actually if you meekly put your foot into a "challenge" like that its incredibly easy to injure your knee. This is why you're always taught to go into a tackle 100% or don't go in at all. That said Henry shouldn't be suspended for this but he probably should get a fine.

you just made my day...hopefully this is true

While the Italy squad is pretty old the strikers are the youngest portion of the roster. Most of them are in the 26-28 range. As a result Rossi is going to have to pass them in the next cycle in order to make the roster without being passed by the likes of Balotelli and other younger players. If he doesn't make the next world cup he'd be looking at being a 31yo striker with no WC experience for the 2018 WC (i.e. extremely unlikely to make the squad) Meanwhile he could've been one of the stars on the US for this and future WCs. So I'd say his decision to "play" for Italy is looking worse by the day. Couldn't happen to a better guy!

I agree that San Diego as a city is fairly high on the list, but Qualcomm will be pretty old by the time the world cup rolls around. In addition to being old it will also be on the small side so as a stadium its below average. If the Chargers get a new stadium between now and when the Stadium sites are finalized (a couple years away) I think SD rockets towards the top of the list.

Some people are upset the the Bay Area was left out. In my opinion the Oakland Coliseum would've been the most likely place in the Bay area to host games (largest and "nicest" stadium). So I was just showing that from a pure capacity standpoint the Bay area had no chance and as you say its a craphole which certainly isn't going to help. The other California cities also have old stadiums but at least those options have decent to large capacities which is why LA and San Diego survived while SF did not.

Here's the breakdown of cities, stadiums, and capacity Atlanta:Georgia Dome 71000 possible new stadium San Diego:Qualcomm 71000 possible new stadium Phoenix:University of Phoenix 72000 Dallas:Cowboys Stadium 80000 (111000 w/ standing) Seattle:Qwest Field 72000 Denver:Invesco Field 76000 Tampa:Raymond James Stadium 75000 Indianapolis:Lucas Oil Stadium 70000 Baltimore:M&T 71000 Nashville:LP Field 69000 Kansas City:Arrowhead Stadium 77000 (currently being renovated) Houston:Reliant Stadium 71500 Miami:Land Shark 75000 (currently being renovated) Philadelphia:Lincoln Financial 68500 LA:Rose Bowl 92500, LA Coliseum 93500 (possible new/renovated NFL stadium) DC:FedEx Field 91500 (possible new stadium) Boston: Gillete Stadium 69000 NY/NJ: New Meadowlands 82500 For comparison Chicago: Soldier Field 61500 Oakland: Oakland Coliseum 63000 Australia (our biggest competitor for the non-Europe WC slot): Melbourne Cricket Ground 100,000, ANZ Stadium (Sydney) 83000 then everything else is 56K or less. It is the World Cup every game sells out no matter what. So this is all about getting the games in as large of stadiums as possible. I believe the process from here is all these cities will be submitted in the bid and then if we get a world cup the USSF will cut it down to a final 12 cities which will actually host games. In terms of cities getting cut at the next stage if Atlanta doesn't get a new stadium you've got to think its out since it would be one of the oldest stadiums and indoors w/o a retractable roof. San Diego is out unless there is movement for a new stadium or the USSF really wants to push the regional groupings idea(i.e LA, SD and Phoenix). The front runners for the semi's and final have to be Dallas, NY and DC (assuming Dan Snyder gets a new stadium for the Redskins)

Play the game at RFK. The crowd will be 90% Honduras fans and then the US can have a relaxing couple days to get ready for Costa Rica. Honduras gets a virtual home game and then both the US and Honduras benefit from the US having an extra advantage going into the CR game.

@PJSeven So if CR gets 6 and we get 4 over the next two games a tie in the last game gets both us and CR into the WC. Can you say 90min of the ball within 10 yards of midfield.

PJSeven you're right my bad...that makes me feel a little better.

Reposted from the last thread since this is a much better place for it The final three games for the top 4 teams are as follows US: @TT, @Hon, CR Costa Rica: @ES, TT, @US Honduras: @Mex, US, @ES Mexico: Hon, ES, @TT You have to expect Mexico to get all 9 points putting them at 21 points. Costa Rica should get 6 going into the US game for a total of 18. You have to plan that Honduras will lose at Mex win at ES to get 3 points and be at 16. If we beat TT on wednesday we're at 16 points. Therefore if we lose to Honduras (putting them at 19) then we'll have to beat CR to qualify with 19pts vs their 18. If we manage a tie in Honduras we'll be at 17 along with Honduras. This means we can tie Costa Rica and have to end up beating Honduras on goal differential (which they currently lead by 3) which can only happen if Mexico destroys them. So in practice we'll still need to beat Costa Rica to qualify. If we win in Honduras we qualify. Moral of the story your confidence in us qualifying automatically is only as high as your confidence that we will either win in Honduras or beat Costa Rica on the last day with a WC spot on the line. So I'll go with I'm 70% confident we'll qualify

@Joe B. NYC We are not in first. We are in second place behind Honduras on goal differential (by 3 goals)

The final three games for the top 4 teams are as follows US: @TT, @Hon, CR Costa Rica: @ES, TT, @US Honduras: @Mex, US, @ES Mexico: Hon, ES, @TT You have to expect Mexico to get all 9 points putting them at 21 points. Costa Rica should get 6 going into the US game for a total of 18. You have to plan that Honduras will lose at Mex win at ES to get 3 points and be at 16. If we beat TT on wednesday we're at 16 points. Therefore if we lose to Honduras (putting them at 19) then we'll have to beat CR to qualify with 19pts vs their 18. If we manage a tie in Honduras we'll be at 17 along with Honduras. This means we can tie Costa Rica and have to end up beating Honduras on goal differential (which they currently lead by 3) which can only happen if Mexico destroys them. So in practice we'll still need to beat Costa Rica to qualify. If we win in Honduras we qualify. Moral of the story your confidence in us qualifying automatically is only as high as your confidence that we will either win in Honduras or beat Costa Rica on the last day with a WC spot on the line. So I'll go with I'm 70% confident we'll qualify

As usual Mexico is a disgrace. Players were hit by objects thrown by the Mexican fans (both Phillips and later Perez when he was "injured"). In addition to the suspension that is obviously coming Aguirre's way, the Mexican fans need to have the same message sent to them that fans anywhere else in the world would get (i.e. games in an empty stadium). Inter was given a four match stadium ban after Dida was hit. Since nothing as bad as a flare was thrown this should be the absolute maximum of any penalty. I'd say Mexico playing their next 2-3 home qualifiers with no one in the stands is probably about right.

thanks tony

I'm going to be visiting SanFran on Sunday anybody have suggestions for where to go to watch the US in the final? Man that sounds great the US in a final!

Master of the Obvious One game the Guatemala outplayed the US and then the US completely outplayed Guatemala with its B team. So I'm not sure what your point is. Outplaying a team once can be a fluke. Doing it twice begins to show a trend. And this is exactly what Chelsea did. In the first game they played the same tactics and generated the best chance of the game. And yesterday the generated the 5 or 6 best chances of the game. Over the course of the two games they showed themselves to have a more dangerous attack and a superior defense (held a team that just put 6 by Madrid to 1 shot on goal). The fact of the matter is that if either Drogba finishes half his chances or the ref calls clear penalties Chelsea would have won this tie 4 or 5 to 1 and we'd all be talking about how dominant Chelsea was. But once again Iniesta deserves all the credit for not folding like many of his teammates did.

I was rooting for Barcelona because they do play a more attractive game. But they were shown to clearly be the weaker team in this tie and didn't deserve to advance. Holding the ball and outplaying a team are two completely different things. Its what you do with the ball once you have it. Barcelona had the ball for 65% of the time over the course of the two games yet Chelsea had at least 6 or 7 great chances for every one that Barca created. That said all credit to Iniesta for taking his chance and sending Barca through to what should be a great final. Barca is going to have to try and win 4-3 since their already weak backline is going to be missing 3 out of 4 starters.