Group F - World Cup 2010

Just post the videos created in Germany against Argentina, Brazil, England, France, Spain and I'll abandon my completely ungrounded idea that it's representative of an undercurrent vein of Germany, the Brazil of Europe, against us katzelmachers.

sure, not going to embed them, though and take no responsibility about the quality of the music.

England: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X18oZY6QQOI&feature=related

Netherlands: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j82VFs0NZY4&feature=related

pretty sure there is one against France somewhere. Spain, Brazil and Argentina would surprise me.

all better now?
 
I have nothing against Italians in general and I love the country - but I can't love a soccer team that has theatrics as its primary strategy to resort to when playing the 78th ranked national team in the world. I wanted to see the world champions play champagne soccer with sublime skills and I was disappointed - not by the result, which was awesome, but the quality of the play and silly diving.

I hope we get better from Paraguay in the next game.

Finally! Something about football/soccer!

The harsh truth is that even at our best we're simply not a flashy team. If there was a football yearbook like one sees in American movies, Italy would be the "least likely to create a highlight reel".
The thing was mitigated in the past thanks to a specific type of player, called "fantasista", who stood behind the forwards to add a dash of artistry to our game. Sadly the heir to Baggio, Totti, hasn't been lucky wearing blue, and even in 2006 he played after a heavy injury which limited his influence quite a bit - he still managed to rack up the highest number of direct passes in the tournament, though.
Then Pirlo was injured, and with him went the one man with vision our senile manager brought along. I could foresee us suffering tremendously for being frankly too "workmanslike", and was confirmed right.

In-depth, merciless rundown on our team:
The defencehas been suffering incredible blackouts, the more damning because, I trust even on this board it will be conceded, we're supposed to be the poster boys of defensive football. And thins against teams that were both times defending their result - I suspect that, were we to face the Netherlands, all the limits of our back line would result in a repetition of the Confed cup.
The midfield, it has some lights. Namely, the new bogeyman De Rossi, a player of quility and quantity that can both attack and defend. Why he did spend so much of the NZ game close to the defense, defies my understanding. But then? Marchisio looked like an under-17 suddenly entrusted with the fantasista role; he looked soout of his depth, teh team stopped giving him the ball. Montolivo has positively surprised with his personality, and at least attembted some shots from outside - which, given our inability to have our strikers touch a ball looked like our best chance.
The strikers are... MIA. Gilardino might as well have sat on the grass, he was absolutely invisible. Iaquinta, well, he tried, as the workhorse he is, but finishing was never his forte and he comes out of a troubled year phisically. And he's expected to come from the side, which he said openly is not his role, while Quagliarella, who plays the role every week, rots on the bench.
We're already preparing a wicker man for Lippi, who's looking less defensible by the game. He tried in the latest friendlies the 4-3-3, a surefire method to make sure that everyone in the team has no reference point. In Serie A the 4-3-3 has gone the way of the dodo years ago. Then with Paraguay he attempts a 4-5-1 that almost reaches the same result. He returns to a sensible 4-4-2 for NZ, and in the first half we can't score but at least look like we're putting some pressure. Then in the second half, out goes Pepe who had been very active (he didn't follow his instructions, Lippi said :eek:) and it's back to 4-5-1. That Di Natale entered for Gilardino, and touched as many balls, reveals how effective this change was. Throughout the match our by far primary tactic appeared to be the high cross (this against a team fielding five men taller than 1,90) which in Italy would be defined "alla 'viva il parroco'" ("parish-yard style").
The man has taken to considering himself above criticism. For two years now he refused to acknowledge that Italians follow their NT with an obsessive scrutiny that is sorely lacking in our political arena, and refused to account for his... peculiar calls. The legitimate heir to Totti is a temperamental firecracker named Cassano, who rowed famously with Capello at Real, and can have dry spells - still, he hasn't caused a fuss in two years, and would have been the quality player we tragically miss out forward. That he's not in SA is openly chalked down to personal animosity from Lippi, because his son, a footballers' manager, was turned down by him.
Then there's SuperMario Balotelli, 19 and exploding at Inter. He's also endowed with a short fuse, and clashed with Mou the whole season; but Mou held his reins as tightly as he could, but never backed down brom using him like a secret weapon. It would have been a great idea to bring a perspective black star to te African cup, but noo, he's too young for Lippi, who cultivates locker room harmony like an old man tends to his cabbages. That's why he thought well to rely on the Juventus group: their season was embarrassing, but he just loves black-and-white stripes...

sure, not going to embed them, though and take no responsibility about the quality of the music.

England: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X18oZY6QQOI&feature=related

Netherlands: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j82VFs0NZY4&feature=related

pretty sure there is one against France somewhere. Spain, Brazil and Argentina would surprise me.

all better now?

It seems like a sort of tradition - ok, you're absolved. Also, horay for Germany, the future champions!!


P.S.
repetita iuvant:


Link to video.
 
Sofista, unconvinced by that video's argument. He appears to be going down before the elbow gets in a plausible position.
 
(..) The harsh truth is that even at our best we're simply not a flashy team. If there was a football yearbook like one sees in American movies, Italy would be the "least likely to create a highlight reel".
The thing was mitigated in the past thanks to a specific type of player, called "fantasista", who stood behind the forwards to add a dash of artistry to our game. Sadly the heir to Baggio, Totti, hasn't been lucky wearing blue, and even in 2006 he played after a heavy injury which limited his influence quite a bit - he still managed to rack up the highest number of direct passes in the tournament, though.
Then Pirlo was injured, and with him went the one man with vision our senile manager brought along. I could foresee us suffering tremendously for being frankly too "workmanslike", and was confirmed right.

In-depth, merciless rundown on our team:
The defencehas been suffering incredible blackouts, the more damning because, I trust even on this board it will be conceded, we're supposed to be the poster boys of defensive football. And thins against teams that were both times defending their result - I suspect that, were we to face the Netherlands, all the limits of our back line would result in a repetition of the Confed cup.
The midfield, it has some lights. Namely, the new bogeyman De Rossi, a player of quility and quantity that can both attack and defend. Why he did spend so much of the NZ game close to the defense, defies my understanding. But then? Marchisio looked like an under-17 suddenly entrusted with the fantasista role; he looked soout of his depth, teh team stopped giving him the ball. Montolivo has positively surprised with his personality, and at least attembted some shots from outside - which, given our inability to have our strikers touch a ball looked like our best chance.
The strikers are... MIA. Gilardino might as well have sat on the grass, he was absolutely invisible. Iaquinta, well, he tried, as the workhorse he is, but finishing was never his forte and he comes out of a troubled year phisically. And he's expected to come from the side, which he said openly is not his role, while Quagliarella, who plays the role every week, rots on the bench.
We're already preparing a wicker man for Lippi, who's looking less defensible by the game. He tried in the latest friendlies the 4-3-3, a surefire method to make sure that everyone in the team has no reference point. In Serie A the 4-3-3 has gone the way of the dodo years ago. Then with Paraguay he attempts a 4-5-1 that almost reaches the same result. He returns to a sensible 4-4-2 for NZ, and in the first half we can't score but at least look like we're putting some pressure. Then in the second half, out goes Pepe who had been very active (he didn't follow his instructions, Lippi said :eek:) and it's back to 4-5-1. That Di Natale entered for Gilardino, and touched as many balls, reveals how effective this change was. Throughout the match our by far primary tactic appeared to be the high cross (this against a team fielding five men taller than 1,90) which in Italy would be defined "alla 'viva il parroco'" ("parish-yard style").
The man has taken to considering himself above criticism. For two years now he refused to acknowledge that Italians follow their NT with an obsessive scrutiny that is sorely lacking in our political arena, and refused to account for his... peculiar calls. The legitimate heir to Totti is a temperamental firecracker named Cassano, who rowed famously with Capello at Real, and can have dry spells - still, he hasn't caused a fuss in two years, and would have been the quality player we tragically miss out forward. That he's not in SA is openly chalked down to personal animosity from Lippi, because his son, a footballers' manager, was turned down by him.
Then there's SuperMario Balotelli, 19 and exploding at Inter. He's also endowed with a short fuse, and clashed with Mou the whole season; but Mou held his reins as tightly as he could, but never backed down brom using him like a secret weapon. It would have been a great idea to bring a perspective black star to te African cup, but noo, he's too young for Lippi, who cultivates locker room harmony like an old man tends to his cabbages. That's why he thought well to rely on the Juventus group: their season was embarrassing, but he just loves black-and-white stripes... (..)
Great analysis. :goodjob:
I've seen what you sketch (lack of creativity; unusual weak defense; no worldclass striker etc.) without knowing the backgrounds.
 
Sofista, unconvinced by that video's argument. He appears to be going down before the elbow gets in a plausible position.

Well, of course it's your right. I'll say it only this time, because it's in the past, but:
- sliding tackles are bankrupt defending; in one of the early games in this cup another such tackle occurred, and the result was, lo and behold, a penalty.
- changing direction running at full speed is not simple.
- we played that game in ten for an hour because of a joke of a red: whose fault it is that the other team did nothing with their advantage? And what kind of a screw job is that?

Great analysis. :goodjob:
I've seen what you sketch (lack of creativity; unusual weak defense; no worldclass striker etc.) without knowing the backgrounds.

Thank you.

And I even left out that we had exhausted all our subs by the 65'! And that our central line Canna-Chiellini, I just heard, conceded 56 goals, and was the sixth worse of the season.
I wish we had the Netherlands' problems: just a 100% Robben away from being irresistible. :)
 
OK, methinks Paraguay ends up first. I'll reserve my thoughts on who goes 2nd.
 
Well, of course it's your right. I'll say it only this time, because it's in the past, but:
- sliding tackles are bankrupt defending; in one of the early games in this cup another such tackle occurred, and the result was, lo and behold, a penalty.
- changing direction running at full speed is not simple.
- we played that game in ten for an hour because of a joke of a red: whose fault it is that the other team did nothing with their advantage? And what kind of a screw job is that?)

It was more of a red than that was a penalty.
 
Sofista - well done on a balanced analysis that did not resort to gross generalisations of other teams (which seems to be the go-to strategy of some of us posting in these threads unfortunately).

Despite your misgivings of your team, you must still have expected to comfortably beat us, surely? You are still ranked number 5 in the world after all, so your team must have done some things right in the last year or two.
 
accidental elbowing some one or being offside, or tripping someone by mistake are all bad things and the teams should get a penalty.

But taking a dive is like using steroids, or match fixing. The player should be banned for a year and the team should lose all of its points in the competition.


That's ridiculous.
Elbowing is dangerous play.
And by the way, Gourcuff just got a red card in France-South Africa.
 
Sofista - well done on a balanced analysis that did not resort to gross generalisations of other teams (which seems to be the go-to strategy of some of us posting in these threads unfortunately).

Thanks! I try to take inspiration from England fans, who have a great attitude and don't go chasing shadows whenever scrutinizing a reversal of fortune.

Despite your misgivings of your team, you must still have expected to comfortably beat us, surely? You are still ranked number 5 in the world after all, so your team must have done some things right in the last year or two.

If I'm not mistaken, NZ doesn't have a pro league, so yes, I expect a team of pros to go by with their own forces. Consider it a bit like a chess exhibition: normally good club players aren't expected to embarrass the visiting pro. That we needed a penalty, and one that might or might not have been called, to salvage the game, says a lot of how weak we are when it comes to finishing.
And NZ did truly well: got a goal then defended effectively. The 3-4-3 forced an additional defensive effort for our midfield, leaving the wings free to hinder our work on the side. And the three backs hid the ball from our strikers like the Harlem Globetrotters - really sensible tactic from you folks! And as three men defences most commonly mean five men covering, our crosses were easy prey of such a tall, athletic team. It all held together, can we borrow your manager? :lol:
Good luck with Paraguay!

As for us, we've been rubbish at the Euro, rubbish at the Confed, and are keeping up the streak in SA. It is rumored we're trying 4-3-3 again in the next game, so I already started groaning, just to be ahead with the job - the benefits of any formation just won't be reaped as long as the men simply don't 'get' it. #5 in the FIFA ranking... yes, even at the Euro we proved the toughest nut for Spain on the road to victory.
Okay, a little historical perspective here on the Italian football view:
The emphasis on solid defending dates back to the days of Vittorio Pozzo, who argued that less physically impressive players like us had to be extra-cautious and defend with an extra man, while relying on speed and agility on the attack. His result, the metodo, responded to these needs excellently.
On this ground later grew the classic catenaccio. Truthfully it didn't have to go that way: the dominating team after WWII, Torino, won 4 Scudetti in a row playing a very vivacious WM. Unfortunately the Superga tragedy put an end to all that.
Along came catenaccio, the magical weapon to keep afloat during hard times.
The underlying philosophy, in my view, is nothing less than reducing chance in football to a minimum: as long as you can keep an airtight defense while being dangerous on the quick counter, no one is to be feared. Win at home, draw away (remember, those were the days of two points for a victory) consistently, and you should have the season in the bag. Football as positional chess - even today, the idea of football as "entertainment" is radically alien to the calcio all'italiana mentality. Reportedly, Churchill once said that Italians treat wars like football games, and football games like wars.

Then Herrera's Inter won its international trophies, while at the same time journalist Gianni Brera, the guru of football journos in Italy, theorized his vision of Italian football as conterattacking rather than attacking. So with the undeniable results on one side, and the willingness to be on the good side of the most respected football critic on the other, every team went along,playing in the same way through the Eighties until Sacchi's Milan introduced a zonal play and a pressing bordering on the fundamentalist.
Still, the mindset is there: catenaccio was swapped with calcio all'italiana, an attitude instead of a system, but we had learned to defend very very well, and more, we absorbed the idea that the defense is the pillar to success.
Which (Finally! I hear you say :) )brings us to Italy's status. Consider Italy's WC record: the Azzurri often have slow starts, because, well, what do most teams in the group stage do when meeting Italy? They defend, and aim to score on the counter, which is
1 - our traditional weapon, turned against us
2 - exactly what we don't want: being forced to make the game
But when push comes to shove, Italy does it more often than not. A good technique, sharpened in the tight chainamail of Serie A defenses, often allows us to grind out a win. Later, when meeting teams like Germany, tireless attackers, we're back in our element.
Statistic curio: since 1982, Italy is undefeated in World cups played in Europe.


(@Ziggy: yes, but they have to hit the ball! It's stuff for the A-grade defenders only, who know full well what they're doing: the Thurams, Beckenbauers and their ilk).
 
Wow, Sofista, you really seem to have thought deeply about this topic. I'm impressed by your analysis of the New Zealand team. You seem to have understood our limited tactics pretty well. Our game is indeed based around interception in defense and height on attack. In the absence of fancy footwork in the midfield, we have to rely on high balls into the box and hope we can get a head on the ball. I'm not sure how on earth we managed to end up with a 'tall' team, but somehow we have so we try to make the most of it.

Yes, you're right that we have no professional league in NZ. So, really, the NZ team should no better than a really bad club team in Europe. One of the players who came on, Andy Barron, works in a bank and had to get time off to be able to come to the World Cup. We really are on a different planet from the other teams here - and maybe that is why we have caused problems. I think the other teams need to throw out their normal tactics and just charge up the middle at us. You could probably dribble your way through our defences as we don't have anything like the pace of some of the other teams.
 
Yes, you're right that we have no professional league in NZ. So, really, the NZ team should no better than a really bad club team in Europe.

You do at least have one player playing top flight football in Europe, who is also one of Blackburns best players. Also isn't there a New Zealand team playing in the Australian league which probably counts for something.
 
the way to break a bus parking opponent really isnt that complicated or new.

spread the defense, vary your side of attack as much as possible.

even of your crosses are poor or marking in the middle exceptionally good, eventually you'll find your chances through the middle if you manage to spread.

the thing is, you'll have few chances. (that's the idea of your opponent. give themselves the best possible probability of not conceding)
lacking an in form striker makes it really probable it will end up a draw which is exactly what happened to italy.
 
The entire New Zealand team gets paid less than the italian goal keeper.
We do have some pros, including the captain who plays in a big english. (maybe he is the captain of it?) Some guy who is a star in turkey, and the players who play for the wellington phoenix.
But atleast two of our guys don't have club teams.
 
The entire New Zealand team gets paid less than the italian goal keeper.

A minor point but Buffon was injured so you were playing against their second keeper and yes I believe Ryan Nelson is captain at Blackburn.
 
Harbourboy,

I don't know if NZ regularly plays 3-4-3, but as it's not a common formation, I assume mr. Herbert correctly expected a 4-4-2, and played the most uncomfortable system against it. Good for the team that they adapted well. Then an early goal was the break to maximize the effect. (Not sure if it was changed through the game: I'm not familiar with the subs, and the fact that NZ was defending the result did not help matters for me).

But it's simple, really: three-men defences mean that the two side MFs will come to help covering when needed, thus leaving the three backs free to take care of the strikers relatively free from all worry while enjoying a numerical majority. Conversely, three men forward mean that the opposing side backs can't really support the team's attack - numbers, again.
So, to say it whole, I believe you were more flexible, and got the good recipe for the game. Mr. Herbert did his homework better than Lippi, and definitely won the managerial duel in the game.
And the high balls? Hey, that's playing to one's strengths! If Messi could only devote spare time from a day job to the game, would he dribble as he does? :)
 
Top Bottom