time as a European team who's never made it, say Iceland. Venezuela won't get ****ed over by the seeding system whereas iceland win and half the teams in Venezuela's group will qualify whereas a quarter of the teams in Iceland's group will. Not to mention that Iceland will be fighting with teams like France, Romania and Serbia or italy, Bulgaria and Ireland for only one automatic spots whereas Venezuela compete with Paraguay, Ecuador, Chile and Peru for 2 spots and a playoff. The lack of seeding makes it so much easier

PHB

We miss Quierez deeply. IMO the failure in big games defensively is squarly down to him missing.