'Aki'lles

Q: How do you distinguish between those who actually watched a match and those who caught up with the information later on NDTV or Times of India?
A: Difficult, very difficult, especially if you haven't seen the match yourself :-(

From personal experience (being at both ends of this problem) I have observed/developed certain tried and tested techniques and have listed these below:

Technique 1:
Its all about using the jargons and keywords such as awesome pass, brilliant free kick, amazing move etc with Ronaldinho, Klose etc interchangeably. This non controversial, no detail approach works unless the player whose antiques are glorified didn't figure in the squad itself.

Technique 2:
Talk history. Shift the focus to past experiences, previous performances of the player, statistics etc...anything which is not remotely related to the match in question. Confused? Not clear about this technique? Here's an example:
"Lampard played pathetically yesterday" . Now, how do respond to this one?

Simple, heres a sample answer: "He plays amazingly well in EPL. Infact in a certain match against Aston Villa he scored goals from a corner, a free kick and a penalty too. Don't know why he played so badly yesterday.." Ofcourse you got to speak these lines with conviction and passion don't forget that.

Technique 3:

The big picture. Who cares about specifies? So talk about the 'big picture' then. Wondering what the 'big picture' in a match is ? Here is an easy one- "The match yesterday was a blood bath" . The crucial information in the match is that 4 players were sent off. Voila !!! That's it! That all you need to coin the phrase "blood bath".

Will post more observations and techniques as the tournament proceeds.