Uruguay and Europe

Biggest winners in this WC.

I'm really happy for Uruguay. They ate more than 1 ton of meat during the WC and deserved a final appearence.

And Europe won for the 1st time outside their continent. They are ahead of S America now for the first time since 1954.

The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

Will you commit seppuku if a european team wins in Brazil?

L r dd wrote:The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

So what???

Barrilete wrote:

L r dd wrote:The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

So what???

Really? They played 3 europeans teams this time they lost 2 and drew against the worst french side in history. I think they did well like Ghana but they're hardly winners IMO.

L r dd wrote:

Barrilete wrote:

L r dd wrote:The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

So what???

Really? They played 3 europeans teams this time they lost 2 and drew against the worst french side in history. I think they did well like Ghana but they're hardly winners IMO.

England played USA twice and never won. so what?

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

Barrilete wrote:

L r dd wrote:The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

So what???

Really? They played 3 europeans teams this time they lost 2 and drew against the worst french side in history. I think they did well like Ghana but they're hardly winners IMO.

England played USA twice and never won. so what?

Bit different from not winning a game in 36 years against a european team. How can you say so what?

BTW Uruguay were lucky as hell to even reach the semi finals which they lost then lost the 3rd place game. I'm still not sure how they're winners.

Forlan is a winner the rest of them not so much.

L r dd wrote:

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

Barrilete wrote:

L r dd wrote:The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

So what???

Really? They played 3 europeans teams this time they lost 2 and drew against the worst french side in history. I think they did well like Ghana but they're hardly winners IMO.

England played USA twice and never won. so what?

Bit different from not winning a game in 36 years against a european team. How can you say so what?

BTW Uruguay were lucky as hell to even reach the semi finals which they lost then lost the 3rd place game. I'm still not sure how they're winners.

Forlan is a winner the rest of them not so much.

England don't beat USA for 60 years.

L r dd wrote:

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

Barrilete wrote:

L r dd wrote:The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

So what???

Really? They played 3 europeans teams this time they lost 2 and drew against the worst french side in history. I think they did well like Ghana but they're hardly winners IMO.

England played USA twice and never won. so what?

Bit different from not winning a game in 36 years against a european team. How can you say so what?

BTW Uruguay were lucky as hell to even reach the semi finals which they lost then lost the 3rd place game. I'm still not sure how they're winners.

Forlan is a winner the rest of them not so much.

No one's denying they had luck but for Uruguay this was a massive achievement. Relative to the size of the population and the scale of expectations ppl had on the team Uruguay's performance has been better than that of Germany and equal to that of the Netherlands IMO.

You used to be a sour bastard before but since England was sent home during the WC you've really become a boring, bitter c**t

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

Barrilete wrote:

L r dd wrote:The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

So what???

Really? They played 3 europeans teams this time they lost 2 and drew against the worst french side in history. I think they did well like Ghana but they're hardly winners IMO.

England played USA twice and never won. so what?

Bit different from not winning a game in 36 years against a european team. How can you say so what?

BTW Uruguay were lucky as hell to even reach the semi finals which they lost then lost the 3rd place game. I'm still not sure how they're winners.

Forlan is a winner the rest of them not so much.

England don't beat USA for 60 years.

Erm, not that I'm advocating LRD logic here,

but England have only ever played USA twice in World Cups in 60 years.

Uruguay have played a number of European teams in the period LRD is suggesting.

Not sure what difference it makes what their record is against European competition.

If anything, Uruguay is a country with a population of 3 million people, so they are punching well above their weight

Noah and the Bale wrote:

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

Barrilete wrote:

L r dd wrote:The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

So what???

Really? They played 3 europeans teams this time they lost 2 and drew against the worst french side in history. I think they did well like Ghana but they're hardly winners IMO.

England played USA twice and never won. so what?

Bit different from not winning a game in 36 years against a european team. How can you say so what?

BTW Uruguay were lucky as hell to even reach the semi finals which they lost then lost the 3rd place game. I'm still not sure how they're winners.

Forlan is a winner the rest of them not so much.

England don't beat USA for 60 years.

Erm, not that I'm advocating LRD logic here,

but England have only ever played USA twice in World Cups in 60 years.

Uruguay have played a number of European teams in the period LRD is suggesting.

Not sure what difference it makes what their record is against European competition.

If anything, Uruguay is a country with a population of 3 million people, so they are punching well above their weight

It's true but Holland's population is pretty low also.

My logic is i don't see how a team who didn't beat anyone great needed a miracle to beat Ghana and lost two games finishing 4th are winners.

Sorry but it makes no sense.

Not beating a european team also in such a long time is pretty poor and says they struggle against the best teams.

They beat Japan, South Africa, Mexico & Ghana(On penalties)

Winners? No way.

Noah and the Bale wrote:

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

Barrilete wrote:

L r dd wrote:The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

So what???

Really? They played 3 europeans teams this time they lost 2 and drew against the worst french side in history. I think they did well like Ghana but they're hardly winners IMO.

England played USA twice and never won. so what?

Bit different from not winning a game in 36 years against a european team. How can you say so what?

BTW Uruguay were lucky as hell to even reach the semi finals which they lost then lost the 3rd place game. I'm still not sure how they're winners.

Forlan is a winner the rest of them not so much.

England don't beat USA for 60 years.

Erm, not that I'm advocating LRD logic here,

but England have only ever played USA twice in World Cups in 60 years.

Uruguay have played a number of European teams in the period LRD is suggesting.

Not sure what difference it makes what their record is against European competition.

If anything, Uruguay is a country with a population of 3 million people, so they are punching well above their weight

3 times, according to LRD.

what I'm trying to show him is exactly what you said. England never beat the USA, Brazil never beat Portugal or Hungary in decades. Uruguay didn't beat euro in 3 games. so what?

L r dd wrote:

Noah and the Bale wrote:

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

Barrilete wrote:

L r dd wrote:The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

So what???

Really? They played 3 europeans teams this time they lost 2 and drew against the worst french side in history. I think they did well like Ghana but they're hardly winners IMO.

England played USA twice and never won. so what?

Bit different from not winning a game in 36 years against a european team. How can you say so what?

BTW Uruguay were lucky as hell to even reach the semi finals which they lost then lost the 3rd place game. I'm still not sure how they're winners.

Forlan is a winner the rest of them not so much.

England don't beat USA for 60 years.

Erm, not that I'm advocating LRD logic here,

but England have only ever played USA twice in World Cups in 60 years.

Uruguay have played a number of European teams in the period LRD is suggesting.

Not sure what difference it makes what their record is against European competition.

If anything, Uruguay is a country with a population of 3 million people, so they are punching well above their weight

It's true but Holland's population is pretty low also.

My logic is i don't see how a team who didn't beat anyone great needed a miracle to beat Ghana and lost two games finishing 4th are winners.

Sorry but it makes no sense.

Not beating a european team also in such a long time is pretty poor and says they struggle against the best teams.

They beat Japan, South Africa, Mexico & Ghana(On penalties)

Winners? No way.

Holland has a populatiuon 5 times bigger than Uruguay's.

Yeh, indeed, Uruguay didn't beat a great, but they could have. I'm not saying they deserved. I think this WC was pretty fair, as most. Spain deserved to win, Holland deserved to reach the final, Brazil deserved to fall against Holland, etc.

But they really could, and played good football, never looking like an underdog, taking the initiative, going forward, showing grit, like the 2-times World Champions that they are.

They are a small nation that came to Brazil as underdogs and beat a very powerful Brazil side in Rio in front of 200,000 people according to estimatives. Gotta take your hat off for a football nation like this.

Uruguay won my heart. I swear if they meet Brazil in the final here I'll support them to see them winning it again here, that would be awesome.

The biggest overachievers in football history.

Forlan has been rather awesome...Suraez as against what FeyL claims is also a player full of heart and desire for the team. Perreira, Godin, etc.. I see a 'T-E-A-M' in Uruguay. Can't say that for France, Italy, England and Brazil. Or Argentina either.

@noah

how would you like seeing Hungary reaching a WC semis again?

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

Noah and the Bale wrote:

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

Barrilete wrote:

L r dd wrote:The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

So what???

Really? They played 3 europeans teams this time they lost 2 and drew against the worst french side in history. I think they did well like Ghana but they're hardly winners IMO.

England played USA twice and never won. so what?

Bit different from not winning a game in 36 years against a european team. How can you say so what?

BTW Uruguay were lucky as hell to even reach the semi finals which they lost then lost the 3rd place game. I'm still not sure how they're winners.

Forlan is a winner the rest of them not so much.

England don't beat USA for 60 years.

Erm, not that I'm advocating LRD logic here,

but England have only ever played USA twice in World Cups in 60 years.

Uruguay have played a number of European teams in the period LRD is suggesting.

Not sure what difference it makes what their record is against European competition.

If anything, Uruguay is a country with a population of 3 million people, so they are punching well above their weight

It's true but Holland's population is pretty low also.

My logic is i don't see how a team who didn't beat anyone great needed a miracle to beat Ghana and lost two games finishing 4th are winners.

Sorry but it makes no sense.

Not beating a european team also in such a long time is pretty poor and says they struggle against the best teams.

They beat Japan, South Africa, Mexico & Ghana(On penalties)

Winners? No way.

Holland has a populatiuon 5 times bigger than Uruguay's.

Yeh, indeed, Uruguay didn't beat a great, but they could have. I'm not saying they deserved. I think this WC was pretty fair, as most. Spain deserved to win, Holland deserved to reach the final, Brazil deserved to fall against Holland, etc.

But they really could, and played good football, never looking like an underdog, taking the initiative, going forward, showing grit, like the 2-times World Champions that they are.

They are a small nation that came to Brazil as underdogs and beat a very powerful Brazil side in Rio in front of 200,000 people according to estimatives. Gotta take your hat off for a football nation like this.

Uruguay won my heart. I swear if they meet Brazil in the final here I'll support them to see them winning it again here, that would be awesome.

The biggest overachievers in football history.

I totally agree.

Uruguay has the same population as Scotland, and look at the different level of success.

They played excellent football against Germany.

For such a small country, to be 2 times World Champions - even if it was years ago - is some achievement, given one of those was on Brazilian soil.

It's just lucky that Forlan's achievements have helped to remove some of the global (and African in particular) sourness at Suarez's actions against Ghana (although would anyone not have wanted their players to do the same?), otherwise they would have been remembered for all the wrong reasons.

Uruguay

Uruguay have played and not beaten a European team in 14 WC matches since 1970.

That shouldn't take anything away from their achievements though. They are sure putting Peru to shame...

L r dd wrote:

mongrel hawk wrote:

L r dd wrote:

Barrilete wrote:

L r dd wrote:The last time Uruguay beat a european team was in 1974.

So what???

Really? They played 3 europeans teams this time they lost 2 and drew against the worst french side in history. I think they did well like Ghana but they're hardly winners IMO.

England played USA twice and never won. so what?

Bit different from not winning a game in 36 years against a european team. How can you say so what?

BTW Uruguay were lucky as hell to even reach the semi finals which they lost then lost the 3rd place game. I'm still not sure how they're winners.

Forlan is a winner the rest of them not so much.

NZ, the only unbeaten team at this WC, and Switzerland, the only team to beat Spain, are the real winners.

Well done to uruguay and forlan, but saurez's cheating soured me against them. I wasn't bothered that much by the initial cheating but the uruguayans celebrating the cheating (having placards thanking suarez in the following match etc.) pissed me off.

Noah and the Bale wrote:
...

Uruguay has the same population as Scotland, and look at the different level of success.

...

Not fair as Uruguay are surrounded by great footballing nations, Scotland only has ... England.


URUGUAY