Yes and yes. This is why I keep tearing out my hair over the Ghana apologists. The call was correct, but they missed the PK. It's basically people complaining that Suarez's play was unsportsmanlike (It was, and he got sent off). But by that measure, Ghana played pretty unsportsmanlike all through the elimination rounds. May I remind you of the blatant grassrolling against the USA, or all the shirt-tugging against Uruguay? My point stands--The law should stay the same. Referees should never allow goals unless the BALL goes over the LINE. End of. The outrage over Ghana's elimination is based entirely on the sentimental drivel of an African nation "Doing well in Africa's cup", and has nothing to do with an honest, pragmatic view of the game.
One thing to consider when considering different countries' reactions to the group is that there are different criteria that may factor in to how they view a draws difficulty. Teams like Ghana and USA just was to get out of any group they are placed in. For both this is probably the threshold of success or failure. Anything they do in the knockout rounds is just gravy. Germany, on the other hand, expects to get out of and likely win any group they are placed in. So for them, looking at draw looks beyond just the group phase. And when they look beyond the group phase they like what they see for their path deep in the tournament. Especially when compared to what they could have in Spain's group where they could end up with Brazil in the round of 16. Portugal likely also looks at the group like this, but with a somewhat lesser degree of confidence of getting out of it in the first place.
Well, Bild is already calling it "Hammer-Gruppe" --which of course means "Hammer-Group" but can be translated as "very tough group." http://www.bild.de/sport/fussball/wm-2014/jogi-jetzt-kommen-deine-gegner-33707772.bild.html The article mentions specially the USA, with Jogi paying his compliments to his old mate Jürgen, and vice versa. Then they say they're happy about the schedule that will allow them to watch the games in the evening, and then proceed to an overview of each group. While the German analysis does not call it a Todesgruppe, they're quite aware that is a group where no mistakes will be tolerated. The Jogi vs. Jürgen match once again as the focus of attention, with the Boateng Bros story as the second. http://www.zdfsport.de/löw-fifa-wm-2014-brasilien-auslosung-gruppe-30950580.html
This is a pretty spot on analysis, and I agree. When you look at it, the most pressure is on Portugal. The international media is aware that Ghana and the USA are powerhouse teams, but nobody outside of large segments of their own fanbases think they can advance provided that neither becomes the whipping boy of the group. Portugal is in the vise because they have the worst of the three schedules and actually are expected to advance. If we beat Ghana, and Portugal loses to Germany, the Portuguese will attack us, feeling the need for points at the same time knowing that they will be playing to take maximum points from us. We can really park the bus on them, and we should.
And that's why the first match is vital. A defeat against Ghana means the team can't just bunker for a tie against Portugal, but must go for the win at all costs.
The BBC did this nifty table of world cup performance over the years, which might be of interest to those who haven't seen it - it could be seen as an all-time world ranking list. Might be of interest for those who haven't seen it! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-25233859 Anyways just to say this is my first post after reading for a while, so hi! Two things I wanted to ask 2 things that came to mind reading through this particular thread. Firstly, if you accept that the USMNT doesn't have the same individual quality of France or England say, what allows them to compete on a similar level at the moment (time training together, national set-up etc)? Second, do you think the backlash against "eurosnobism" causes some on here to underestimate such teams? Thanks, and be nice!
The system for ranking was 3 points for a win and 1 for a draw, in group and knockout games. Holland won all their games in the group when Spain lost to Switzerland. Guessing a similar deal with Poland in 74.
In regards to the France and England question, I think the answer is very different for each of them, as far as what allows us to compete at a similar level. For France, the major problem for them is that their national program is a mess, and has been for 8 years now (and probably a lot longer, they just don't have Zidane to cover it up anymore) From an outsiders perspective, it seems as if the atmosphere around the french team is almost always toxic, and that tensions are very rarely low. This affects teamwork, which is deadly for a national team that doesn't have long to train together. England is different. I know this can be discounted because I'm American and therefore biased, but England doesn't have a team that is so much more individually talented than us that there need to be outside factors to explain why we can perform similarly to them. Don't get me wrong, individually they're better than us, but the gap isn't really all that big. The problem is that many people overrate the youngsters in the squad, which is understandable because they're being asked to follow in the footsteps of a very talented generation of players. There are a decent number of US players who would make the 23 man squad for England this summer, which is something that might never have been true in the past. As to the cause of people underestimating the teams, I don't think it's a backlash to the uneducated opinions of some Europeans. It's just fandom. Fans aren't analysts. We aren't neutral, and never claim to be. Similarly, I'm sure that if fans of England of France were asked to compare their teams to Germany or Spain, they would be at least somewhat dismissive of those two in order to lift confidence in their own team. That's just how being a fan works.
Staying with the German press, I don't think this has been linked from Die Zeit, a major weekly national German publication: http://www.zeit.de/sport/2013-12/wm-auslosung-loew It was reprinted last December from the German Berlin newspaper Tagesspiegel. The headline is more or less: The most difficult group that the Germans have ever been given. The article notes that according to the FIFA rankings this could be termed the most difficult group, and that it is probably the hardest group the Germans have ever had. But the author says it could be worse and cites the situation of the Dutch. He also looks at what one of the Dutch group winners will encounter in the next round (Brazil). He notes that without Klinsmann there would probably be no Löw, and that Bierhoff also owes his job to Jürgen.
You have to take into account that it is an old German tradition to prevent underestimating of any team. Talking (weaker) opponents up before games is what the public and team officials do most of the time. "The most difficult group ever been given" view derives from the well-recognized fact that Germany used to have luck in picking the easiest WC groups.
I learned something from this chart...Mexico has lost more games in the WC than any other country and they have the worst goal differential of all-time too. That's a whole lot of suffering right there. Ha!
Mexico sucked in the first world cups, they were not very good until say 1970 (really 1986) and latter. Think of Mexico as being the New Zealand (well NZ has done ok in terms of getting draws) and Concacaf being OFC back in the days. Mexico did not win a game in the world cup until their 5th World Cup.
BTW the 1950 to 1970’s of the history of the USA NT needs a lot of work. It seems like wiki writers want to forget about that era. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_men's_national_soccer_team#1950s.E2.80.931970s