The Golden Ball

[BoyBrumby]

Why did Inter sell him?

Maybe they got an offer they couldn't refuse? ()

 

[roseboy64]

Prmph where's Hargreaves?

Errr ZIdane

Unbelievable that Terry got nominated ahead of him for the All Star team.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

The all-star team was a joke. All bar three from Europe, and all bar one of those Europeans from one of the four sides that made the semis. Luis Figo and John Terry in there, while Essien, Neill and so on miss out.

 

[Robertinho]

It was definitely a joke. I'd say Zidane.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Any team of the WC without Neill in the center of defense is a joke.

 

[marc71178]

Unbelievable that Terry got nominated ahead of him for the All Star team.

Erm why, they're different positions.

 

[marc71178]

Any team of the WC without Neill in the center of defense is a joke.

Players who play well over 7 games are much better than those who do it over 3 games and 99% of another.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Players who play well over 7 games are much better than those who do it over 3 games and 99% of another.

Oh I didn't know that, thanks big guy.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Players who play well over 7 games are much better than those who do it over 3 games and 99% of another.

Well to begin with, it was named after 6 games. But do you really believe that players who have a minor part in a successful side that makes the semis are more worthy of an "all-star" team than those that have a huge part in a team that does well for, say, 4 or 5 games?

Neill and Essien (for instance) had bigger impacts on the relative success of their sides than Terry or Figo or whoever. Obviously you'd expect a fair number of the players to come from the more successful sides, but not all of them. It just defeats the whole idea of an all-star team really.

 

[cameeel]

Surely the All-Star team is a measure of the 11 players who performed best in the matches they played for their countries.

If only players that are in successful teams are selected, we may as well just choose 11 players from the finalists.

It's a disgrace, not necessarily because Neill was not selected, but because there were very good players who performed in all their country's games, but were overlooked because of the team's lack of success.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Not Zidane. Not now. No way.

 

[steds]

Neill and Essien (for instance) had bigger impacts on the relative success of their sides than Terry or Figo or whoever.

Bigger impact != Better performance.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Bigger impact != Better performance.

Difference in terminology. The point is the same - the all-star team should be the best players in the tournament in terms of their performance and the effect they had on the games they played in, relative to all the other players. Totti played in a better and more successful team than many other people in the World Cup, but he didn't have a particularly good tournament by any means, and as such shouldn't have been in the all-star team.

 

[sledger]

Cannavaro gets my vote, followed by Pirlo, would have been Zidane were it not for his idiotic performance this evening.

 

[steds]

Pity vote from me.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Not Zidane. Not now. No way.

Indeed...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2006/5154248.stm

 

[social]

I'd give it to Grosso

Righted a sinking ship with his dive vs Aus

Scored the winner with a sensational strike vs Germany

Scored the winning penalty in the Final

 

[Anil]

well it is zidane, like it or not....

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Zidane was the correct choice, in my view. He was the best player, and without him it's exceedingly unlikely that France would have made the final.

Maybe it's a cultural thing related to Australian sport, but I don't see how you could possibly fail to give the "best player" award to someone just because they headbutted someone in the last 5 minutes of the tournament. Doesn't have any impact on how he played for the rest of the tournament at all.

Mind you, the award was given out at half time it seems, so the headbutt wouldn't even have happened yet.

 

[Xuhaib]

Zidane was the correct choice, in my view. He was the best player, and without him it's exceedingly unlikely that France would have made the final.

Maybe it's a cultural thing related to Australian sport, but I don't see how you could possibly fail to give the "best player" award to someone just because they headbutted someone in the last 5 minutes of the tournament. Doesn't have any impact on how he played for the rest of the tournament at all.

Mind you, the award was given out at half time it seems, so the headbutt wouldn't even have happened yet.

One can raise the same point with Cannavaro.

Italy had no hope of winning without him especially with Nesta already injured.