2014 World Cup Thread

[TheGreatGatsby]

 

[Statistikhengst]

The final game was good for the first 60-70 minutes as the two teams went at each other though they couldn't finish. Predictably, they both began to tighten up as players began to worry about making a critical mistake that might cost them the World Cup. But in the end, the right team won.

It was an excellent tournament. The soccer was free-flowing, and there were several surprises, not least the collapse of Brazil.

that [MENTION=2926]Toro[/MENTION]

Non-soccerites don't understand how damned good a 0:0 game can be.

In the finals, the two last teams were equally yoked: Deutschland and Argentinien.

Both are very, very good teams and played hard ball.

I counted 18 major storm attempts by the Germans and 18 major storm attempts by the Argentinians before Götze sealed the deal in the 113th minute with an amazing kick. Both goalies were absolutely outstanding, which is why the game stayed at 0:0 so long. Most think that Neuer is the best goalie in the world and the best in the WM since 1990. He is practically unbeatable. But Romero is also an amazingly adept goalie and has good, good eyes for everything that's going on on the field.

To be honest, the Argentinians were faster and have an incredible stormer, practically a one-man team, Messi, but the Germans were the better oiled-team. After 30 minutes, the Germans LET the Argentinians run like crazy, keeping the ball in middle-field for longer than necessary and moving less, to save energy for the second half.

The goal like Götze's goal was 1/2 technique, 1/2 luck, and he grabbed the opportunity.
And remember, Germany's main goal-scoring star is Klose, not Götze, and not Müller or Özil. But the team didn't care WHO got the goal in, they just cared THAT they got it in. Argentina, on the other hand, relied way too much on it's one man show.

Soccer and Basketball are the two most aerobic sports we know of. I think that soccer is even more aerobic, alone for the fact that it is played outdoors and a runner has to contend with the elements as well, something a basketballer does not have to do.

And soccer is a sport where there are legal dirty tricks that can change an outcome, which is why all of a sudden Schweinsteiger was getting injured by players from Argentina all over the place. But damn, with blood on his face, that dude did not give up.

And for you armchair goalies who think they know everything: when Neymar (Brasil) was injured, prayer-chains and websites wishing him a really speeding recovery sprung up all over Germany. The German 11 also sent him their best wishes. The Germans play hard, but they are also good, decent sportsmen. As are many other teams.


Now, onward to 2020!

 

[Statistikhengst]

USA 2022 motherfuckers

Maybe.

FIFA, in all it's glorious corruptness, awarded the 2022 World Cup to a country the size of Connecticut, with the population of Columbus Ohio and 115F heat.

Try and imagine Columbus hosting the World Cup. In 115F heat.

Won't that be fun?

Lol...... allow him his fantasy....

 

[Statistikhengst]

Germany was far from a weak team. They would've given any previous champion a run for their money.

The goal was good but that´s it.

one goal is enough, if the other team has higuain and palacio being totally afraid of neuer.

All you need is one more goal than the other team...

 

[Toro]

argentina was a mediocre team that had a great chance to win it all; but they flubbed their chances. Honestly, costa rica, ghana, usa, belgium, netherlands, mexico, colombia, chile, etc were all probably better teams than argentina in this tourney.

lol

You must not've been watching. You're probably just a highlights guy.

I disagree.

I picked Argentina to go to the finals from the beginning because they had the most talent, more than Germany. But they chose to play defensively, and they played defensively very well. Argentina had their chances to win but couldn't take them.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

lol

You must not've been watching. You're probably just a highlights guy.

I disagree.

I picked Argentina to go to the finals from the beginning because they had the most talent, more than Germany. But they chose to play defensively, and they played defensively very well. Argentina had their chances to win but couldn't take them.

Well, you don't necessarily disagree. I by no means was shocked to see Argentina make it to the final. But they were not especially impressive, and there is a case that many teams were simply better.

In maybe the weakest group of all, Argentina won all of their games by only a goal. Against Switzerland, the game didn't go to shootouts because the guy hit the post from point blank instead of burying it in the back of the net. I'd say they played their best game against Belgium, but in the end the offense was anemic in a 1-0 win. They beat Netherlands in shootouts after going 0-0. More often than not, Netherlands finds a way to get goals. Were they lucky that Sneider had to sit out? Then, against Germany, they did what they had to do to have a chance of winning (like they always do), but they came up short. But they did not otherwise look like the same class of teams as Germany throughout this tournament.

Before the tourney started, I would have called Argentina a top 5-10 team that is very beatable. I'd still say that. I don't think that at all about Germany. And as far as the tourney goes, I don't think Argentina played like the second best team. You could make a case for it, I guess. Their offense was whatever Messi was going to give them on any given day. That's enough to beat anyone on any given day for what it's worth.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Schweinsteiger laying on the pitch before Messi's free Kick was ridiculous, it was obvious he was just wasting added time. The Ref should have ordered him off the field with a red card and a spatula

 

[Statistikhengst]

Schweinsteiger laying on the pitch before Messi's free Kick was ridiculous, it was obvious he was just wasting added time. The Ref should have ordered him off the field with a red card and a spatula

The move is legal.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Schweinsteiger laying on the pitch before Messi's free Kick was ridiculous, it was obvious he was just wasting added time. The Ref should have ordered him off the field with a red card and a spatula

hahaha, that time was added later. icing the messi is totally legal. at least as legal as blooding the schweini.

 

[Statistikhengst]

"blooding the schweini"


LOL.....

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

argentina was a mediocre team that had a great chance to win it all; but they flubbed their chances. Honestly, costa rica, ghana, usa, belgium, netherlands, mexico, colombia, chile, etc were all probably better teams than argentina in this tourney.

lol

You must not've been watching. You're probably just a highlights guy.

I watched every game. I guarantee I follow football more closely than you, you simply don't understand what you are talking about if you think Costa Rica, Ghana, USA or Mexico for example were better than Argentina.

And the South American teams you listed, Argentina beat them all in World Cup qualifying, and beat Belgium in the World Cup itself.

Of the group you mentioned, the Netherlands and perhaps Belgium had a shot to beat Argentina realistically, but they certainly didnt have a better tournament, and when they came up against them, they couldn't break Argentine defense and lost.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

Schweinsteiger laying on the pitch before Messi's free Kick was ridiculous, it was obvious he was just wasting added time. The Ref should have ordered him off the field with a red card and a spatula

hahaha, that time was added later. icing the messi is totally legal. at least as legal as blooding the schweini.

Schweinsteiger is an embarrassment and a total flop. The story of him getting bloodied, talk about a story of a boy who cried foul. No one could have deserved it more than him .

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

You must not've been watching. You're probably just a highlights guy.

I disagree.

I picked Argentina to go to the finals from the beginning because they had the most talent, more than Germany. But they chose to play defensively, and they played defensively very well. Argentina had their chances to win but couldn't take them.

More often than not, Netherlands finds a way to get goals.
.

Except when it mattered in the knockout rounds, they didn't against Argentina, won in penalties against COSTA RICA, scoring no goals, and had to pull it out of their ass against Mexico in the final minutes.

They played well in group but lacked any consistency going into the knockout rounds and paid the price for it.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

lol

You must not've been watching. You're probably just a highlights guy.

I watched every game. I guarantee I follow football more closely than you, you simply don't understand what you are talking about if you think Costa Rica, Ghana, USA or Mexico for example were better than Argentina.

And the South American teams you listed, Argentina beat them all in World Cup qualifying, and beat Belgium in the World Cup itself.

Of the group you mentioned, the Netherlands and perhaps Belgium had a shot to beat Argentina realistically, but they certainly didnt have a better tournament, and when they came up against them, they couldn't break Argentine defense and lost.

If you know soccer, then you wouldn't be bringing up qualifying. There is example after example of teams who performed great in qualifying and sucked at the WC and teams that sucked in qualifying and were great at the WC (like Mexico).

Argentina did not have one wow game. They were a team that played tight, and they were relatively lucky to make it to the final. Ghana played Germany much better. And they played well in all three group games in a tough group. Argentina needed a last minute shot to beat the likes of Iran and were mediocre in all three group games. Costa Rica and Mexico wowed at this WC; something Argentina frankly never did. Perhaps, experience and talent got them to the final; but they were not in sync as a team at all.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I disagree.

I picked Argentina to go to the finals from the beginning because they had the most talent, more than Germany. But they chose to play defensively, and they played defensively very well. Argentina had their chances to win but couldn't take them.

More often than not, Netherlands finds a way to get goals.
.

Except when it mattered in the knockout rounds, they didn't against Argentina, won in penalties against COSTA RICA, scoring no goals, and had to pull it out of their ass against Mexico in the final minutes.

They played well in group but lacked any consistency going into the knockout rounds and paid the price for it.

They were too conservative in the knockout phase, and the coach made some bad decisions imo. They did outplay all three teams though imo. It's no fluke that they tore apart the defending champs, Spain.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

You must not've been watching. You're probably just a highlights guy.

I watched every game. I guarantee I follow football more closely than you, you simply don't understand what you are talking about if you think Costa Rica, Ghana, USA or Mexico for example were better than Argentina.

And the South American teams you listed, Argentina beat them all in World Cup qualifying, and beat Belgium in the World Cup itself.

Of the group you mentioned, the Netherlands and perhaps Belgium had a shot to beat Argentina realistically, but they certainly didnt have a better tournament, and when they came up against them, they couldn't break Argentine defense and lost.

If you know soccer, then you wouldn't be bringing up qualifying. There is example after example of teams who performed great in qualifying and sucked at the WC and teams that sucked in qualifying and were great at the WC (like Mexico).

Argentina did not have one wow game. They were a team that played tight, and they were relatively lucky to make it to the final. Ghana played Germany much better. And they played well in all three group games in a tough group. Argentina needed a last minute shot to beat the likes of Iran and were mediocre in all three group games. Costa Rica and Mexico wowed at this WC; something Argentina frankly never did. Perhaps, experience and talent got them to the final; but they were not in sync as a team at all.

Qualifying certainly matters. Argentina beat Colombia and Chile in qualifying and Chile and Colombia couldn't even beat Brazil in group(Brazil gave up 7 goals to Germany in regulation, Argentina gave up zero goals to germany in regulation and should have scored two of their own). Don't get me wrong Chile and Colombia have great individual talent, but as a team neither has the same quality of Argentina by a long shot.

Mexico played in a sub par group and their best performance was a draw against a drastically overrated Brazil side and a defeat of a mediocre Croatia side. They beat Cameroon by a goal(skated by) and gave up two goals in two minutes to Holland. Not such a great performance at all. They had more hype than previous years but performed no better.

You are just focusing on flash no substance. You claim I "just watch highlights", but it is very typically American to suggest they didn't have a "wow" game. They didn't need to have a "wow" game, they shut down all their opponents on the attack and scored when necessary. They just didn't score when necessary against Germany and shut down the most dangerous attacking side of the tournament for 115 minutes. Germany was the better team for sure because they took advantage of their chances. But Argentina had some sitters and could have very easily won the match by a goal or two.

Costa Rica had only one impressive match, against Uruguay, who wasn't nearly what they were four years ago. That is what we call an upset, not a reflection of reality.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

More often than not, Netherlands finds a way to get goals.
.

Except when it mattered in the knockout rounds, they didn't against Argentina, won in penalties against COSTA RICA, scoring no goals, and had to pull it out of their ass against Mexico in the final minutes.

They played well in group but lacked any consistency going into the knockout rounds and paid the price for it.

They were too conservative in the knockout phase, and the coach made some bad decisions imo. They did outplay all three teams though imo. It's no fluke that they tore apart the defending champs, Spain.

They were a good side, I think this was there last chance to win. Van Persie and Robben will be over the hill and not near their prime so I dojn't expect a semifinal run next World Cup. Though they have some great young defenders. Janmaat got picked up by Newcastle, Indi by Porto, and De Vriij by Man U or Lazio. I also think Vlaar had one cup left in him(he wil be 32, 33 I believe so he can anchor the back line). But they have attacking issues to resolve. Without these world class attackers like Snedjer, Van Persie and Robben in their prime, who will get those last minute goals for them?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I watched every game. I guarantee I follow football more closely than you, you simply don't understand what you are talking about if you think Costa Rica, Ghana, USA or Mexico for example were better than Argentina.

And the South American teams you listed, Argentina beat them all in World Cup qualifying, and beat Belgium in the World Cup itself.

Of the group you mentioned, the Netherlands and perhaps Belgium had a shot to beat Argentina realistically, but they certainly didnt have a better tournament, and when they came up against them, they couldn't break Argentine defense and lost.

If you know soccer, then you wouldn't be bringing up qualifying. There is example after example of teams who performed great in qualifying and sucked at the WC and teams that sucked in qualifying and were great at the WC (like Mexico).

Argentina did not have one wow game. They were a team that played tight, and they were relatively lucky to make it to the final. Ghana played Germany much better. And they played well in all three group games in a tough group. Argentina needed a last minute shot to beat the likes of Iran and were mediocre in all three group games. Costa Rica and Mexico wowed at this WC; something Argentina frankly never did. Perhaps, experience and talent got them to the final; but they were not in sync as a team at all.

Qualifying certainly matters. Argentina beat Colombia and Chile in qualifying and Chile and Colombia couldn't even beat Brazil in group(Brazil gave up 7 goals to Germany in regulation, Argentina gave up zero goals to germany in regulation and should have scored two of their own). Don't get me wrong Chile and Colombia have great individual talent, but as a team neither has the same quality of Argentina by a long shot.

Mexico played in a sub par group and their best performance was a draw against a drastically overrated Brazil side and a defeat of a mediocre Croatia side. They beat Cameroon by a goal(skated by) and gave up two goals in two minutes to Holland. Not such a great performance at all. They had more hype than previous years but performed no better.

You are just focusing on flash no substance. You claim I "just watch highlights", but it is very typically American to suggest they didn't have a "wow" game. They didn't need to have a "wow" game, they shut down all their opponents on the attack and scored when necessary. They just didn't score when necessary against Germany and shut down the most dangerous attacking side of the tournament for 115 minutes. Germany was the better team for sure because they took advantage of their chances. But Argentina had some sitters and could have very easily won the match by a goal or two.

Costa Rica had only one impressive match, against Uruguay, who wasn't nearly what they were four years ago. That is what we call an upset, not a reflection of reality.

No. Mexico was on their heels in the Brazil game and were bailed out by their goalie. It'd be like saying that the US played their best game against Belgium. Mexico played their best games against Croatia and Netherlands.

Argentina packed it in against Germany. They were just hoping to get a quick counter strike. You can't give them too much credit just because Germany didn't play up to their clinical greatness. And two of the three good Argentina chances were because of German mistakes, not because of any great execution by Argentina.

If Costa Rica had 'one impressive match' than it was just as many as Argentina, who had one impressive match if you wanted to give them that. Statistically there's a case. But Switzerland were playing a countering attack and weren't under too much duress.

If Germany-Argentina play that final five times, Germany wins four of the five and possibly five of the five. If you want to claim that Argentina was the second best team, I won't say you don't have a case. But the reality is that the rest the field was just not that great, Argentina included.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Except when it mattered in the knockout rounds, they didn't against Argentina, won in penalties against COSTA RICA, scoring no goals, and had to pull it out of their ass against Mexico in the final minutes.

They played well in group but lacked any consistency going into the knockout rounds and paid the price for it.

They were too conservative in the knockout phase, and the coach made some bad decisions imo. They did outplay all three teams though imo. It's no fluke that they tore apart the defending champs, Spain.

They were a good side, I think this was there last chance to win. Van Persie and Robben will be over the hill and not near their prime so I dojn't expect a semifinal run next World Cup. Though they have some great young defenders. Janmaat got picked up by Newcastle, Indi by Porto, and De Vriij by Man U or Lazio. I also think Vlaar had one cup left in him(he wil be 32, 33 I believe so he can anchor the back line). But they have attacking issues to resolve. Without these world class attackers like Snedjer, Van Persie and Robben in their prime, who will get those last minute goals for them?

Roben was the best player in the tourney at the age of 30. He's a beast who allegedly has impeccable fitness standards. My guess is you'll see him at the next WC. How much he will have lost, we shall see. He'll likely still be fairly flighty and still have good ball control and a rocket kick. Netherlands won't be passing on that imo.

RvP will likely be gone. But its not within the realm of possibility he'll not be back. I could see him being a part of the qualifying process if not making the squad.

Netherlands will likely want to go with a youth movement all the same. They need to reload in many ways.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

They were too conservative in the knockout phase, and the coach made some bad decisions imo. They did outplay all three teams though imo. It's no fluke that they tore apart the defending champs, Spain.

They were a good side, I think this was there last chance to win. Van Persie and Robben will be over the hill and not near their prime so I dojn't expect a semifinal run next World Cup. Though they have some great young defenders. Janmaat got picked up by Newcastle, Indi by Porto, and De Vriij by Man U or Lazio. I also think Vlaar had one cup left in him(he wil be 32, 33 I believe so he can anchor the back line). But they have attacking issues to resolve. Without these world class attackers like Snedjer, Van Persie and Robben in their prime, who will get those last minute goals for them?

Roben was the best player in the tourney at the age of 30. He's a beast who allegedly has impeccable fitness standards. My guess is you'll see him at the next WC. How much he will have lost, we shall see. He'll likely still be fairly flighty and still have good ball control and a rocket kick. Netherlands won't be passing on that imo.

RvP will likely be gone. But its not within the realm of possibility he'll not be back. I could see him being a part of the qualifying process if not making the squad.

Netherlands will likely want to go with a youth movement all the same. They need to reload in many ways.

Robben was still moving full speed at the 120th minute