What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Brazil v Australia (Game 28)

Bumble

First Grade
Messages
7,995
Had to go to school...now I'm doing assignments...might have an early night though, none of the games interest me tonight.
 

chili pepper

Bench
Messages
2,963
lockyno1 said:
Any keeper would have saved the first goal, except Schwartzer!

You have no idea u clown. Obviosly never played soccer. No way is a keeper gonna get to a shot through a defenders legs into the corner of the goal - unless he is way out of position. Kalac wouldn't have saved it, Buffon wouldn't have either. Any decent keeper would have been covering the far post and it was just unluckly that the ball snuck between Chipperfields legs.
 

chili pepper

Bench
Messages
2,963
We desreved a draw at least - we matched, if not slightly outplayed Brazil. Created more chances but lacked the class and composure in front of goal. Presented with the same opportunities their strikers would have bagged at least 3.

But the lads were brilliant - if Neill doesn't play himself into a big contract I'll be stuffed. Just an awesome defender who has eradicated the rash challenges and is now as good a tackler than anyone in the world.

The ref was crap - but thankfully didn't influence the result. Some of the fouls against the Aussies were completely ridiculous and he robbed us of a chance to at least get 1 back by blowing his whistle before the injury time was complete.

Very confident of beating Croatia if we play like that again - we just need to bury our chances.
 

Bob8

Juniors
Messages
287
Brazil were better.

The teams that win the World Cup are no the ones that have the most attacks, but the ones that leave everyone with the impression that they were just lucky and how did they sneak through?
 

chili pepper

Bench
Messages
2,963
Bob8 said:
Brazil were better.

The teams that win the World Cup are no the ones that have the most attacks, but the ones that leave everyone with the impression that they were just lucky and how did they sneak through?

Not having a go at you - but how?

I think there was really nothing in it. The reason I think we slightly outplayed them if anything was that we created more goal scoring chances.

We were certainly not out of place against them!
 

Cletus

First Grade
Messages
7,171
I thought Brazil were definatley the better team. They look fantastic. Australia defended well but didn't take their chances.

Great game to watch and I hope Brazil can play Argentina in the final, that'd be a dream final.
 

Bob8

Juniors
Messages
287
Australia had more attacking opportunities, but that means little. They played like a continental side in that they don’t mind you attacking in their half, as it drags players out of your half for when they attack. You go forward and feel you are making progress, but they are waiting for you.

Brazil were poor by their standards, but were in my opinion the better team.
 

Red Bear

Referee
Messages
20,882
Good game - Can't fault any Australians. The pretty much took Ronaldiniho out of the match last night. 1-0 would've been good result, 2-0 doesnt seem right cos we played better than that. Good performance tho.

Draw or win against the Croats now:)
 

Kurt Angle

First Grade
Messages
9,650
lockyno1 said:
On a serious note why wasn't Kennedy used and WTF was Brecianno doing on the bench!

Bresciano didn't start because he had a yellow card as Guus was saving him.

In the 2nd half Bresciano, Kewell and Aloisi were brought on, meaning Kennedy couldn't.

That said, it is a shame about Bresciano not starting, Kennedy wouldn't of caused havoc in set pieces, Brazil's defence was clearly tiring (as was ours.. but man we were playing 2-5-3 by the end.... yes and I mean 2 defenders)
 

chili pepper

Bench
Messages
2,963
Bob8 said:
Australia had more attacking opportunities, but that means little. They played like a continental side in that they don’t mind you attacking in their half, as it drags players out of your half for when they attack. You go forward and feel you are making progress, but they are waiting for you.

Brazil were poor by their standards, but were in my opinion the better team.

Actually it means alot.

Brazil were poor by their standards because they could only play as well as we let them, because we matched, if not outplayed them.
 

Latest posts

Top