Very cute. You've shown enough intelligence to merit a reply, but have unfortunately been vitriolic enough to force me to reply with less mercy than I otherwise would. Let's begin. I'll follow your outline.
I live in Illinois. However, I am a World Cup fanatic. So from June 9th through July 12th or so, I actually do read the majority of those papers once or twice a week online, because the English media entertains me. They are unjustifiably caustic, pithy with their insults, and most of all, misplace blame.
Of course they do! You completely missed, or rather ignored, my point about the English press. It's an entirely different beast to press anywhere else in the world. The English press doesn't strive for impartiality, which is actually refreshing considering every form of press has a bias, but they're the only ones to openly admit it. Yes, even BBC News has a bias. Even the USA Today has a bias. Even your-beloved New York Times has a bias. I'm glad the English press can entertain you, because that's what it's there for. As I said in my previous post, if they (especially the redtops, which I will assume from your post is all you look out for) do not reflect the public views or take a stance on the issues, people will look for a paper that does. We're very simple in that respect, as is everyone else in the world. Why buy a newspaper that doesn't agree with your views?
My statement that you blamed Mr. Christian Ronaldo for cancer, world poverty and hunger, was, to those with a level of intelligence higher than that expected of a single celled organism, hyperbole. My point was that you blamed him for a pathetic roster selection, awful coaching, and lackluster frontline play. Wayne Rooney stomped on a man's testicles.
Have you not read that he insists it was an accident?
I know that you're not inclined to believe him, especially now that I'm backing his corner and anything less than a so-called witty rebuke of my post will result in you looking stupid, but if you watch the incident in real time, it certainly looks unintentional. It's only in slow-motion replay (where everything looks worse) that it looks intentional. Unfortunately for you, the world does not operate in slow motion.
He deserved not only to be ejected with a red card, but brutally beaten with a very large stick after the match. But Ronaldo deserves blame for that ejection, right? After all he ran....how did your media put it....some ridiculous length of the pitch to protest?
It was a foul, I'd have protested to. In fact, I might have pulled a Zidane and headbutted Rooney in the chest for being less than a man. You should probably want to headbutt him too, for whiffing on a surefire goal in that match, and underperforming for the entire tournament.
If you were to run 30 yards to "pull a Zidane" then all you would have done was put yourself on par with Rooney. Also, that's a nice assumption you managed to nestle in there; I should want to headbutt him too? Why? Because his strike-partner was injured? Because he was asked to perform in a role that he has never played? Yeah, sure, I'm going to get right on that. It's not as though he's the only player to underperform at this tournament, look at Ronaldinho. Yes yes, I know he didn't headbutt anybody, or put his foot down on anybody, but if you're talking about underachievers at the highest level, then I've got a list right here if you want to discuss it.
Moving on, let us continue on with our discourse on the lacklustre. I contended that David Beckham was your best player - you contended that this displayed a dearth of knowledge on my part. I'm mystified by your clairvoyance on my soccer knowledge, considering you do not know who I am, either in life or on the internet. This makes your assertion regarding my knowledge stupid at best, and downright foolish at worse. I'll lean toward the 'worse' portion of the spectrum for now. Here's the bottom line: when the English needed a play, it was David Beckham who made it. It's that simple. Ecuador was going to win that football game, and David Beckham changed it with a kick. Let's not forget his assist as well. He made up for a stagnant, pathetic offensive showing almost singlehandedly. Had he remained on the pitch vs. Portugal, you might have stood a chance...though David Beckham has missed a vital penalty kick, from time to time. The only argument you could make here is for Ashley Cole, who marked forwards like white on rice. John Terry and the rest played well as a system, but individually? Not so much.
See, this is where the difference lies. We (the English) do not count one free-kick, or one set-piece as enough to justify an otherwise-mediocre 90 minutes on the field. Yes, Beckham has a magical right foot. That has never been in dispute. It gets complicated when you watch someone like Shaun Wright-Phillips or Aaron Lennon, who have much more to their game than set-plays. All three (Wright-Phillips, Lennon and Beckham) ply their trade on the right wing, and all three have the ability to play for England. The problem is, Beckham's reputation is so high, so untouchable within the England set-up that to drop him is sacrilege. The first coach to drop Beckham will have to withstand such a media storm that it would take a man of only the strongest character to survive it. Your point that Beckham stepped up in the clutch is valid, but the thinking is, what if England had a true right winger on the pitch for 90 minutes? Someone who can skin a man AND put in a decent cross. Beckham has never been able to beat a man one-on-one then put in a cross. That's simply not his game. He takes the ball from deep and puts in balls from there. The prevailing theory on these shores is that we would benefit from someone like Wright-Phillips or Lennon moreso than we would from Beckham.
You might not be aware that we already have players who are more than capable of taking good set-pieces. Lampard (while he didn't show it at the World Cup) has been a consistent penalty and free-kick taker for Chelsea for the past two seasons; Gerrard takes free-kicks and corners for Liverpool in tandem with Xabi Alonso; Rooney takes free-kicks from time to time at Manchester United. That's three players there who can step into Beckham's shoes and take the set-pieces. To speculate if Beckham had stayed on the pitch we might have had a chance against Portugal is just that. Speculation. And poorly-thought out at that.
Oh, and please don't let my use of "and" after a full-stop offend your delicate grammatical sensibilities.
What do we have next? Ah, your assertion that my use of an internet moniker is a reflection of cowardice. I'm not really sure who you're insulting more here...but considering the childish nature of the statement, I'm going to have to go with yourself. That I don't use my real name - which is Christian, by the way, or Cristiano in Spanish or Portugese, so perhaps you'll see me eliminating your team from the World Cup in the near future - is no reflection of anything, merely that this is a VIKING FAN site, and many show their enthusiasm for the Vikings by adopting a pro-team moniker. In my case, my sobriquet is the name of my favorite Vikings player, with his number, and the last two digits of the year I joined. I'll change it to 'CristianoOwnsEngland1706' if you'd like, the numbers would correspond.
So your support comes from nothing more than the fact that both your parents and his decided the name Christian "or Cristiano in Spanish or Portuguese" was a good name for their baby boy? Aaaw, how cute! I knew you had a sensitive side and all this grandstanding was nothing more than an attempt to hide it. You don't have to be tough with me, I understand, honey.
Oh, and to come back with "I don't care if you play for the other team but I don't" or "don't try and trivialise our argument by making camp jokes", would be just too easy. By the way, I am trivialising our argument by making camp jokes. Not because I'm losing, but because arguing on a message board.. How does that punchline go? I'm sure you know it anyway.
Wait, scratch that. I know you're a pompous, pretentious, knave who tries to be all things to all people but ends up being nothing to nobody.
If you're going to insult me, please use proper English spelling and punctuation. You are, after all, from the country that invented the language. And be careful who you call a knave - you might get embarassed. Or, considering it IS the Internet, just eviscerated.
Have a wonderful day.
Ooooooo, someone got their thesaurus out for that one!
Wow. All that on the basis of one commar.
I, am, so, sorry, that, your, eyes, and, fingers, were, so, offended, that, you, were, compelled, to, type, out, three, whole, lines, based, on, that, one, mistake.
The fact that I enclosed 'pretentious' in commars for effect must have gone over your head.