Wyrdness said: Player2 said: Regarding Greece's 2004 Euro I have a better theory: Ottmar Hitzfeld stole the three German traits and imbued the Greek team with them. If their defenders (and goalie) were so great all the big european teams would've tried to sign them. Football isn't an exact science, you can score in a corner/freekick, play like trash for 89 minutes and still win. I didn't want to believe it, but it seems to be true: Brazil began to change after their failures in the 82 and 86 World Cups and eventually fell to the dark side. Apparently now there's offensive and defensive football, and Brazil choosed the latter because it's the faster and easier way to win. That's why they have coaches like Scolari and Dunga and their midfield has been full of Paulinhos, Felipe Melos and Gilberto Silvas in the last ten years, meanwhile creative players had to give up and play for another country. Problem with that theory is in practice it works in one or two matches but not in a whole tournament, Greece beat Portugal twice on their home ground, Czech Republic who were the second best team in the world at the time, France who were the holders and had the likes of Zidane, Viera, Henry etc... and held an upcoming Spanish side to a draw. They were playing strong football even if it wasn't attractive.

So they defeated a bunch of teams that (at the time) had never won anything and France, which was a shadow of its former self despite the presence of overhyped Arsenal players (it was knocked out in the group stage of the previous WC and had lost key players like Djorkaeff and Deschamps (and other players were too old, like Desailly and Lizarazu)).

Czech Republic lost his star player due to a knee injury in the match against Greece, which supports my theory.

Manchester United have reportedly offered £50m plus Nani for Arturo Vidal. Juventus have responded, asking for £45m instead.

I had to laugh at this.

Not sure if already posted :P

http://media.dumpert.nl/foto/bfce7b5c_Krul.jpg

Player2 said: Wyrdness said: Player2 said: Regarding Greece's 2004 Euro I have a better theory: Ottmar Hitzfeld stole the three German traits and imbued the Greek team with them. If their defenders (and goalie) were so great all the big european teams would've tried to sign them. Football isn't an exact science, you can score in a corner/freekick, play like trash for 89 minutes and still win. I didn't want to believe it, but it seems to be true: Brazil began to change after their failures in the 82 and 86 World Cups and eventually fell to the dark side. Apparently now there's offensive and defensive football, and Brazil choosed the latter because it's the faster and easier way to win. That's why they have coaches like Scolari and Dunga and their midfield has been full of Paulinhos, Felipe Melos and Gilberto Silvas in the last ten years, meanwhile creative players had to give up and play for another country. Problem with that theory is in practice it works in one or two matches but not in a whole tournament, Greece beat Portugal twice on their home ground, Czech Republic who were the second best team in the world at the time, France who were the holders and had the likes of Zidane, Viera, Henry etc... and held an upcoming Spanish side to a draw. They were playing strong football even if it wasn't attractive. So they defeated a bunch of teams that (at the time) had never won anything and France, which was a shadow of its former self despite the presence of overhyped Arsenal players (it was knocked out in the group stage of the previous WC and had lost key players like Djorkaeff and Deschamps (and other players were too old, like Desailly and Lizarazu)). Czech Republic lost his star player due to a knee injury in the match against Greece, which supports my theory.

The French team then was one of the strongest teams by far (Zidane, Viera, Makelele, Henry, Thuram, Trezaguet etc...) what are you on about? That same team reached the final of the WC 2 years later and the was only two or so Arsenal players and in regards to Henry and Viera they were world class, Holland has never won a WC does that take anything away from any team that beats them? No fact is like it or not Greece were the better team even if their football was negative, Nedved also got injured at the end of the match. The best football is not necessarily the most attractive.

Wyrdness said: Problem with that theory is in practice it works in one or two matches but not in a whole tournament, Greece beat Portugal twice on their home ground, Czech Republic who were the second best team in the world at the time, France who were the holders and had the likes of Zidane, Viera, Henry etc... and held an upcoming Spanish side to a draw. They were playing strong football even if it wasn't attractive.

Pretty much this, it wasnt exactly plesant to watch the Greek side play but they were playing very good football, defensive but very good.

Quarter-finals resume:

-Brazil lost T.Silva (for semis) and Neymar
-Argentina lost Di Maria
-Netherlands had to go penalty shootout with CR
-Germany 1x0 on France

It was a difficult round indeed

Barozi said: this WC started great but now the performances of every team are rather poor and for the most part boring to watch.

I have to agree with this. In every single tournament there were always teams that played state of the art football, they were like meatgrinders.

Euro 2012 - Spain, Italy, Germany, Portugal all played awesome

WC 2010 - Spain, Netherlands, Germany, Uruguay - all were incredible

Euro 2008 - Spain, Germany, Turkey - all solid

WC 2006 - Italy, France, Germany were all incredible

 

Now? There isn't a single team that could match up with these teams. Everyone is disappointing. Germany is playing boring football just like it used to some time ago, Brazil lost Neymar, Netherland is running out of steam, Argentina lost Di Maria My only hope is that Argentina seems to be growing as a team, Higuain seems to be starting to click with the rest, but again, Di Maria is a massive blow

look win didn't score in the 120 mins, but there were many chances

I can see why people are disappointed that there are no really offensive teams. But history shows us that these kind of teams just don't win the WC. Some people talked about Brazil, and that's BY FAR the best example.

In 1982, we lost to a vastly inferior Italy, but they had great defending. Then we won in 1994 with a much less talented team, but it was a more solid squad overall. State of the art football doesn't win titles, with some few exceptions. I couldn't tell you why though.

Personally, I don't think this WC is as boring as some of you are thinking. I'm really enjoying it, if only because of the tension the matches generate. Yeah yeah, that's just because it's the knock-out stage, but still.

Not sure about all the doom and gloom in here. I thought the quarter finals were quite entertaining with at least Argentina and Germany playing their best games so far. Netherlands dominated while Costa Rica showed massive resilience. Brazil vs Colombia was a very dirty game but far from boring. Brazil still strong in that one.

What I fear is that the semifinals might get boring.