No I am sure those victories count to a point and that isn't what I really meant or mean but they are two completely different eras and contrasting styles of play. Italy doesn't employ that type of game any longer and it would be impossible in this day and age as the game has entirely changed since those days. There also isn't anyone alive to even remember those days nor does that Italy still exist. For starters, if you think back to that time, there was a lot of corruption as opposed to now. There may still be some of this today but you can't even imagine how it was in those days and there was quite a lot of it all around and matches were fixed. Il Duce had a hand in a lot of it and so did many teams , players and clubs alike. Italy today or at least since 1970 until present day, plays a completely different brand of football. I've read Vittorio Pozzo's book and his philosophy on the game (back then) is not the same as it is now. Those teams relied quite heavily on attack. There was no 4-4-2 or 5-4-1. It was actually more like a "metodo" 3-2-5 where you had 5 forwards. When Pozzo had everyone in a 6 week camp in Norther Italy prior to WC 1934, he had Nereo Rocco in camp as a camp player. He was playing checkers with Gigi Allemandi (who had been suspended for life for throwing a match and then graced by the King and brought back into league and the national squad by Pozzo) and he was coming up with his "catenaccio" plan on the board. When Pozzo heard him talking, he told him, "Rocco, this is not the way you play the game"! Basically, he was upset and against the defensive style that Nereo was coming up with. He said" Rocco, this is not the way the game is played! If you score one, you have to score two, if you score two, you have to score three! Always one more"! Rocco was cut before the final 22 man squad was named and never played for the national team again but he later gained fame managing Milan. Anyway, I have never seen Italy use and employ this mentality , I mean not since 1970 onward. Therefore, its almost impossible to compare the two eras. Even the Grande Torino wouldn't be able to play in today's world and also, these players are a lot better , stronger and faster than they were in those days. Even more so today than in the 70's, 80's & 90's.
I know youre 100 percent bro and I know the point youre making. Its just ive heard ppl say those cups dont count quite a few times now thats all.
Is there even a way of quantifying this? I don't think so. Betting syndicates, drugs and overall communications are much more sophisticated these days that it's become an art of subtlety these days. I think corruption is just as great now a days, if not greater. Yet the only real evidence for any of that was a very newspaper articles which "alleged" there was a hand involved, one of which was inspired by a Spanish defender who was crying that his tackle was legit. Happens now in almost every week of play. In other words the evidence was no greater than the accusations the the Germans doped in 54, England paid the linesmen in 66, Argentina paid off Peru in 78, French chefs poisoned Ronaldo in 98, etc. So it's really hard to make conclusive judgements. What I have observed is that since the Heysel incident and because the FIGC at the time was instrumental in swaying UEFA to ban English clubs from Europe for quite some time, the inference that Italians cheat more has been a real focal point in English media of all sorts. Social Scientists understand this principle quite well, and that is if you repeat something enough times, most people just accept it as truth! Do you think Hitler would allow Mussolini to rig the 1936 Olympics by any chance? Just food for thought.
I'm sure I'm reading you wrong because the way I read that statement above, I have to disagree. Italy always has been and will be a tournament team, typically starting slow and finishing strong. Who knows what could have been if minor hurdles were made in 04, or even if Tomassi's golden goal stood in 02. Maybe you're saying they take time to get it going? Italy weren't playing for penalties in 68, 70, 82, 90, or 2000 for that matter. 2012 was only the 2nd time in history that Italy suffered a heavy defeat, and both occasions the scoreline was flattering. Italy's national team play together as much as all other national teams play together. Training, on the other hand could increase, but the clubs won't release players for anything more than they're already obliged to!
You misunderstood. I'm saying Italy is a strong team. Probably IMHO, the strongest in the world next to Brazil but they don't have a strong forward line and that is a proven fact and if they did they wouldn't keep going out on pk's as they did in 3 straight tournaments. Maybe other countries have the same problem but I can care less about them as I'm only talking about Italy. My overall point however is different . If Italy as a national team were to play a US men's national team schedule of maybe 20 games per year , where you bring in maybe 4-5 (at most) different players at one time but leaving the same core group of 5-6 players , playing together, they would be unbeatable. They would develop cohesion, they would learn how to play together and they would know each other just as a club team would. I mean any strong club with star players that play together for 20 games a year is bound to get better. Playing 5 times a year however, IMHO will do nothing to improve national team play and things will just remain the same. I'm not saying things are bad the way they are mind you, but I am saying , they can be a lot better. I never understood why no one seems to understands this but its a very simple concept to grasp. One of the biggest problems however IMHO, comes from the clubs as well as the FIGC who don't care about the national team until tournament time. My uncle played for Serie C and B sides in the late 40's & early 50's and he told me back then everyone was corrupted, They even tricked him into signing a lifetime contract that they screwed him out of and he ended up moving to the USA via Australia. As far as corruption is concerned, its been going on in Italy and the rest of the world since before Roman times. The only reason why things are known more today are because there are more lines of communication and easy access information but corruption is something that will not ever go away. As long as there is money involved in soccer and/or sport, match fixing , corruption or whatever you want to call it, will exist.
You're right, I didn't get that point because you didn't say any of that, lol. You're probably making general statements out of error, believing that going out in PK's is actually correlated with having poor forwards, otherwise how could you overlook awesome forwards like Baggio, Del Piero, Vieri, Signori, Vialli, etc. They were all world class. I assume you're referencing 90, 94, 98. You can't make a general statement about a tournament that happens every four years where 95-99% of teams play cagey and tight in, in the later stages. I'm not sure you got my point. Italy have the same international schedule as every other European national team. It's a nice dream to believe that could be different but it's largely unrealistic, doesn't matter if you're comparing them to the US, that's apples and oranges. Prandelli has already asked for the clubs to work with him in releasing the players more for training, which is something that Spain's national team enjoys, but it's been a struggle so far. Scheduling more games in an already overbooked season, is another totally unrealistic thing altogether in Europe, I'm afraid. I think Italy develop cohesion in tournaments, which is why the national team editions tend to get stronger as the tournament progresses, as history attests to. As for the rest, it's an even playing field. All other nationals are subjected to the same schedules. This year (2012) Italy played 14 games together, almost triple from 5, and only 6 of from your proposed 6. In the calendar year, Nov 2011-Nov 2012, they played 16 games. 2011-12 games, 2010 - 11 games, 2009 - 12 games, etc. We'd all like that, I'm sure, but I don't think your solution is going to happen. On the other hand, increasing times when they can get together and train could be a reality, if teams would release their players more often. If extra games that clubs play could be reduced somehow. Maybe eliminate some of the redundant club friendliest, or even domestic cups, but that's a pipe dream too I'm afraid. Oh it's easy to grasp, as I mentioned in my previous post, just not realistic (see above paragraph) That's taking advantage of someone else because you have power over them. Same old, same old. See Llorente and Schneider getting bullied by being forced to sign reduced contracts or being frozen out of playing! Lol just Roman times? Try since man discovered fire and realized he could control other men when he had more knowledge than them. Research history prior to Roman times, Falvo
Of course they played 16 games this year. Six in the tournament along with a friendly or two before the finals and losing to the USA 4 months earlier so now you are back to 6/7 games a year using completely different players. I don't know how this can be a positive. Either way, I know its a pipe dream and it won't happen and its the same old story year in and year out. At least as far as the national team is concerned, nothing ever seems to change. Bottom line as I posted no one cares about the national team because all they care about are the clubs. Anyway, Roman, Ancient or mid evil or whatever period, I lived there and I now exactly how things work so you don't have to convince me but life goes on just the same. Quest'e' la vita e si tira sempre in avanti! "Sursum Corda" & "Ora pro nobis"!
lol wut? So games in tournament, when the true character of the team shows, and friendlies prior do not count towards the total games played in a calendar year? La vita, e una ruota che gira! I care about both, just no so much about cliche's and generalities or erroneous correlations and the sort of sloppy thinking that seems to go along with it. You lived in Roman times?! I'm so envious. Did you get to meet Scipio? I always have wondered how great Roman tacticians would have interpreted tactics in modern sport!! "Caelum, non animum, mutant, qui trans mare currunt." Anyway the answer to my question above is that I don't believe that Hitler would have allowed Mussolini to rig sport in his country (Germany) in 1936. Italy captured the gold medal in football that year, at a time where the Olympics were seen and accepted as prestigious as the early World Cup, which would eventually replace the Olympics as the sports top competition. That, itself, would suggest that Italy had a very solid team in the 30's, and probably would have captured more gold had WWII not put a halt, or the Superga tragedy in 1949 not put the national team back a decade. Therefore if Italy were only to have won in 1934 and 38 (played in France mind you), based on some speculative force that Mussolini created during the tournament, then it must be true that Mussolini helped rig 1936. So you see how rumors work, repeat an idea enough times and it becomes truth to most people. Also, most people go to a new place with an already existing preconceived notion of the place, and usually see what they want at the exclusion of anything contrary. I had to travel a lot for a previous job I held. I lived in Milan for 3 years. Saw a lot that I had expected to see, and even some that I never expected It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair… Italy truly is a tale of two cities! Vade en pace!
non ho mai conoscito Scipio pero a Roma sono stato scippato e non ho scopato mai, purtroppo .... Li mortacci loro!
3rd in a major tournament holland also belted us at euro 2008. I dont count the confeds as a major but you easily could then in that case it would be 4 heavy defeats as brazil caned us 3-0.
Actually, Italy beat Holland on pk's in the 2000 Euros but none of this is really the point I was trying to convey. Either way, its really no big as I just see things differently than and am not really content with the status quo.
Talking about a final, and in knock outs specifically. This seems like deja vu...like I've had thus discussion with you before.
He was talking about 08 I got your point, but a lot of it was cliche'd and unrelated, though I agree that it would be nice if national teams, all of them, played more and we had a few less club matches.
I knew he was talking about 08 but I just thought aside from anything, I'd mention how Italy won on pk's in 2000. On second thought, Italy won in 2000, 2006 , 2012 and they bowed out on pk's in 1990, 1994, 1998, 2008... So I guess they are 3 & 4 on pk's....not too bad in retrospect although I wish it wouldn't have come to this as I feel its not really part of the game...
2000 was the turn around to pk bad luck for Italy, at least in so far as consecutive eliminates on pk were concerned. Holland became the bigger losers on pk that year having lost to Denmark in 92, France in 96, Brazil in 98, Italy in 2000. So if PK losses in major tournaments equate to poor forward lines for Italy, does it mean the same for Holland as well?
Not sure but I don't think Holland is in the same league as Italy is even though they beat us 3-0 in 08 & in 78. They've never won a WC though, just a Euro in 88 with Van Basten. I remember they played well with Johan Cruyff in 1974 but still didn't win anything.
Ya but that doesn't answer my question If you can ignore Italy constantly producing good forwards by citing three eliminations on PK from major tournaments, does that apply to da Dutch too?
Yeah maybe but I never knew or thought too much about the Dutch to really care either way. Speaking of corruption and Holland though, I think they should have won in 1978 but Argentina beat the Dutch when Argentine born Peruvian GK Ramon Quiroga somehow conceded 6 goals in a match against the home nation qualifying the gauchos to the qualifying round against Holland in the final. Italy though in 1978, was the best national team I ever saw IMHO better than 82. Too bad they lost it. Per wiki.....
Yeah, I mentioned that in an above posting. Argentina needed a 4 goal (I believe it was 4 and got it vs Peru with a 6-0 win) margin to qualify ahead of Brazil in order to make that final, or it would have been Brazil and Holland, which wouldn't have guaranteed Holland a cup anyway, but there's another example of corruption in the post WWII era, which again begs the question; how do we know for sure if there was more corruption in one era or the other? Answer is, we don't! Google "Argentina corruption World Cup 1978" and you'll see how speculation (and in this case, it's quite a logical conclusion to make, to be honest), when repeated over and over, becomes truth to some people.
Cmon Falvo. Holland hasn't won a world cup, but they're not a small footballing nation. You can't say a nation that has produced the likes of Cryuff, Van Basten, Gullit, Rijkaard, Bergkamp, Van Nistelroy, Kluivert, Van Persie, etc, are a nation of weak forwards. They're not. The honest answer is that losing on PK's doesn't = bad forwards. The reality is that in knockout stages of tournaments almost ALL teams play cagey, frustrating and tight to avoid losing first, then winning second. It's the norm these days. Only Italy, having been the first nation to perfect this style, keeps getting a bad rap for playing like this when almost everyone else does it as well, inclusive of Brazil nowadays!! Spain might be the only exception, but even post WC2006 Spain plays tight defense and better possession in midfield makes up for the fact that they ALL get back in numbers to defend also. Look at how England parked a double decker bus vs Italy in the last Euro's, and the English pundits are the worse critics of the Italian game, constantly citing old cliche'd stereotypes any time they get, yet they parked 10 men in front of Hart making something like 11 blocks and crowding their 18 yard box at all opportunities. When the shoe is on the other foot, they call it "organized and constructive defending", more cliche's aye? So the bottom line is that losing on PK's doesn't automatically equate to bad forwards.
But I don't consider them to be in the same class as Italy. In my opinion, with the exception of Cryuff and the Milan trio of Van Basten, Gullit and Rijkaard, no one else would be better than Totti, Del Piero, Baggio, Zola, Mancini , Vieri, Inzaghi or even a Vialli or Altobelli, for that matter. Bergkamp failed miserably at Inter, and Kluivert was a bust at Milan and I never saw them play after they left Italy. I also never saw Van Nistelroy or Van Persie play so I can't really judge them either but I can care less about watching either the EPL or LA Liga....
I never said or meant that. What I was saying is when it comes to tournament time they can not score and that has been proven. Again, I'm not saying they aren't any good but I am saying they need more time playing together because they could win and score a lot of goals. I could just imagine what could have happened if Baggio , Vieri and Inzaghi were on the same pitch more than only a few minutes a match what would or could happen. Same thing with Di Natale in 2012 and regardless of his age, there aren't many forwards in Italy who are better than he is. Still don't know why he was not made a full time starter each game as he should have been. My point is, if the national team rarely plays together as a club does, they will never create a cohesive unit. I'm not saying they aren't any good or that they haven't been in the past but I do believe they can be even better if they had more games to get to know one another. One game here and one there IMHO will not do the trick , however. You may not agree with it or have the same point of view but its just my belief.