Onni Kari

toimittaja, Iltalehti

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@MakisenJussi @juho_orjala en jaksa sen enempää kirjoittaa, mutta tarkoitin 11/15 tehtyä iskua enkä hebdoa

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@MakisenJussi @juho_orjala ja toistan itseäni, mutta aiheelle annettiin rutkasti etusivutilaa ja iso osa sunnuntain työvoimasta teki juttuja aiheesta

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@MakisenJussi @juho_orjala totta kai etusivulla on journalistista harkintaa, mutta miksi tämän uutisen pitäisi olla ykkösenä 24/7 jos mitään uutta ei ole ilmennyt ja maailmassa tapahtuu muutakin?

koko ajan julkaistaan uusia juttuja kaikilta eri osastoilta ja niillekin halutaan näkyvyyttä

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@MakisenJussi @juho_orjala jos puhutaan vaikka pariisin terrori-iskusta 2015, niin siinä kuoli 132 ihmistä ja taustalla oli (de facto) valtiollinen toimija. sellainen kiinnostaisi nytkin todella paljon

Isiksen tuhoutuminen (valtiollisena entiteettinä) on tehnyt ääri-islamismista kakkoskorin ilmiön

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@MakisenJussi @juho_orjala yksittäinen terrori-isku Suomen ulkopuolella, vähän kuolleita, ei syytä epäillä esim. Venäjää -> suomalaisia ei kiinnosta (kovin paljoa)

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@MakisenJussi @juho_orjala 1. aihe kiinnosti. Siitä tehtiin päivittyvä seurantajuttu ja kainalojuttuja
2. aihe ei kiinnostanut _sen enempää - ei syytä pumpata loputtomasti juttuja
3. isku tapahtui sunnuntain vastaisena yönä - esim. IL:n deskissä minimivahvuus, ei ole ylimääräisiä käsiä

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@sunraysunray @YuriFrozen in finland, only a minority identify as leftists. but if you ask about issues, great majority still support welfare state, trade unions etc.

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@sunraysunray @YuriFrozen the consensus is more and more vulnerable, but the right wing parties still claim to defend the welfare state. if they have to do cuts, they claim they are just defending the core of the welfare state

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@pursiain allekirjoitan tulkintasi sarjasta

se on myös nalle wahlroosin lempisarja

ihmettelin onko nalle katsonut samaa sarjaa

[allen farrington @allenf32]

the emerging consensus on England and Tuchel, that he made horribly defensive substitutions and threw away the game, is completely wrong. I honestly think it's because most (maybe all) English/British pundits want to blame Tuchel as an outsider rather than face up to how the game actually played out.

the entirety of the game after Gordon's goal was dominated by Argentina. but note the first substitution was 17 minutes later on 72 minutes and the *really* defensive ones were on 82 minutes.

in the 17 minutes before the first sub, Argentina could and arguably should have scored 3 times. in the 10 minutes before the next, they could and should have scored twice more. in that interval, England did absolutely nothing. they had already given up. they strung virtually zero passes together and I don't think touched the ball in the opposition half (never mind box).

I think that Tuchel realized this (because he is an excellent coach) and *correctly* concluded they needed to shore up or Argentina would indeed score 3 or more before long.

one idea I've seen is Tuchel should have thrown on the likes of Rashford and Watkins (who are fast, basically) to better press from the front and give England a route to play out. but imagine he had done this, England became *even more pathetically open* and Argentina had won 4-1. the criticism would have been even worse than now, and would have called for *exactly what he did*.

so, no, he did what he had to do as he watched his team completely collapse for no reason.

and *it could have worked*! after the second set of subs, Argentina had one very long-distance shot and the two goals. but the two goals were a result of astoundingly lazy lack of pressing, not tactics. the chances before were getting sliced apart in open play. the chances after were pathetic individual discipline.

so, no, the substitutions did not throw away the game and Tuchel did not get it wrong. England epically shat the bed, should have ended up losing 4-1, and Tuchel attempted the only viable route to holding on and still winning. it is no way his fault that Bellingham couldn't be bothered closing down Fernandez and Spence couldn't be bothered closing down Messi, amongst the other 5 goals they could have conceded after giving up.

English pundits want somebody to blame, so they blame Tuchel (who conveniently isn't English). what they ought to do is face up to this being one of the most astonishing psychological capitulations in World Cup history.

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@r3sho it was painful to watch

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@PetteriSihvonen Kun Norja teki toisen maalinsa, ainoa reaktioni oli kalvava tunne siitä, että tilanteessa joku maalitilanteen ulkopuolinen pelaaja on tehnyt "rikkeen" ja maali hylätään varilla

var on tappanut pelin. maaleja ei voi juhlia, ellei ole argentiina tai muu järjestäjän suosikki

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@r3sho even if Sorloth did try a pass, he could've failed, that ain't his trade

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@r3sho Sorloth is not a winger but a center forward used on the wing as a target man. It creates advantage in aerial challenges, but here they would've needed a real winger. Schjelderup, Musa etc would have easily handed the proper pass for Haaland

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@RLynch43576 i don't think american sports are inherently boring even though i don't care about them (just like most non-americans don't care). just never watched them

it seems there is some problem for some americans that nobody outside their country cares at all about their sports

[Onni Kari @OnniKari]

@RLynch43576 and in the end, "boring" is subjective, trying to argue "objectively" about it is stupid. and the closest we get to an objective meter is viewers, and there football ("soccer") absolutely butchers all the other sports even if you combine them