2006 maybe?too many boring matches, too much crazy hype, too many rotten tv pundits..and so on?
2006-09-01 00:37:29 · 26 answers · asked by hello 2 in Sports ➔ Football ➔ Other - Football
1994 World Cup was terrible because the games were scheduled at noon to accommodate to European $chedules that meant playing at more than 40 degrees C. The players were absolutely exhausted, the level of the game was bad.
2002 Again, another logistic mess. Because of the rainy season the tournament was scheduled two weeks earlier than usually. Players didn't have enough time to rest from the regular season, lots of injuries and exhausted players, the jet lag form having to fly from one country's venue to the other didn't help plus the corruption and bad referring were evidently in favor of S. Korea.
Every time FIFA puts money over the well being of players it takes a lot out of the spectacle which is what us fans are there too see.
2006-09-01 07:51:48 · answer #1 · answered by Lumas 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Out of the World cups I can remember in my lifetime and from a personal view I'm giving either 1994 or 2002.
USA 94 was just plain odd. The host nation didn't even like football and England didn't quailify. With the exception of the penalty shootout, the final was seriously boring.
Japan and South Korea in 2002 was just horible for us in UK. All the games were at ridiculous times in the morning for us and Enlgand played awful and bummed out early.
2006 was good. The later games in the knockout stages were a little poor but on the whole it was a great tournament. Probably be most remebered for Zidanes headbutt though!
2006-09-01 00:45:21 · answer #2 · answered by stuman8484 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No it wasn't between the worst issues to take place to the song international. a number of that's exhibits, fantastically Headbangers Ball and a hundred and twenty minutes confirmed the international song that until that element did no longer get carry of a great style of airplay. If it hadn't have been for MTV, i might have in no way gotten into bands like the Violent Femmes, The Sugar Cubes and The Jesus and Mary Chain because of the fact they weren't getting airplay on advertisement radio. each and every era has consistently had that's advertisement/company artists. Madonna is a good occasion of commercialized song no count what decade it lands in. there continues to be good song being made available now, one merely has to dig a touch to discover it.
2016-09-30 05:51:00 · answer #3 · answered by hobin 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
WC 2006 was the worst WC match ever coz a team which didnt even deserve to enter the final match won the WC 2006.I think France desrved to win rather than Italy.this years Wc was a play of LUCK.Italy also did a lotta cheating.Football is a beautiful game to be played fair.Then how can a bunch of cheats win the most prestigious prize in football when there were other teams who played fair with dignity and honour?How could the WC trophy be kissed by a bunch of cheats when there were the BEST players in the French team?How could the GOD of football-Zizou be insulted by a players who is no better than a piece of ****?How could the provoked be red carded when the provoker was left alone???I must say that the refrees of this WC were horrible.
I hope that such a WC never happens in the future.
2006-09-01 00:55:47 · answer #4 · answered by lil_angel 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
1966 was the worst ever
It was a low scoring and dirty world cup.
Pele nearly had to quit afterwards because he got kicked so much.
Obviously England won, but one of their goals wasn't even a real goal (at a crucial point in the match). It was a complete fix!!!
And it's the only world cup you ever hear about!!
2002 was pretty bad too though, mainly because i missed it all!
I thought 2006 was actually pretty good, England were TERRIBLE though, but you'd think they were the favourites the way they were hyped
2006-09-01 04:36:18 · answer #5 · answered by Pete H 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
2002
2006-09-01 02:07:06 · answer #6 · answered by Bengal Striker 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
2006.not 2 many actions.many boring matches.many draws.2 many yellow and red cards.this worldcup had the lessest no. of goals in history(i think,or mayb second im not sure).even if there was victories 2 c it was jus lik 1-0 or close ones except 4 sum matches lik arg-serb(6-0).Then Ronaldinho didnt do tricks!!!!!!tht was the biggest sorrow.and then its sad wat happened 2 zidane.tht was really bad by matterazzi 2 provoke him and mak him do sumthin stupid so tht he won ply the rest of the match which will increase the chances 4 italy.
But watch out 4 2010.its hosted by SA.Im hoping 4 an underdog shock victory....yes im supportin india then saudis then bahrain then south africa.and we really hope som spectacular plying by ronaldinho,messi,rooney,riquelme,tevez,van nistelrooy.so i jus cant wait another 4 yrs.
2006-09-01 10:53:49 · answer #7 · answered by Sonic 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
2006.
It showed that blatant cheating can be awarded with victory and that the bad guy can win.
Hang your head in shame Italy.
Not to metnion some of the worst refereeing ever seen, 3 yellow cards to 1 player in 1 match? how was that guy ever endorsed by FIFA or the FA?
2006-09-01 01:08:07 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, definitely 2006 for me. There were only a few great matches; very few great goals, a lot of poor refereeing and they made a mockery of the slogan "Fair Play".
2002 was the best for me, so maybe I was expecting too much .....
2006-09-01 00:48:11 · answer #9 · answered by kiteeze 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
2006.
Most of the top teams are out of whack. And alot of teams that were expected to qualify, didn't.
2006-09-02 02:59:27 · answer #10 · answered by Saffren 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋