I recall the ole ole ole from Brazilian fans taking over the town of Los Gatos in the 1994 WC before, during and after their match with the USA at Stanfurd. I don't think it is an original US cheer.oskirules said:
It seems like some countries don't have any distinguishable cheers during matches like Russia for example. I can hear the crowd supporting their team but their aren't any songs or unified cheers that other countries have. I remember the first round match between Germany and Mexico and all I heard were Mexican cheers and songs, it really does add to the experience of the World Cup even if you aren't a Mexico fan. Thinking about the U.S, I can't think of any other cheer except U-S-A and ole ole ole?
OdontoBear66 said:Again the better side won, but what a gutty effort by Russia. Now to the all Euro semi finals.sycasey said:OdontoBear66 said:Hate to admit the Brits came with it today. The Swedes were totally shut down. So now I shift to England or Croatia (if they make it). Belgium has too many French and well, France is France.sycasey said:OdontoBear66 said:
So we have South, North and Central America all gone from the World Cup. Wow. Could be an all European semi is Croatia wins.
Meantime go Sweden. The announcers sure have bias to England. Take 'em down.
This tends to happen when the World Cup is played in the European region. Teams from the Americas usually don't do well in those Cups.
This England team seems very different from the squads that crashed out in the final 8 or 16 before. They are aggressive and take it to the opponent. Really enjoying them.
The 3 teams that have advanced have all been very entertaining. Shame about this Croatia-Russia rockfight.
oskirules said:
It seems like some countries don't have any distinguishable cheers during matches like Russia for example. I can hear the crowd supporting their team but their aren't any songs or unified cheers that other countries have. I remember the first round match between Germany and Mexico and all I heard were Mexican cheers and songs, it really does add to the experience of the World Cup even if you aren't a Mexico fan. Thinking about the U.S, I can't think of any other cheer except U-S-A and ole ole ole?
I don't know who first started the "ole, ole ole ole" cheer, but I know German fans were doing it when they won the WC in 1990 (I was in a pub in Munich during the final. The locals "adopted" us,,, my buddy was Mexican American: They called him Maradonna. When Germany scored their goal, everybody threw whatever was in their beer mugs up to the ceiling.)OdontoBear66 said:I recall the ole ole ole from Brazilian fans taking over the town of Los Gatos in the 1994 WC before, during and after their match with the USA at Stanfurd. I don't think it is an original US cheer.oskirules said:
It seems like some countries don't have any distinguishable cheers during matches like Russia for example. I can hear the crowd supporting their team but their aren't any songs or unified cheers that other countries have. I remember the first round match between Germany and Mexico and all I heard were Mexican cheers and songs, it really does add to the experience of the World Cup even if you aren't a Mexico fan. Thinking about the U.S, I can't think of any other cheer except U-S-A and ole ole ole?
Big C said:I don't know who first started the "ole, ole ole ole" cheer, but I know German fans were doing it when they won the WC in 1990 (I was in a pub in Munich during the final. The locals "adopted" us,,, my buddy was Mexican American: They called him Maradonna. When Germany scored their goal, everybody threw whatever was in their beer mugs up to the ceiling.)OdontoBear66 said:I recall the ole ole ole from Brazilian fans taking over the town of Los Gatos in the 1994 WC before, during and after their match with the USA at Stanfurd. I don't think it is an original US cheer.oskirules said:
It seems like some countries don't have any distinguishable cheers during matches like Russia for example. I can hear the crowd supporting their team but their aren't any songs or unified cheers that other countries have. I remember the first round match between Germany and Mexico and all I heard were Mexican cheers and songs, it really does add to the experience of the World Cup even if you aren't a Mexico fan. Thinking about the U.S, I can't think of any other cheer except U-S-A and ole ole ole?
Going to Wikipedia then to google, it sounds like it has spread around the world and through all sports, but its origin is Spanish in bull fighting. Other than that we can argue, Canadian hockey, Welsh Rugby and on and on and on.calumnus said:Big C said:I don't know who first started the "ole, ole ole ole" cheer, but I know German fans were doing it when they won the WC in 1990 (I was in a pub in Munich during the final. The locals "adopted" us,,, my buddy was Mexican American: They called him Maradonna. When Germany scored their goal, everybody threw whatever was in their beer mugs up to the ceiling.)OdontoBear66 said:I recall the ole ole ole from Brazilian fans taking over the town of Los Gatos in the 1994 WC before, during and after their match with the USA at Stanfurd. I don't think it is an original US cheer.oskirules said:
It seems like some countries don't have any distinguishable cheers during matches like Russia for example. I can hear the crowd supporting their team but their aren't any songs or unified cheers that other countries have. I remember the first round match between Germany and Mexico and all I heard were Mexican cheers and songs, it really does add to the experience of the World Cup even if you aren't a Mexico fan. Thinking about the U.S, I can't think of any other cheer except U-S-A and ole ole ole?
Wikipedia weighs in
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ol,_Ol,_Ol
There was one moment in one game where I swear I heard the audio tech screw up. It made me think they were piping into the TV broadcast added audio so as to give the impression of a more lively and raucous crowd in the stadium.oskirules said:
It seems like some countries don't have any distinguishable cheers during matches like Russia for example. I can hear the crowd supporting their team but their aren't any songs or unified cheers that other countries have. I remember the first round match between Germany and Mexico and all I heard were Mexican cheers and songs, it really does add to the experience of the World Cup even if you aren't a Mexico fan. Thinking about the U.S, I can't think of any other cheer except U-S-A and ole ole ole?
You might have to live through the infamy of a French or half-French team raising the trophy next Sunday, France and Belgium are the best two teams in the final four.OdontoBear66 said:Hate to admit the Brits came with it today. The Swedes were totally shut down. So now I shift to England or Croatia (if they make it). Belgium has too many French and well, France is France.sycasey said:OdontoBear66 said:
So we have South, North and Central America all gone from the World Cup. Wow. Could be an all European semi is Croatia wins.
Meantime go Sweden. The announcers sure have bias to England. Take 'em down.
This tends to happen when the World Cup is played in the European region. Teams from the Americas usually don't do well in those Cups.
I would agree with this, tremendous amount of drama and stunning upsets, only one scoreless draw (a record low), some great goals and comebacks. I think it's at the very least right up there with the best.Quote:
Fox people keep saying "this is the best World Cup EVER.
Do you agree, or is it marketing hype?
No it is true. Best World Cup I have seen by a long shot. I am 54...concordtom said:
Fox people keep saying "this is the best World Cup EVER.
Do you agree, or is it marketing hype?
Goobear said:No it is true. Best World Cup I have seen by a long shot. I am 54...concordtom said:
Fox people keep saying "this is the best World Cup EVER.
Do you agree, or is it marketing hype?
And anyone citing World Cup titles as the sign of the best individual player needs to be reminded that soccer is a team game, and while a single player can make huge impacts and make teammates better, the discussion should not end on number of World Cup titles. And anyone citing World Cup titles as the sign of the best individual player should also be reminded that World Cup games equate for maybe 5% of a player's soccer career.calbear80 said:Goobear said:No it is true. Best World Cup I have seen by a long shot. I am 54...concordtom said:
Fox people keep saying "this is the best World Cup EVER.
Do you agree, or is it marketing hype?
This year's World Cup has been amazing. Being in Russia for most of it was once in a lifetime rxperience (ok, twice in a lifetime because I was also in Brazil for the 2014 World Cup)..
My favorite is still the 1970 World Cup when Pele and Brazil won it all. I think Brazil beat the drfending World Cup Champs England by one goal (scored by Jerzinho) in the 1/4 finals. Then Brazil beat Italy in the finals 4-1. In that World Cup, a very good W. Germany finished third (W. Germany won it all in 1974 with pretty much the same team over an excellent Holland side). I watched every minute of every game in the 1970 World Cup and loved it. Since the games were in Mexico and I was 11 time zones away, i slept all day and watched games all night (quite a thrill for a very young kid).
i am probably biased because 1970 was my first World Cup and I folloeed everything possible about Pele.
Pele is THE GREATEST footballer ever. He won the World cup THREE TIMES in 1958 (as a 17/18 year old), 1962 and 1970. Anyone who wants to bring up Ronaldo or Messe needs to be reminded Ronaldo abd Messe combine won ZERO World Cup (3 >> 0). Anyone who wants to bring up Maridona needs to be reminded 3 > 1.
Go Bears!
GMP said:And anyone citing World Cup titles as the sign of the best individual player needs to be reminded that soccer is a team game, and while a single player can make huge impacts and make teammates better, the discussion should not end on number of World Cup titles. And anyone citing World Cup titles as the sign of the best individual player should also be reminded that World Cup games equate for maybe 5% of a player's soccer career.calbear80 said:Goobear said:No it is true. Best World Cup I have seen by a long shot. I am 54...concordtom said:
Fox people keep saying "this is the best World Cup EVER.
Do you agree, or is it marketing hype?
This year's World Cup has been amazing. Being in Russia for most of it was once in a lifetime rxperience (ok, twice in a lifetime because I was also in Brazil for the 2014 World Cup)..
My favorite is still the 1970 World Cup when Pele and Brazil won it all. I think Brazil beat the drfending World Cup Champs England by one goal (scored by Jerzinho) in the 1/4 finals. Then Brazil beat Italy in the finals 4-1. In that World Cup, a very good W. Germany finished third (W. Germany won it all in 1974 with pretty much the same team over an excellent Holland side). I watched every minute of every game in the 1970 World Cup and loved it. Since the games were in Mexico and I was 11 time zones away, i slept all day and watched games all night (quite a thrill for a very young kid).
i am probably biased because 1970 was my first World Cup and I folloeed everything possible about Pele.
Pele is THE GREATEST footballer ever. He won the World cup THREE TIMES in 1958 (as a 17/18 year old), 1962 and 1970. Anyone who wants to bring up Ronaldo or Messe needs to be reminded Ronaldo abd Messe combine won ZERO World Cup (3 >> 0). Anyone who wants to bring up Maridona needs to be reminded 3 > 1.
Go Bears!
calbear80 said:GMP said:And anyone citing World Cup titles as the sign of the best individual player needs to be reminded that soccer is a team game, and while a single player can make huge impacts and make teammates better, the discussion should not end on number of World Cup titles. And anyone citing World Cup titles as the sign of the best individual player should also be reminded that World Cup games equate for maybe 5% of a player's soccer career.calbear80 said:Goobear said:No it is true. Best World Cup I have seen by a long shot. I am 54...concordtom said:
Fox people keep saying "this is the best World Cup EVER.
Do you agree, or is it marketing hype?
This year's World Cup has been amazing. Being in Russia for most of it was once in a lifetime rxperience (ok, twice in a lifetime because I was also in Brazil for the 2014 World Cup)..
My favorite is still the 1970 World Cup when Pele and Brazil won it all. I think Brazil beat the drfending World Cup Champs England by one goal (scored by Jerzinho) in the 1/4 finals. Then Brazil beat Italy in the finals 4-1. In that World Cup, a very good W. Germany finished third (W. Germany won it all in 1974 with pretty much the same team over an excellent Holland side). I watched every minute of every game in the 1970 World Cup and loved it. Since the games were in Mexico and I was 11 time zones away, i slept all day and watched games all night (quite a thrill for a very young kid).
i am probably biased because 1970 was my first World Cup and I folloeed everything possible about Pele.
Pele is THE GREATEST footballer ever. He won the World cup THREE TIMES in 1958 (as a 17/18 year old), 1962 and 1970. Anyone who wants to bring up Ronaldo or Messe needs to be reminded Ronaldo abd Messe combine won ZERO World Cup (3 >> 0). Anyone who wants to bring up Maridona needs to be reminded 3 > 1.
Go Bears!
You have good points my friend.
I have seen Messe play twice in person (in Bello Horizonte in Brazil and in Camp Nu in Spain) and Ronado play in person once (in Saransk in Russia, two weeks ago to the day, less than 20 meters from where I was sitting). And of course, I have seen Pele, Maridona, Messe and Ronaldo play on TV for their clubs and national teams a million times. They are all amazing players, but, for my money,
PELE WAS/IS THE BEST.
Go Bears!
P.S. ok, maybe, again, I am biased because I have a soccer ball autograghed by Pele with my name on it!
Interesting. I felt the opposite. France is lucky Belgium doesn't have 3 goals already. They had 5-6 really good chances. I thought France only had one or two really good chances.bonsallbear said:
France looks like the stronger side
calbear80 said:
Here are my picks for the upcoming semi-finals and finals:
France 2-1 over Belgium
. Both Belgium and France are very good and have many stars. But, France has #10 Mbappo (sp?) who is the best athletic on the field and will make that one or two briliant runs to score the winning goal.
England 3-1 over Croatia
. England has Harry Kane and Croatia has Mordic. Both have excellent goalies. But, Croatia has TIRED LEGS and England is simply a better team.
Third Place Game:
Belgium 3-1 over Croatia
. Belgium is one of the top three teams in this year's World Cup (along with Brazil and France). Belgium is simply a better team and has more stars and this late in the tournament those tired legs ...(Belgium will have ine more day of rest and did not have to play those two back to back overtime games in 1/4 and semi-finals).
Finals:
France 2-1 over England
. Two good teams with many stars. It will be a great game. But, France has #10 and that will be the difference. (i wish the finals was between Brazil and France where Brazil would win 2-1).
Go Bears!
The French hooligans have mostly all been at the International Brie Festival, but it ends tomorrow, so expect them back in time to show the English hooligans a thing or two about "fromage".oskirules said:
Where are the French hooligans to neutralize the potential English hooligans?
Is there such a thing as a female English hooligan?
I don't know but I think I need one of those.oskirules said:
Is there such a thing as a female English hooligan?
And this is why the game of soccer sucks.sycasey said:
Basically a coin flip. France got one to go in.
Mbappe was so much faster than the guy trying to mark him on a play early on.bonsallbear said:
France looks like the stronger side
Truly sad that politics always gets into the discussion at some point. We are talking world cup folks. Leave the rest alone or go to a politics board.concordtom said:And this is why the game of soccer sucks.sycasey said:
Basically a coin flip. France got one to go in.
Sepa Blatter even admitted to it when he said that the controversy is good for debate in pubs - what an idiot!
The VAR and goal line technology have been great adds, but come on, the French Belgium result was a toss up.
We can look at the highlights and pick any number of plays that could have been goals. And then there were the two incredible non-call fouls on Eden Hazard at the top of the box, not that they'd have been converted.
I have a friend Guillermo in Madrid who says he likes soccer simply because anyone prey much always has a chance. We Americans don't like that. We want justice. But, as is, the game is one where 20 guys run around their guts out, and maybe the ref calls a PK and that decided it. And then we get to debate whether the handball was "intentional" or not. I think that's stupid! But I love the game, still.
Sepa AND trump would make good friends by the way:
Both corrupt.
Both like "show" over substance.
Couldn't you say the same about any other sport were there are two evenly-matched teams? Someone has to win. Small breaks will decide it.concordtom said:And this is why the game of soccer sucks.sycasey said:
Basically a coin flip. France got one to go in.
Sepa Blatter even admitted to it when he said that the controversy is good for debate in pubs - what an idiot!
The VAR and goal line technology have been great adds, but come on, the French Belgium result was a toss up.
We can look at the highlights and pick any number of plays that could have been goals. And then there were the two incredible non-call fouls on Eden Hazard at the top of the box, not that they'd have been converted.
I have a friend Guillermo in Madrid who says he likes soccer simply because anyone prey much always has a chance. We Americans don't like that. We want justice. But, as is, the game is one where 20 guys run around their guts out, and maybe the ref calls a PK and that decided it. And then we get to debate whether the handball was "intentional" or not. I think that's stupid! But I love the game, still.
Sepa AND trump would make good friends by the way:
Both corrupt.
Both like "show" over substance.