Most mediocre teams to win the WC
in [World Football]
|
From: JK on 20 Jul 2010 10:17 Mehdi wrote: > > Subject : Most mediocre teams to win the WC > > From : jknapp(a)oacpc.com > > > Ok, but doesn't it ALWAYS take a special group of players to win a World > > Cup? > > Brazil, Italy and Germany produce a special group of players at regular > intervals. That's never been the case with Spain. True, but that doesn't mean it can't happen again. All successful winning traditions have to start somewhere. For all we know, in 30 years we may be referring to this group as the vanguard for a long line of great Spanish teams. Of course it may not pan out that way, but in the case of a country of Spain's size and resources, I like the odds. We're not talking about somebody like Belgium or Croatia rising out of nowhere and winning. > > What would you suggest they do as an alternative: abandon their unique > > strengths and turn their back on the playing style which has won them > > two tournaments in a row? > > A clear distinction should be made between how Spain played at the Euros > and how they played at the World Cup. > > > Yes. Italy, France, and England aren't going away anytime soon. > > Nor are Germany. England?!??!?! England are doomed. I doubt it. Given the size of the population and the popularity of the sport, you can't help but put out a competitive team. Eventually, the right combination of players and coach will probably come along. Two of the great > central midfielders of the past decade, (at least at club level) Gerrard > and Lampard, are the wrong side of 30 but an even bigger problem is the > attitude of the players themselves. They live in bubble, protected by > their clubs, they cannot handle either the pressure or demands of living > outside of that environment - note the complaints about boredom at the > camp. No video games, no wags, no alcohol, not allowed out = moan, moan, > moan. Pathetic. Sky have created a monster, the rampant > commercialisation of the EPL and demands of their TV market have > destroyed English football and the situation will only get worse. 60 > something percent foreigners in the EPL? How long before that rises to 70%? All problems to be sure. And yet they (mostly) cruised through qualifying and the pre-WC build up. Go figure. I agree there is something rotten at the core of the English set-up: some messed up confluence of an outsized sense of entitlement, a refusal to innovate, an aversion to the plain old hard work of getting better (perhaps just perceived on my part), and a deferral to commercial/media pressures. However, I think the situation is far from hopeless. But you need new leadership in the worst way, and a new coach. Fabio has completely become a company man and made not rocking the boat the priority. Heskey?!?!?!?!? What a joke. Honestly, I like the U.S.'s trajectory a lot better than yours. (Even if you will continue to consistently turn out better players than us for a while.) And I have a LOT more faith in our coach. > > England may win the rights to host the 2018 World Cup and it will make a > fortune for the FA but it's hard to image in just 8 years they'll have a > team capable of getting to the QFs let alone winning the competition.
From: Bob on 20 Jul 2010 11:03 Italian Mike wrote: > Bob wrote: >> Italian Mike wrote: >>> Bob wrote: >>>> Binder Dundat wrote: >>>>> On Jul 19, 11:49 am, "Bob" <B...(a)Bob.com> wrote: >>>>>> Italian Mike wrote: >>>>>>> Mehdi wrote: >>>>>>>>> Subject : Most mediocre teams to win the WC >>>>>>>>> From : italian.mik...(a)gmail.com >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Exactly, the praise this team has earned in the media just >>>>>>>>> reveals the quality of the double standards that exist. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> While this is true I also think this WC will be forgotten about >>>>>>>> very quickly. There wasn't a single all time great at this >>>>>>>> tournament, there were three players that would have reached >>>>>>>> that status had they won the competition i.e. Maicon, Lucio >>>>>>>> and Messi. >>>>>> >>>>>>> It may be forgotten, or seen as it really was by seasoned >>>>>>> viewers who know what they are watching, but the typical World >>>>>>> Cup fan every four years is going to repeat what they are told, >>>>>>> and Spain being one of the greatest attacking teams of all time >>>>>>> is likely what they'll be repeating. I've heard it already >>>>>>> being echoed around my parts and it's hardly a soccer/football >>>>>>> mad city. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Anyway, whoever said that Spains Tiki-Taka was a defensive >>>>>>> weapon was bang on. I'll be honest, it was a good defensive >>>>>>> weapon too, but nothing more than that. Other goals came on >>>>>>> desperation plays, set pieces, and direct football, no square >>>>>>> or triangle passing into the net at all. >>>>>> >>>>>> Spain outshot their opponents by 33-50% (except for Chile). >>>>>> Playing possession ball (an offensive tactics) has always lead >>>>>> to stronger defense, way before the words tiki taka were >>>>>> pronounced for the first time. Spare us the senseless negative >>>>>> spin. >>>>> >>>>> I think the best defensive weapon is attacking every time you have >>>>> the ball, keeping it away from the opponent and scoring on each >>>>> attack. I know it is purely a defensive tactic but it can work! I >>>>> mean if you could score every time you have possession and >>>>> continuously attack and the other team never has the ball you >>>>> stand a better than 50% chance of at least getting a draw? >>>> >>>> pretty much ;) >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Man this group goes down hill during the summer, too bad there >>>>> wasn't some football event they could plan to keep people occupied >>>>> during June and July? >>>>> >>>>> Now can someone please analyze the best shoe laces to use on a wet >>>>> pitch! Or how about the stats on curly haired players accuracy on >>>>> headers vs bald headed players? >>>>> >>>>> Spain deserved to win the WM, plain and simple. >>>> >>>> That's a fact the negative spinmeisters can't contest, but they'll >>>> try to tarnish that win as much as they can. >>> >>> Tarnish what? Here's another example of assaulting the messenger, >>> not the message. If you have a counter argument, make it, otherwise >>> you've failed to say anything significant. >> >> I have already made my argument but you'd rather ignore it than >> answer it. > > You'll have to forgive me Bob. I haven't tracked down all your > arguments pro or con. I responded to the statement you made directly > to me which was void of any argument really. Just above, I said that Spain outshot their opponents by a wide margin (my numbers were a gross underestimate of reality too), which tend to show they were likely the most offensive team of the tournament. I also said, and Binder suggested it much more humorously than I did, that it is ludicrous (Orwellian, really) to claim that maintaining possession and attacking incessantly is a defensive tactics. Spain defensive strategy may be to play possession ball but it isn't implemented through the use of defensive tactics like you and your new pal Benny (Mehdi) are claiming. > >>> Keeping possession is a brilliant defensive strategy, especially >>> when you can't triangle pass the ball in the net. These are facts >>> that are quite easily observable when you watch Spain play. I also >>> said they were probably the best team in the tournament aside from >>> Brazil. Where's the negative spin in that? >> >> Because you know that teams with offensive tactics are more highly >> regarded by today's fans > > So they say. Just on this board most people want to see offensive football and from the amount of flak taken by defensive outfits, I think it is pretty safe to say that offensive football is what people value most. > >> whereas teams with mostly defensive tactics aren't so much >> appreciated. > > So they say. > >>> When Spain needed a goal, it wasn't from triangle passing. It was >>> usually a direct assault on net, or a set play. > >> All teams faced with mostly defensive tactics have similar difficulty >> scoring in the modern game. > > It's not about having difficulty scoring, it was the manner in which > Spain found their goals that I'm specifically discussing. The manner (and number) is directly related to the tactics used by their opponents. All dominating teams are faced with the same dilemma in the modern game. Name one > time they triangle passed into a goal. The triangle passing strategy > that made up a bulk of Spain's display was, as I've already said, good > for keeping possession in the neutral area of the pitch hence a good > defensive strategy and largely useless in getting them goals. Their > goals came on much more direct approach or set plays. As I said, if > you have a counter argument to that, you can present it. I have but you don't seem to realize that Spain's opponents mostly parked the bus making passing of the ball into the net almost impossible, although it wasn't for lack of trying. > >>> Counter that as an argument, if you can. > >> LOL. > > Ok, you chose not to, or are unable to. No difference to me. I've made > no qualitative argument for/againt Spain's play. May be, but you ought to stop agreeing with Benny because he is doing it, I've said > specifically where and why I think they used the approach they did. > You, on the other hand, have provided no substance whatsoever. No > better than trolling really. People claiming that Spain used defensive tactics are clearly the trolls (and not very good ones at that)
From: Bob on 20 Jul 2010 12:09 Mart van de Wege wrote: > "Bob" <Bob(a)Bob.com> writes: > >> Binder Dundat wrote: >>> On Jul 19, 11:49 am, "Bob" <B...(a)Bob.com> wrote: > <snip> >>>> Playing possession ball (an offensive tactics) has always lead to >>>> stronger defense, way before the words tiki taka were pronounced >>>> for the first time. Spare us the senseless negative spin. >>> >>> I think the best defensive weapon is attacking every time you have >>> the ball, keeping it away from the opponent and scoring on each >>> attack. I know it is purely a defensive tactic but it can work! I >>> mean if you could score every time you have possession and >>> continuously attack and the other team never has the ball you stand >>> a better than 50% chance of at least getting a draw? >> >> pretty much ;) >> > I agree with one qualification: when possession football takes the > shape of endless back and square passing between the defenders, DMs > and goalkeeper, it *is* a boring and defensive tactic. > > And trust me, if you watch Dutch football a lot, you get a *lot* of > matches like that. Which are still hailed in our local press as > 'great combinations' or 'offensive football'. Dominating teams that play possession ball have no reason to waste time passing the ball back and forth *before* they score a goal. Spain are composed and deliberate because they don't want to open themselves to counters through losing the ball in a compromising situation but that isn't 'defensive football'.
From: Italian Mike on 20 Jul 2010 15:31 Bob wrote: > Italian Mike wrote: > > Bob wrote: > >> Italian Mike wrote: > >>> Bob wrote: > >>>> Binder Dundat wrote: > >>>>> On Jul 19, 11:49 am, "Bob" <B...(a)Bob.com> wrote: > >>>>>> Italian Mike wrote: > >>>>>>> Mehdi wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Subject : Most mediocre teams to win the WC > >>>>>>>>> From : italian.mik...(a)gmail.com > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Exactly, the praise this team has earned in the media just > >>>>>>>>> reveals the quality of the double standards that exist. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> While this is true I also think this WC will be forgotten about > >>>>>>>> very quickly. There wasn't a single all time great at this > >>>>>>>> tournament, there were three players that would have reached > >>>>>>>> that status had they won the competition i.e. Maicon, Lucio > >>>>>>>> and Messi. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> It may be forgotten, or seen as it really was by seasoned > >>>>>>> viewers who know what they are watching, but the typical World > >>>>>>> Cup fan every four years is going to repeat what they are told, > >>>>>>> and Spain being one of the greatest attacking teams of all time > >>>>>>> is likely what they'll be repeating. I've heard it already > >>>>>>> being echoed around my parts and it's hardly a soccer/football > >>>>>>> mad city. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Anyway, whoever said that Spains Tiki-Taka was a defensive > >>>>>>> weapon was bang on. I'll be honest, it was a good defensive > >>>>>>> weapon too, but nothing more than that. Other goals came on > >>>>>>> desperation plays, set pieces, and direct football, no square > >>>>>>> or triangle passing into the net at all. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Spain outshot their opponents by 33-50% (except for Chile). > >>>>>> Playing possession ball (an offensive tactics) has always lead > >>>>>> to stronger defense, way before the words tiki taka were > >>>>>> pronounced for the first time. Spare us the senseless negative > >>>>>> spin. > >>>>> > >>>>> I think the best defensive weapon is attacking every time you have > >>>>> the ball, keeping it away from the opponent and scoring on each > >>>>> attack. I know it is purely a defensive tactic but it can work! I > >>>>> mean if you could score every time you have possession and > >>>>> continuously attack and the other team never has the ball you > >>>>> stand a better than 50% chance of at least getting a draw? > >>>> > >>>> pretty much ;) > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Man this group goes down hill during the summer, too bad there > >>>>> wasn't some football event they could plan to keep people occupied > >>>>> during June and July? > >>>>> > >>>>> Now can someone please analyze the best shoe laces to use on a wet > >>>>> pitch! Or how about the stats on curly haired players accuracy on > >>>>> headers vs bald headed players? > >>>>> > >>>>> Spain deserved to win the WM, plain and simple. > >>>> > >>>> That's a fact the negative spinmeisters can't contest, but they'll > >>>> try to tarnish that win as much as they can. > >>> > >>> Tarnish what? Here's another example of assaulting the messenger, > >>> not the message. If you have a counter argument, make it, otherwise > >>> you've failed to say anything significant. > >> > >> I have already made my argument but you'd rather ignore it than > >> answer it. > > > > You'll have to forgive me Bob. I haven't tracked down all your > > arguments pro or con. I responded to the statement you made directly > > to me which was void of any argument really. > > Just above, I said that Spain outshot their opponents by a wide margin (my > numbers were a gross underestimate of reality too), which tend to show they > were likely the most offensive team of the tournament. I also said, and > Binder suggested it much more humorously than I did, that it is ludicrous > (Orwellian, really) to claim that maintaining possession and attacking > incessantly is a defensive tactics. You're not reading what I say properly, or purposely misreading what I say. Either way, I'm not going to repeat what I said because I'm starting to see it's a fruitless endeavor with you. I believe you're going to make negligible references to certain statements and then spin it how you believe anyway. > Spain defensive strategy may be to play > possession ball but it isn't implemented through the use of defensive > tactics like you and your new pal Benny (Mehdi) are claiming. If you want me to respond to you based on something *I* said, then refer to what I say. Don't be to concerned with what others are saying. > >>> Keeping possession is a brilliant defensive strategy, especially > >>> when you can't triangle pass the ball in the net. These are facts > >>> that are quite easily observable when you watch Spain play. I also > >>> said they were probably the best team in the tournament aside from > >>> Brazil. Where's the negative spin in that? > >> > >> Because you know that teams with offensive tactics are more highly > >> regarded by today's fans > > > > So they say. > Just on this board most people want to see offensive football Go watch pick up soccer on the weekend. There are plenty of fields that play offensive, no defense football >and from the > amount of flak taken by defensive outfits, I think it is pretty safe to say > that offensive football is what people value most. People are about 40 years too late, and I'm guessing most of these people you refer to aren't in their 50's or 60's, are they? > >> whereas teams with mostly defensive tactics aren't so much > >> appreciated. > > > > So they say. > > > >>> When Spain needed a goal, it wasn't from triangle passing. It was > >>> usually a direct assault on net, or a set play. > > > >> All teams faced with mostly defensive tactics have similar difficulty > >> scoring in the modern game. > > > > It's not about having difficulty scoring, it was the manner in which > > Spain found their goals that I'm specifically discussing. > > The manner (and number) is directly related to the tactics used by their > opponents. All dominating teams are faced with the same dilemma in the > modern game. You're not responding to anything I said. I've said that triangle passing was a useless offensive weapon, and the evidence is in the many times Spain tried to use this approach to generate offense. It simply did not work. If you need, you can go and re-watch the games. I often watched them twice, one for entertainment and the second time to note what particular teams are doing, hence why I seem to be able to discuss the specifics while you're going on vague generalities. > >Name one > > time they triangle passed into a goal. The triangle passing strategy > > that made up a bulk of Spain's display was, as I've already said, good > > for keeping possession in the neutral area of the pitch hence a good > > defensive strategy and largely useless in getting them goals. Their > > goals came on much more direct approach or set plays. As I said, if > > you have a counter argument to that, you can present it. > > I have but you don't seem to realize that Spain's opponents mostly parked > the bus making passing of the ball into the net almost impossible, although > it wasn't for lack of trying. Chile did not. Triangle passing still failed there. > >>> Counter that as an argument, if you can. > >> LOL. > > > > Ok, you chose not to, or are unable to. No difference to me. I've made > > no qualitative argument for/againt Spain's play. > May be, but you ought to stop agreeing with Benny because he is doing it, Maybe you should evaluate my comments based on myself and not be so overly concerned with whomever might agree with them or not. I'm not accusing you of saying anything in particular because someone else may have openly agreed with it. Focus on me, not your other adversaries. > > I've said > > specifically where and why I think they used the approach they did. > > You, on the other hand, have provided no substance whatsoever. No > > better than trolling really. > People claiming that Spain used defensive tactics are clearly the trolls > (and not very good ones at that) No trolls are those who can't make any specific argument and would rather attack the messenger than the message, something I've seen you do more of the former.
From: Bob on 21 Jul 2010 01:10
Italian Mike wrote: > Bob wrote: >> Italian Mike wrote: >>> Bob wrote: >>>> Italian Mike wrote: >>>>> Bob wrote: >>>>>> Binder Dundat wrote: >>>>>>> On Jul 19, 11:49 am, "Bob" <B...(a)Bob.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> Italian Mike wrote: >>>>>>>>> Mehdi wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Subject : Most mediocre teams to win the WC >>>>>>>>>>> From : italian.mik...(a)gmail.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Exactly, the praise this team has earned in the media just >>>>>>>>>>> reveals the quality of the double standards that exist. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> While this is true I also think this WC will be forgotten >>>>>>>>>> about very quickly. There wasn't a single all time great at >>>>>>>>>> this tournament, there were three players that would have >>>>>>>>>> reached that status had they won the competition i.e. >>>>>>>>>> Maicon, Lucio and Messi. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It may be forgotten, or seen as it really was by seasoned >>>>>>>>> viewers who know what they are watching, but the typical World >>>>>>>>> Cup fan every four years is going to repeat what they are >>>>>>>>> told, and Spain being one of the greatest attacking teams of >>>>>>>>> all time is likely what they'll be repeating. I've heard it >>>>>>>>> already being echoed around my parts and it's hardly a >>>>>>>>> soccer/football mad city. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Anyway, whoever said that Spains Tiki-Taka was a defensive >>>>>>>>> weapon was bang on. I'll be honest, it was a good defensive >>>>>>>>> weapon too, but nothing more than that. Other goals came on >>>>>>>>> desperation plays, set pieces, and direct football, no square >>>>>>>>> or triangle passing into the net at all. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Spain outshot their opponents by 33-50% (except for Chile). >>>>>>>> Playing possession ball (an offensive tactics) has always lead >>>>>>>> to stronger defense, way before the words tiki taka were >>>>>>>> pronounced for the first time. Spare us the senseless negative >>>>>>>> spin. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the best defensive weapon is attacking every time you >>>>>>> have the ball, keeping it away from the opponent and scoring on >>>>>>> each attack. I know it is purely a defensive tactic but it can >>>>>>> work! I mean if you could score every time you have possession >>>>>>> and continuously attack and the other team never has the ball >>>>>>> you stand a better than 50% chance of at least getting a draw? >>>>>> >>>>>> pretty much ;) >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Man this group goes down hill during the summer, too bad there >>>>>>> wasn't some football event they could plan to keep people >>>>>>> occupied during June and July? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Now can someone please analyze the best shoe laces to use on a >>>>>>> wet pitch! Or how about the stats on curly haired players >>>>>>> accuracy on headers vs bald headed players? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Spain deserved to win the WM, plain and simple. >>>>>> >>>>>> That's a fact the negative spinmeisters can't contest, but >>>>>> they'll try to tarnish that win as much as they can. >>>>> >>>>> Tarnish what? Here's another example of assaulting the messenger, >>>>> not the message. If you have a counter argument, make it, >>>>> otherwise you've failed to say anything significant. >>>> >>>> I have already made my argument but you'd rather ignore it than >>>> answer it. >>> >>> You'll have to forgive me Bob. I haven't tracked down all your >>> arguments pro or con. I responded to the statement you made directly >>> to me which was void of any argument really. >> >> Just above, I said that Spain outshot their opponents by a wide >> margin (my numbers were a gross underestimate of reality too), which >> tend to show they were likely the most offensive team of the >> tournament. I also said, and Binder suggested it much more >> humorously than I did, that it is ludicrous (Orwellian, really) to >> claim that maintaining possession and attacking incessantly is a >> defensive tactics. > > You're not reading what I say properly, or purposely misreading what I > say. Either way, I'm not going to repeat what I said because I'm > starting to see it's a fruitless endeavor with you. I believe you're > going to make negligible references to certain statements and then > spin it how you believe anyway. I believe you are backing down from claiming that Spain used defensive tactics because you have nothing sensical to reply to my comments. >> Spain defensive strategy may be to play >> possession ball but it isn't implemented through the use of defensive >> tactics like you and your new pal Benny (Mehdi) are claiming. > > If you want me to respond to you based on something *I* said, then > refer to what I say. Don't be to concerned with what others are > saying. wether you say it or agree with someone saying it (as there are several posts of your doing so in this very thread), doesn't make a whole lot of difference to me. > >>>>> Keeping possession is a brilliant defensive strategy, especially >>>>> when you can't triangle pass the ball in the net. These are facts >>>>> that are quite easily observable when you watch Spain play. I also >>>>> said they were probably the best team in the tournament aside from >>>>> Brazil. Where's the negative spin in that? >>>> >>>> Because you know that teams with offensive tactics are more highly >>>> regarded by today's fans >>> >>> So they say. > >> Just on this board most people want to see offensive football > > Go watch pick up soccer on the weekend. There are plenty of fields > that play offensive, no defense football do you have any other strawmen you could throw around? > >> and from the >> amount of flak taken by defensive outfits, I think it is pretty safe >> to say that offensive football is what people value most. > > People are about 40 years too late, and I'm guessing most of these > people you refer to aren't in their 50's or 60's, are they? i suspect the average age here is significantly less than that but fans are entitled to decide what they want to see. Bean counting football sucks. Is that plain enough for you? > >>>> whereas teams with mostly defensive tactics aren't so much >>>> appreciated. >>> >>> So they say. >>> >>>>> When Spain needed a goal, it wasn't from triangle passing. It was >>>>> usually a direct assault on net, or a set play. >>> >>>> All teams faced with mostly defensive tactics have similar >>>> difficulty scoring in the modern game. >>> >>> It's not about having difficulty scoring, it was the manner in which >>> Spain found their goals that I'm specifically discussing. >> >> The manner (and number) is directly related to the tactics used by >> their opponents. All dominating teams are faced with the same >> dilemma in the modern game. > > You're not responding to anything I said. I've said that triangle > passing was a useless offensive weapon, and the evidence is in the > many times Spain tried to use this approach to generate offense. It > simply did not work. If you need, you can go and re-watch the games. I > often watched them twice, one for entertainment and the second time to > note what particular teams are doing, hence why I seem to be able to > discuss the specifics while you're going on vague generalities. They scored that way because passing the ball into the net rarely works with teams parking the bus but they did try. My comment directly answers yours despite your claim to the contrary. > >>> Name one >>> time they triangle passed into a goal. The triangle passing strategy >>> that made up a bulk of Spain's display was, as I've already said, >>> good for keeping possession in the neutral area of the pitch hence >>> a good defensive strategy and largely useless in getting them >>> goals. Their goals came on much more direct approach or set plays. >>> As I said, if you have a counter argument to that, you can present >>> it. >> >> I have but you don't seem to realize that Spain's opponents mostly >> parked the bus making passing of the ball into the net almost >> impossible, although it wasn't for lack of trying. > > Chile did not. Triangle passing still failed there. pretty small sample > >>>>> Counter that as an argument, if you can. >>>> LOL. >>> >>> Ok, you chose not to, or are unable to. No difference to me. I've >>> made no qualitative argument for/againt Spain's play. > >> May be, but you ought to stop agreeing with Benny because he is >> doing it, > > Maybe you should evaluate my comments based on myself and not be so > overly concerned with whomever might agree with them or not. I'm not > accusing you of saying anything in particular because someone else may > have openly agreed with it. > > Focus on me, not your other adversaries. > >>> I've said >>> specifically where and why I think they used the approach they did. >>> You, on the other hand, have provided no substance whatsoever. No >>> better than trolling really. > >> People claiming that Spain used defensive tactics are clearly the >> trolls (and not very good ones at that) > > No trolls are those who can't make any specific argument and would > rather attack the messenger than the message, something I've seen you > do more of the former. |