Πάμε Μουνδιάλ (Off to the World Cup)

​

First off, big thanks to Ismitje, soccernutter, and these wonderful boards.

This is the only thread dedicated to Greece's travails to Rio. And I do mean travails, most of the results we've achieved so far have come from laborious displays. A disappointing loss to a free-scoring Bosnia, who are deserved front runners, has all but condemned us to the dreaded play-offs. But, after watching the game against Austria, I'm feeling very confident about our team.

I'll be back to offer more commentaries and please feel free to add your thoughts. Πάμε!

 

Posting taken from here.


(Lazaros with the winner)

Just some points on Greece's match against Lithuania:

Positives:

1. Great play on the goal. Maniatis played a couple of good passes out wide to stretch the Lithuanian defense: first to Torosidis, whose excellent one-touch pass kept time and space open for Greece to play the ball around, and second to Holebas, who had enough time to take a touch, pick his target man, and then plump in a beautiful cross. Lazaros also did well to get into Lithuania's blind spot, make the run, and finish with aplomb. Great play all around.


(Sokratis pressing an attacker out and wide)

2. Sokratis was MOTM. He made life impossible for Lithuania throughout the game. He closed them down at every turn and left them with no space whatsoever. He also did really well to both disrupt and frustrate Lithuania's rhythm, keeping the game firmly in our control. And he came to the relief of a fledgling Holebas on more than one occasion. He's the bedrock of this team and so far Greece's most outstanding player on our road to Rio.

3. Fresh faces like Lazaros and Manolas again demonstrate that Greece has options we all too often willingly ignore. Lazaros was fantastic. He showed some really clever touches and movement. At times his challenges were more wild than measured, but he showed great determination and spirit. Also, he's a bigger, more athletic, more energetic, more technically gifted, and stronger player than Salpingidis and this game proved he can be just as incisive, which is Salpingidis' greatest strength. Given time, Lazaros could develop a good understanding with Torosidis down that right wing if we persist with a 4-3-3.

Manolas looks really great from a development standpoint. Avraam never looked as assured of himself in his first run of games for Greece as Manolas has, so that's a very good sign given how well Avraam performed before his injury. Only time will tell if Manolas will become indispensable for Greece, but so far the prognosis is very promising and I would like to see him get more minutes.

Worries:

1. I suspect Lazaros got the nod because Salpingidis was very tired (due to his involvement in the GSL play-offs). Although, Santos could be looking to inject surprises into the attacking third to make our team less predictable, so that's a possibility. Manolas only played because Avraam was out injured, that's a given.

2. Holebas was our worst player. Too many chances came flying in because he failed to close players down or because he lost out on challenges for the ball. We desperately need to address our problems at left-back. I like him as a left-winger, but not as a left-back. I'm of the opinion we should have a back three once Kyriakos is fully fit. Sokratis at LB, Kyriakos at CB, and Manolas at RB. That will solve our problems and allow us to play a more attacking style. If we play stronger teams, I'd put Moras at CB and use Kyriakos as a quasi-libero similarly to how Ramos was used by Spain against Brazil in the final of the Confederations Cup.

3. We have to radically overhaul our midfield. The games against Austria and Lichtenstein are a good starting point. Karagounis is going to be 37 and Katsouranis is going to be 34 come the finals. The 2010 World Cup was a disaster until Kaita inexplicably got himself sent off and having these two oldies around four years later isn't making our chances appear any rosier. Karagounis still makes out as a great impact player. Katsouranis is more useful as depth or as someone who can come on late and close games. They absolutely can not start matches any longer. And it's not like we don't have options, I just need to cite how well Lazaros and Manolas performed to make that point.

 

Away to Lichtenstein in Vaduz
0-1, Mitroglou


(Greece's over jealous celebration after scoring against Lichtenstein)

Greece made heavy weather of Lichtenstein, a side FIFA rank's 148th in the world. To Santos's credit, Greece conceded no clear cut chances. In fact, the only shot on goal Lichtenstein ever produced in the game took place during the seven minute interval where they had a numerical advantage, a low drive that never looked like bothering Karnezis. By contrast, Greece had nine shots on goal and 19 efforts directed at goal in total, most of which, disappointingly, came in the second half. In fact, Greece had at least seven clear cut chances by my count and Mitroglou should have scored bags full. Clearly, Santos took note of Slovakia's draw against Liechtenstein in the last round of qualifiers, recognizing that even smaller nations can spring unwanted surprises and so he adopted a more cautious approach. In fairness, he can't be faulted if Mitroglou fails to convert gilt edge chances and Greece did show enough to merit a win.


(Santos standing pensively as the national anthems are played)

Santos' approach also had some other remarkable features. For example, Lazaros and Kone took set-pieces for Greece, even though Ninis, Karagounis, Holebas, and Tachtsidis were available to do so. He also took Lazaros from the right wing where he played in the match against Lithuania last time out and instead played him on the left in this match. Santos clearly wants Greece to become more versatile and, in lockstep with current international soccer fashions, less predictable. Uruguay are perhaps the trendiest in that regard, but Greece have also impressed and more so than most other nations at that.

Yet one still wonders how a few other tweaks to the team's tactics and selections could have seen us run away with a bigger and more comfortable margin of winning. For example, Santos' adoption of Rehhagel's reactive choice to employ forwards turned unorthodox wingers is hardly one of Greece's finest tactical/formal choices and one that dearly needs to be reviewed. Is there really any wisdom using Dimitris Papadopoulos as a winger? It's a decade later and he's still playing the same position for Greece, although no one but Santos would have predicted it. Furthermore, Holebas and Torosidis had no problem taking on 2-3 defenders at once, making easy work of Liechtenstein's flanks, particularly down Liechtenstein's right. Lazaros and Papadopoulos never looked as confident on the ball and offered little else, except when pressing, providing defensive coverage down the wings, and stretching the defense (although even then they were caught offside more times than warranted). Fact is, Greece appeared more fluid when Lazaros was subbed off and when Ninis shifted from center to left at free will, combining more effectively with Torosidis than Lazaros, Salpingidis, or Samaras ever have and likely ever will.

Tactical decisions aside, the most questionable selection was that of Siovas and of Papadopoulos. Papadopoulos has been out of favor for years and only appears to have been selected due to his close ties with former teammates, like Santos' assistant Fyssas. Perhaps Santos is a romantic and believes he can resurrect the career of a once promising player, but in that case he should leave the quixotic fetishes to more gifted coaches who actually have more than five days to work with him. Siovas, on the other hand, had one of the clearest chances of the game, and like against Slovakia, he failed to score from within the six yard box. It brings to mind why the tallest player in the Series A, Moras, continues to be overlooked, despite an impressive performance against Balotelli when Hellas Verona were victorious against AC Milan two weekends ago, and why Manolas, who despite an impressive performance against Lithuania last time out for Greece, was overlooked against a more inferior Liechtenstein.


(Maniatis filling in at right-back as Torosidis fills in for Holebas)

The other questionable selection is two-folded and revolves around why Santos felt compelled to play both Maniatis and Katsouranis against Liechtenstein. Perhaps he felt their versatility defensively was useful or he felt that both are important pillars in his team, but it appeared to be overkill. It's hard seeing Liechtenstein producing credible chances on goal even if neither Maniatis or Katsouranis played given the strength of Greece's defensive options. It's worth mentioning in that regard how Slovakia and Armenia, teams that have suffered humiliating defeats to minnow in recent games, are not as resolute defensively as Greece. Again, it demonstrates Santos' preference for caution; however, Greece should approach a match like this with more confidence. Bolder selections should have been made.

One promising sign was the inclusion of Ninis and Tachtisidis on the same pitch, who have only played together once in a friendly against Ireland. Both are set to command Greece's midfield in the years to come and Santos should be building towards a team oriented around these two. It was Santos' best decision on the night and one he needs to persist with making.

 

Home to Latvia in Athens
1-0, Salpingidis


(Salpingidis takes a deep breath after scoring for Greece)

This game arguably saw Greece's best spell of play under Santos, mainly at about the 30th minute mark of the match. A spell where a monotonous and intricate slew of passing managed to neatly carve Latvia open on a few occasions. Soon after, however, the team lost its rhythm. The long passes started to fall astray, then the first touches became heavier and awkward, then the short passes were either missed because the player spent too much time thinking where to place his pass or he rushed his pass, then the positions players took up were wrongly anticipated. Bit by bit, Greece began to lose their concentration, but Latvia were poor and failed to take advantage of Greece's lapse. Even Sokratis looked unfocused on occasion--it was a rare sight for a player of his quality.

This was still a vintage Greek win, despite the promising first half performance. Even the goal was reminiscent to the goals Greece scored against Ukraine in Donetsk and against Turkey in Istanbul. It was a great play by Samaras to allow a finely positioned Salpingidis to score a simple, well placed finish. Greece still needs to improve and Santos has to reconfigure his team to a structure and style that works for a newer generation of players rather than passing by on 1-0 successes thanks to a system implemented by his more illustrious predecessor.

 

I agree. Plus, we will be seeded in the play-offs, so we will avoid playing France or Portugal. But our team needs to improve and we have the potential to play better.

 

​

Unless Greece scores some 20 odd goals or Bosnia drop points, we'll be condemned to the playoffs. Despite our woes, we will almost certainly be seeded (click <-).

Shockingly, and this may come as a surprise to some (it was for me!), it turns out Les Poupons Terribles mightn't be seeded. France will be the strongest team in the playoffs if that's the case. Perhaps of greater concern is the favoritism they receive from referees when they play in Paris. Just think back on what happened to Ireland or Bosnia. The referee was the difference in those games and the same will be true for any team that draws them in the playoffs. So spending Une Nuit A Paris is the worst case scenario if for no other reason than the referee. That said, France have underperformed in circumstances like these in the past. Moreover, France struggled for a recent stretch to score goals.

France aside, I would love to see us up against Ukraine again for old time sake's. That would be a great encounter and I'm sure the Ukrainians share those sentiments.

 

If we finish second in our qualifying group we would then have to play a two-legged knock-out match against one of the eight other best 2nd placed teams from the European qualifying groups.

Right now croatia, sweden, hungary, iceland, portugal, greece, ukraine, france are all in second place. As things now stand, Croatia, Portugal, Greece, and Sweden have the best chance to be seeded. That means we will be drawn with one of Hungary, Iceland, France or Ukraine, assuming they finish in second place, because they would be unseeded. So, we could end up with France in the playoffs. That's what I mean by being seeded.

If we qualify for the finals, we will be among the second pot like we were in 2010.

 

A big test is coming up against Slovakia.

Likely line-up:

Karnezis
Torosidis---Siovas---Sokratis---Holebas
Ninis---Maniatis---Tziolis
Salpingidis---Mitroglou---Samaras
​

I see a couple of problems with this. First off, Karnezis has been riding the bench all season and he's our best option in goal. That's a worry. Also, how do we cope with Slovakia on the wings? I see Holebas being drawn back to defensive duties. The problem with that? He offers little assurance defensively and it will draw Sokratis out of position, which will give more space for Hamsik to wreak havoc. Plus, it will nullify Holebas on the attack, where he's of actual use. In other words, we are playing right into Slovakia's hands. Our left side has been the biggest problem for us on several occasions. To date, Santos has offered no welcomed solution. Likewise concerns exist on our right wing. Torosidis has featured far too little for Roma this season. I'm convinced he'll put in a lipid display. Lastly, the midfield looks to be outmatched to that of Slovakia's. We'll get overrun again, just like in Bratislava.

My problems broken down,

1. We have four players in defense, but only two of them can defend. So, expect Hamsik and company to overrun us once more. Maybe this time they won't botch it, but I wouldn't bet on it.
   
2. In the midfield, we are outnumbered, too small, and too slow. Maniatis and Ninis offer no bite. Tziolis is big, but too slow and lethargic to keep up with Hamsik or Weiss or anyone else for that matter. I find that Santos will reason that either Maniatis or Ninis will need to sit out. Either Tachtsidis for Ninis or Siovas for Maniatis. Maybe both. That will give us size, which we could use as leverage over Slovakia, but we still lack speed which we will be a problem. I now wonder, could there be any better time to put Torosidis in the center of the pitch? He would more than welcome the opportunity if it means reinventing his career at Roma. He stands no chance of competing with Maicon, but Bradley, no problem.
   
3. Our options up top will be close to useless. That means three of our players will be out of the game. And expect Samaras to go Rambo, again, and again, and again.

My line-up:

Karnezis
Siovas
Manolas---Moras---Sokratis
Lazaros---Torosidis---Ninis---Tziolis---Holebas
Mitroglou​

Why?

Siovas to help cover for Moras lack of pace and to help shore up an unfamiliar back four. His presence will also lend more reassurance to Karnezis. I selected Lazaros on the right wing because he's a familiar face, in a familiar role for Greece, in an unfamiliar setup. He also has a very good rapport with Ninis. Torosidis for reasons already noted and like Lazaros, he combines well with Ninis. Ninis was selected because he has been in fine form for Greece. Hopefully he recreates the kind of form we saw against Lithuania. We need him to control this game, he needs to make things revolve around him so that things don't revolve around Hamsik. This is key. Tziolis over Tachtisidis due the former's club involvement with Ninis. He has also shown some good play for both PAOK and Greece, albeit nothing too worthy of praise. Holebas in my system is put to better use. He's now in a more attacking role, where he'll be much more effective. For me, this is another key component to this game. We need to properly set up our left wing. With Holebas attacking, rather than defending, we will turn the table on the Slovakians. Mitroglou up top because he has been stunning when the mood has struck him. He plays off his confidence, which is why he scores in bunches. Let's hope it strikes him again, and again, and again.

Basically,

1. It's a new system, but it's not totally unfamiliar (the shape is somewhat similar to the way we play under our form of the 4-3-3). This also means leaving out Mavrias, Samaris, and Tachtsidis for the sake of team cohesion, even if all them are worthy of breaking into our eleven.
   
2. This system employs a sweeper for defensive reassurance. No way Slovakia finds a way past us now, unless Karnezis gets blind sided by the sort of Pecovsky strike that beat Bosnia.
   
3. Ninis is central to everything. Notice how every player I selected in the midfield has a good rapport/familiarity with Ninis. This is how we cancel out Hamsik without becoming overtly negative. We let Ninis boss the game, not Hamsik. If Ninis ain't happening, then let's send out Fetfatzidis/Karagounis to salvage something at least.
   
4. Holebas goes from being a weakness to a strength.
   
5. The superfluous forwards are dropped. Pandemoneum, you must be happy with this: no Samaras!

 

Greece is desperate for a player of Torosidis' attributes in the midfield. He's fast, technical, energetic, ambidextrous, and strong... qualities no other Greek midfielder embodies in whole. Considering that Maniatis worked out well in the midfield after being converted from the right-back, I had wonder if Torosidis could make the adjustment, especially now that he's getting older, when the brain begins to work better than the body. You may disagree with me on Bradley, but Torosidis is surely better than Maniatis (and for the record, I think Maniatis is a better option than Bradley).

 

On Bradley, he's combative and energetic. He's a counter-weight to players like Totti, Pjanic, and De Rossi and for that reason he complements the Roman midfield well, but he's Roma's version of what was once United's Park Ji-Sung. Both are good players, but nothing spectacular. They have one really great quality, though, their energy. They can wear opponents down, but to ask for more from them is to ask for too much. And most experts would acknowledge that both Ji-Sung and Bradley were bought in part, but not in whole, as marketing ploys. Korea has a population of 50 million. The US has over 350 million showing glimmers of enthusiasm for soccer. They're big markets and players like Bradley help clubs like Roma grow their global brand.

Top ten? To put him on a list in the same breath as Messi, Ronaldo, Iniesta, Xavi, Falcao, Schweinsteiger, Ribery, Pirlo, and Neymar is asking for trouble. Even as far as players of his ilk go, there is Freddy Guarin, Claudio Marchisio, Sami Khedira, Yaya Toure... these are considerably talented players, if not more gifted than Bradley, and only Toure ever features among the experts top tens (let alone my lowly opinions). I will concede though, Maniatis isn't a better player and Torosidis doesn't possess the aptitude to cover as much ground as Bradley game in, game out. I must think a little more straight in the morning than I do at night!

 

Here's the squad for our next to qualifiers:

Do we really need Katsouranis against Liechtenstein at home? After all, he's ineligible against Slovakia. Meanwhile, Dimitris Papadopoulos was dropped, but why did he ever get called up last time? Wasn't it obvious from the get go that he had no business playing on the national team? Also, there's the elephant in the room, our unchanging left-back situation. It's been two years since that the writing has been on the wall. Holebas is a winger, not a defender. Tzavellas is a mismatch against quick, strong, athletic players. Why does our coaching staff keep burying their head in the sand on this?

Here's another sticking point, we only called up Sokratis, Manolas and Siovas as center backs. What if Avraam and Kyriakos aren't fit come the time of the finals? In the event they are fit, but not match fit, will we see a repeat of the mistake Santos made when he disastrously fielded a clearly unready Avraam against Bosnia? Moreover, how long will Sokratis, Manolas and Siovas last without getting suspended or injured at the finals? Does Santos even trust Manolas? Would we see Manolas suffer the same indignity suffered by Malezas at EURO 2012? More importantly, does this mean we will be partaking in another finals where we could see either Katsouranis or Vyntra fielded as center-backs?

 

According to Wikipedia, any suspensions that were the result of an accumulation of two yellow cards over two different matches doesn't carry through to the tournament itself. So players begin with a clean slate if they have one or two yellow cards accumulated to their name by the end of the qualifying phase. If I understand the rules correctly, however, any suspensions due to a red card in the final qualifier would carry through to the tournament. Also, any suspensions which are the result of violent conduct could carry a longer suspension than a one-match ban. This ban would apply to the tournament as well. This is what happened to Rooney at EURO 2012 after he kicked a Montenegrin player in qualifying.

Right now we have 5 players on yellows; Salpingidis, Samaras, Karagounis, Kone, and Torosidis (Source: ESPN). Katsouranis is our only player currently suspended (he received a red card against Latvia).

 

Looks like we've become as predictable as I thought:

(Source: Ναυτεμπορική)

There are other websites reporting that Lazaros might get the nod ahead of Salpingidis, which I find doubtful. In other news, Sokratis could be out injured (or we could just be playing mind games with the Slovaks). Reports suggest he could be fit in time for Lichtenstein (if anyone should care).

 

Reports on the opposition confirm that Hamsik is out (he wasn't called up), while Stoch is back in the Slovakian fold.

Here's a list of the players Slovakia called-up:

 

I should have taken Kostas Kefalogiannis up on his offer (read). This was a boring game, a chore for any adoring Greek fan to watch. Nor did I exaggerate when I wrote we're as predictable as I thought.

Folks, go through the following ten questions and get back to me:

1. Were you fully convinced of Sokratis' now confirmed contrived injury?
2. Did you really think Salpingidis wouldn't start? My only genuine surprise was the inclusion of Lazaros in the midfield and the inclusion of Manolas over Siovas, which leads to my next two questions.
   
3. Why was Manolas good enough to play against Slovakia today, but not good enough for matches against Latvia and Liechtenstein a month ago? Why was the opposite true for Siovas? What exactly changed in a month?
   
4. Why did Ninis come on in place of Lazaros at a time when our team looked even more disinterested than at the start and a time when the game's momentum had shifted firmly in favor of Slovakia (in other words, when we lost control of the game)? Was not Ninis the reason why we dominated Lithuania and, in the previous two rounds, Latvia and Liechtenstein?
5. Who was more central to our play: Ninis or Maniatis? Why?
   
6. More importantly, how many crosses were delivered by Salpingidis and Samaras today?
7. Also, how often did Holebas threaten on the wing? Was he drawn back defensively more often than he should have been drawn back?
   
8. Why were we so conservative in a home match to Slovakia and in a game that was of little to no importance? Why not be more adventurous? If not this game, then which games can we afford to play more positively?
9. If we played more positively, would the players have relished this game rather than treat it as much as a chore as the rest of us who had to watch?
   
10. Would the answers to these specific questions lead us to conclude why we failed to create more than three shots on target?

Anyways, we showed the same old same old.

Samaras and Sokratis used too many dirty tricks. Sokratis clashing with Stoch's knee, Samaras deliberately stamping on Weiss's heel. Holebas didn't play the game of his life as a defender, we just kicked out at the dangerous Slovakian wingers. We hobbled them so that they couldn't threaten us and we got away with because we were playing at home. More disturbingly, Samaras' play acting is surely the only reason to think he could play at Barcelona. Weiss could well have learned a thing or two; his reaction when Samaras stamped on his heel, which was genuine, was far too delayed for the referee to take action against Samaras. When Samaras rightly received the same treatment from a Slovak defender--this was early in the second-half not long after the Slovakia coach must have alerted his team of our antics during his half-time pep talk--Samaras made no mistake in selling the referee on carding his marker.

Samaras is clearly an experienced player. He does little things well, too, like backing into a player, nudging him just as he is getting ready to jump for the ball. This prevents the player from actually jumping for the ball. Regardless, Samaras doesn't do the more important things well, like shooting and crossing, things you'd expect a forward or, for that matter, a winger to do.

Holebas did improve defensively this match, but he was defending too often and not getting forward enough. Moreover, he was rarely bothered by Weiss, who looked hobbled by Samaras' Machiavellian challenge from earlier in the game. When Holebas concentrates and is in a confident mood, he defends well, but without the concentration and confidence, he is dreadful. Worse yet, his tough guy attitude is going to come at a cost. He needs to smarten up, he needs to pick himself up and get on with the game instead of starring players down seconds after he gets tangled with them. He does get rough treatment here and there, but that's no excuse for the hot headed rage he so easily falls prey to.

Mitroglou was as useless as his wingers. No surprise.

For all my criticism of Salpingidis, he did work hard and he produced a great effort at goal from distance, even if it missed the target. Still, he belongs on the pitch only as an impact sub, not as a starter.

A passionless coach, a passionless display. It's that simple.

 

The team needs to evolve and Santos has gone from promising to reluctant to unable in attempting to take us to that next level. And it's not just Santos. The EPO, the Superleague, the clubs, the players, it's a bit of everything. What's frustrating is that it's been 3 years now and there have been no changes to write home about. Moreover, we need to face facts: we can longer play like we did in our 2002-2004 pomp. We don't wear the opposition down anymore, we're just sitting ducks. Katsouranis used to run the opposition ragged in concert with Zagorakis, now it's just Katsouranis and he sits and absorbs. A change is in the cards.

 

I think we'll qualify, but I'm less sure that we will play with much offensive purpose in either game, let alone the home game. We will be very conservative, as we were against Slovakia, aiming to make fewer mistakes than our opponents while taking advantage of any mistakes they make. Beyond that, Santos will be looking to Samaras and maybe Mitroglou to make the difference with whatever scavenger chances we produce. Samaras was key in penultimate qualifiers against Turkey in '07 with the game winning assists, Ukraine in '09 when he again registered a game winning assist, and Croatia in '11 when he scored the game winning goal. In addition, Mitroglou is more than capable of scoring past any defense we stand to face in the play-offs, including that of France. Plus, he scores in bunches, so if he grabs one goal, a second or even third could realistically follow.

As an aside, there are reports going round that the EPO is giving Lithuania a financial incentive to take points off Bosnia (read).