WC 2006: Group E

[Marla_Singer]

You're right Rhye. However, Italy was far better organized, and italians were also a lot more dangerous in their actions than the Ghaneans. All this to say that Italy deserved to win tonight.

Now this said, I believe Argentina appeared better than Italy on Saturday.

 

[Hitro]

You're right Rhye. However, Italy was far better organized, and we also a lot more dangerous in their actions than the Ghaneans. All this to say that Italy deserved to win tonight.

Now this said, I believe Argentina appeared better than Italy on Saturday.

Hmm, I'd say Ghana was better than Ivory Coast, but that's hard to tell.

Overall I'd say that Argentina and Italy were those amoung the favourites who had decent opponents, add to that the Dutch although I found Serbia a little disappointing. The rest of the favourites have either not played yet or against weak teams.

 

[Hitro]

My mistake, I thought Czech Republic v Italy was the second group match. It's a pity that in fact several of the last group matches are likely to have no impact on qualification (Sweden-England, Portugal-Mexico, Czechs v Italy and, I hope, Netherlands vs Argentina). Anyone know whether this is a deliberate effect of the seeding ?

Officially it is not. After they were drawn in groups the positions within those groups were also drawn. So it is supposedly random, albeit with a potentially bad outcome in groups B,C,D and E.
But Spain plays against Ukraine first and so does France against Switzerland. Also Poland could have been considered to be one of the two strongest teams in group A before the tournament and they play Germany in the second match.

 

[woodelf]

My mistake, I thought Czech Republic v Italy was the second group match. It's a pity that in fact several of the last group matches are likely to have no impact on qualification (Sweden-England, Portugal-Mexico, Czechs v Italy and, I hope, Netherlands vs Argentina). Anyone know whether this is a deliberate effect of the seeding ?

The way it looks (to my novice eye) the 1-2 of each group meet in the last match. I think that kind of sucks, but maybe a team already through can spoil another's bid?

 

[woodelf]

I defer to Hitro.

 

[Hitro]

The thing already annoyed me during the draw. It would likely have been far more exciting if for example England would have opened against Sweden and Argentina against the Netherlands.

 

[kronic]

I think that won't matter much for Italy vs. Czech Republic. I hardly believe they're are keen on meeting Brazil in the next round. So both teams will try to win the match...

 

[Marla_Singer]

The thing already annoyed me during the draw. It would likely have been far more exciting if for example England would have opened against Sweden and Argentina against the Netherlands.

Honnestly, I would have liked a lot better to play the Swiss as last ones than as first ones.

 

[Inter4]

Is it just me?
I've probably seen another game.

The first 20 minutes were a Ghanese siege.
Then after Toni hitting the bar we recovered but still with the fixation with long passes. We don't seem good enough to hold the ball if not like the Argentinians, at least like the Czechs.
In the end it turned out to be a lucky game but WTH every time Italy plays it's either a boring game or, like this time, a continuous heart-attack.
I mean, have you seen Nesta saving from a potential equaliser a ball with the heel?

Yeah, that' what I was about to say.. I was talking with a friend of mine and we both agreed that Italy played very bad.. I expected more of them.

At the end, a win's a win.

 

[Winner]

Koller wasn't worth it With Koller out of tournament, we have 20% less chance of getting through

 

[woodelf]

Koller wasn't worth it With Koller out of tournament, we have 20% less chance of getting through

Sadly I agree. He's a man-beast out there.

 

[Hitro]

Honnestly, I would have liked a lot better to play the Swiss as last ones than as first ones.

Exactly my point.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Yeah, that' what I was about to say.. I was talking with a friend of mine and we both agreed that Italy played very bad.. I expected more of them.

At the end, a win's a win.

Maybe we were all influenced by our respective commentators ?

Obviously the Germans have seen the best game of the World Cup, maybe that's what the German commentators told. On the other side, Italian commentators may have been very pessimistic during the full game, and would have as such influenced the viewers.

We had Arsène Wenger commenting in France, and I've found him very moderate in his comments. I think he was right to say that Ghana had a Champion's league midfield, but weak forwards. This seems to have been proven later during the game. As for Italians, they were clearly better organized and you can see this as it was a lot harder for Ghana to take them in counters. Nearly all Ghanean shots have been taken from the midfield, I guess that's supposed to say something.

All this to say that I would certainly not consider Italy's performence as desappointing. That's obviously about under-estimating the quality of the Ghanean midfield, but I wouldn't either consider Italy as the current ruler of the competition, as Ghana has shown weakness both in defence and attack.

It's simply too soon to tell, but honnestly, I would be very happy if France would have the same start as Italy on tomorrow !

 

[Marla_Singer]

Exactly my point.

You're sadistic.

 

[Hitro]

Koller wasn't worth it With Koller out of tournament, we have 20% less chance of getting through

Probably. He and Nedved are your best players. Is he definetely out of it, though?

 

[Hitro]

You're sadistic.

No, I like exciting games, not "let's not attack because with result X both of us are through" games like Germany - Austria in 1982...

 

[Hitro]

Obviously the Germans have seen the best game of the World Cup, maybe that's what the German commentators told.

We had him turned off.

I guess the Italians here just think their team sucks if it doesn't play a Catenaccio.

 

[Marla_Singer]

No, I like exciting games, not "let's not attack because with result X both of us are through" games like Germany - Austria in 1982...

That was deeply pathetic. France still remembers that as Algeria has been unfairly fooled because of that and later on a French player has lost his inferior jaw as a consequence.

We should have won that game !

 

[Winner]

Probably. He and Nedved are your best players. Is he definetely out of it, though?

Well, he's being optimistic, saying that it's "just a tear" and he'll be back in few days. On the other hand, Brückner says it's really, really bad. He won't be available for the games with Ghana and Italy, that's for sure.

 

[Rhye]

Maybe we were all influenced by our respective commentators ?

Obviously the Germans have seen the best game of the World Cup, maybe that's what the German commentators told. On the other side, Italian commentators may have been very pessimistic during the full game, and would have as such influenced the viewers.

Italian commentators were quite optimistic.

I guess the Italians here just think their team sucks if it doesn't play a Catenaccio.

But do you really see much difference from past year's Italy?
I see no big difference in playstile with 2002 and 2004 Trapattoni's Italy, 2000 Zoff's, and 1998 Maldini's. Maybe the only difference are the substitutions.
Anyway I'm happy as long as we win, whatever the play style (yes, catenaccio is good sometimes), but I don't want my heart to break, I'm too young. We shouldn't suffer so much, especially with B-teams like Ghana.