Who will advance - part Three...

[mfw13]

I will go ahead and start the new thread with the same post that I started the last thread with....

First of all, takesthese predictions with a grain of salt....there are too many unknown factors (injuries, refereeing decisions, etc.) to predict results with any degree of certainty at this point.

Here are my takes on the four teams:

Italy: have the most individual talent in the group, but have only won four out of their last nine WC group stage matches despite being the more talented team in every match. It will be very interesting to see how Toni and Gilardino handle the pressure, given that this will be the first major international tournament for both of them. Although Lippi has supposedly installed a more aggresive attacking system, results during qualifying (+9 GD and only 17 goals scored in a weak group) were, in my opinion, less than impressive.

The Czech Republic: results during qualifying suggest that while they have crush inferior teams, they have difficulty against equally talented teams (Romania, Netherlands). A lot will depend on how well Nedved plays, given that their other talented players such as Smicer, Rosicky, and Baros, tend to be very inconsistent. Given that Nedved will be almost 34 by the time the tournament starts, coming off tough Serie A & Champions League campaigns which will see him play over 50 matches total, and up against some pretty good defensive midfielders in Gattuso, Essien, and Reyna, its would not be at all suprising to see both him, and consequently, the Czechs, struggle.

The USA: a team with no real superstars, but a lot of solid players. They will be the fastest and fittest team in the group, well-managed by Bruce Arena, well-organized, and very difficult to beat. The main concern will be the inexperienced defense (Bocanegra, Onyewu, Gibbs, Cherundolo), which although very athletic, and all starters in major European leagues, will have exactly 0 minutes of combined World Cup experience when they step out on the field for the first match against the Czechs. That said, they are backed by an in-form Kasey Keller, and conceded only three meaningful goals in the seven qualifiers that it took the USA to clinch qualification.

Ghana: In my opinion, in over their heads. They have no experience playing against top-15 teams the quality of Italy, the USA, and the Czechs (they've played only one match against non-African competition in the last four years, and none against top-25 teams), and this level of competition will represent a major step up for most of their players. Only Essien, Appiah, Muntari, and Amoah play in the top European leagues, and they simply do not have enough depth or overall talent to be competitive in this group. If they were in groups A, F, G, or H, they would have a decent shot at qualifying for the 2nd round, but not in this group. Should be a major force in 2010, but making it out of this group is probably asking for too much too soon.

So...analysis complete, here are my predicitions for all they're worth:

Italy 2-0 Ghana
USA 2-1 Czech. Rep (the upset of the group, as Reyna stifles Nedved)

Czech Rep. 2-1 Ghana (the Czech struggle, but get the points)
Italy 1-1 USA (as in the past, Italy fails to beat a good, but less-talented team)

So, going into the last match, its:

Italy 4 points (+2 GD)
USA 4 points (+1 GD)
Czech 3 points (even)
Ghana 0 points (-3 GD)

The USA, knowing that Brazil awaits the 2nd place finisher in the 2nd round, and that 1st place in the group may come down to goal difference, attacks all out against Ghana. The Czechs, knowing that they need to win to advance, come out firing on all cylinders against the Italians, who also are in attack mode in an effort to win the group. An exciting first half ends 1-1. As the match progresses, the Italians, knowng that they will be out if they concede a 2nd goal, become more conservative and defensive, and being less afraid of Brazil, eventually settle for the draw.

USA 3-1 Ghana
Italy 1-1 Czech Rep.

Final Group Standings:

USA 7 points
Italy 5 points
Czech Rep. 4 points
Ghana 0 points

[Massimo_Oddo]

In response to mfw13

Italy: I don't see why you keep poiting to previous World Cups. Its not like Italy fans say "oh we have qualified from the group stages for the last 7 WC's, therefore we will do it again". The vast majority of the team from previous World Cups no longer plays and they have a new manager and a new approach. Toni and Gila will handle the pressure just fine. Gila has already handled the presue very well at Milan and already has 12 goals in Serie A alone. Toni has also handled the pressue very well when playing for Italy and has scored in the big games for Fiorentina in Serie A. Qualifying was less than impressive but none of the top nations look particularly impressive during qualification except for maybe the dutch. Italy is getting better and better and the recent firendly against Holland is more inidicative of what they can do.

Czech: Des[ite the fact they are ageing they still should have enough talent to get through the group. They do play very well as a team and are worth more than the sum of their parts. I think the Czechs are not as good as before, but they are not to be underestimated.

USA: Agree with most of what you have said. I wouldnt look into qualifying too much though. Not only is the USA's group fairly weak but qualifying perfomances are rarely indicative of world cup perfomances. I mean Brazil just scraped it into the last WC while argentina wiped the floor yet we all know what happened in the end.

Ghana: Not to be underestimated. I don't agree with most of what you have said - people were saying the same about Senegal last time round and they ended up being pretty good. Their squad is arguably more talented than the USA (players like Essien, Appiah, Muntari and Kuffour have played at the very highest level in club football while none of the Americans have). Don't think they will qualify but they could push the USA down to bottom of the group.

[jcsd]

The difference between Italy and the Czech Republic and the other two teams is relatively big, they can mount credible challenge for the World Cup, the other two teams can't. Therefore you have to feel Italy and Czech Republic will qualify.

[Massimo_Oddo]

The difference between Italy and the Czech Republic and the other two teams is relatively big, they can mount credible challenge for the World Cup, the other two teams can't. Therefore you have to feel Italy and Czech Republic will qualify.

Thank you.

[mfw13]

Massimo,

The reason I continually bring up how the Azzurri have performed in the past is because I think it offers some hints as to how they may perform this year. Regardless of the manager and the players, over the past three World Cups Italy has consistently failed to defeat less talented teams, winning only four of nine matches despite being the more talented team in every match. Yes they have a different manager this year, and many of the players will be different also, but in my opinion, the cause of Italy's difficulties is something systematic, not something specific to teams or players from a given year. After all, the Italian media expect the Azzurri to reach the final in just about every World Cup, which puts the players under tremendous pressure. Or maybe it has something to do with whether or not the players get to spend time with their families during the tournament. Just because Lippi has changed the playing system does not mean that Italy will achieve better results.

As you can see from my match predictions, my guess is that Italy beats Ghana easily but then draws with the USA and the Czechs. Not horrible results, but consistent with the Azzurri's inability to beat similar quality teams such as Mexico, Ireland, and Croatia.

Maybe I'm wrong, and Italy will sweep the group. But my guess is that the historical pattern will continue, and they will find ways not to win against teams that they should beat.

[mfw13]

JSCD,

And precisely what evidence do you have to support your assertation that the gap between Italy/Czech and the USA is huge, right now, in 2006?

After all, the US did better in World Cup 2002 than both Italy and the Czechs, achieved better results than Italy against both of their common opponents in WC 2002 (S.Korea & Mexico), is currently champion of its admittedly weaker confederation whereas Italy didn't even make the quarterfinals of Euro2004, and is ranked higher than Italy by FIFA (admittedly a questionable ranking).

Certainly Italy has better individual talent than the USA, but I believe that they are only a marginally better team. And the Czechs have one clearly superior player (the almost 34 year old Nedved), but otherwise are not significantly more talented than the US.

Otherwise, if you are going to make such a blatant assertion, please back it up with some cold hard evidence...oh....whoops....you don't have any, do you!!

[GOYA-GOYA]

ITheir squad is arguably more talented than the USA (players like Essien, Appiah, Muntari and Kuffour have played at the very highest level in club football while none of the Americans have). Don't think they will qualify but they could push the USA down to bottom of the group.

Perhaps you could elaborate on this?

[Daniel_Alves]

JSCD,

And precisely what evidence do you have to support your assertation that the gap between Italy/Czech and the USA is huge, right now, in 2006?

After all, the US did better in World Cup 2002 than both Italy and the Czechs, achieved better results than Italy against both of their common opponents in WC 2002 (S.Korea & Mexico), is currently champion of its admittedly weaker confederation whereas Italy didn't even make the quarterfinals of Euro2004, and is ranked higher than Italy by FIFA (admittedly a questionable ranking).

Certainly Italy has better individual talent than the USA, but I believe that they are only a marginally better team. And the Czechs have one clearly superior player (the almost 34 year old Nedved), but otherwise are not significantly more talented than the US.

Otherwise, if you are going to make such a blatant assertion, please back it up with some cold hard evidence...oh....whoops....you don't have any, do you!!

Ghana has individualities that can decide a match. US doesn't. The americans have more depth though. So I do believe that they're equal when it comes to potential and quality.
And no offense, but don't you find weird how americans are the only ones rating their own country in the top 15?....and accusing others of being eurosnobs or anti-americans is turning out to be a lame excuse.
And if you want to talk about facts how can you argue that the czechs are equally strong as the US even if you recognize that your confederation is pretty weak?

[GOYA-GOYA]

Reyna, Manchester City
Beasley, PSV (Champions League Semi-finalist)
Howard, Man Utd
McBride, Fulham
Bocanegra, Fulham
Keller, Monchengladbach
Cherundelo, Hannover


I guess the EPL, Eridivisie, and Bundesliga aren't the highest level? All of these playeres have been in the past, or are currently starters on their squads.

[GOYA-GOYA]

Ghana has individualities that can decide a match. US doesn't. The americans have more depth though. So I do believe that they're equal when it comes to potential and quality.
And no offense, but don't you find weird how americans are the only ones rating their own country in the top 15?....and accusing others of being eurosnobs or anti-americans is turning out to be a lame excuse.
And if you want to talk about facts how can you argue that the czechs are equally strong as the US even if you recognize that your confederation is pretty weak?

It is pretty clear you haven't watched much of the US since we bounced Portugal in 2002.

This is great, we cannot beat you but other Euros can.

:rolleyes:

[Massimo_Oddo]

Massimo,

The reason I continually bring up how the Azzurri have performed in the past is because I think it offers some hints as to how they may perform this year. Regardless of the manager and the players, over the past three World Cups Italy has consistently failed to defeat less talented teams, winning only four of nine matches despite being the more talented team in every match. Yes they have a different manager this year, and many of the players will be different also, but in my opinion, the cause of Italy's difficulties is something systematic, not something specific to teams or players from a given year. After all, the Italian media expect the Azzurri to reach the final in just about every World Cup, which puts the players under tremendous pressure. Or maybe it has something to do with whether or not the players get to spend time with their families during the tournament. Just because Lippi has changed the playing system does not mean that Italy will achieve better results.

As you can see from my match predictions, my guess is that Italy beats Ghana easily but then draws with the USA and the Czechs. Not horrible results, but consistent with the Azzurri's inability to beat similar quality teams such as Mexico, Ireland, and Croatia.

Maybe I'm wrong, and Italy will sweep the group. But my guess is that the historical pattern will continue, and they will find ways not to win against teams that they should beat.


Well actually going into the 1994 World Cup the team expectations were very low and no-one expected Italy to do that well. I don't think the Azzurri played poorly in the last 3 World Cup groups because of media pressure. Besides, the media in Italy is not particularly confident this year and no where near as confident as in 2002. Most people in Italy seem to think our team has weakened since then. IMO Sacchi, Maldini and Trappatoni were all very defensive coaches and this contributed to Italy not beating these less talented teams. Te coaches installed a mind set for the players where all they thought about was the result and this inevitably lead to them playing poor defensive football despite all the talent we have. In Trap's case i dont think changing the formation just before the World Cup was a wise decision either. From the looks of it, Lippi is a more attacking coach and i think this showed in his days at Juventus. It also shows from the formation he picks where he has 2 strikers supported closely by Totti and 2 very full backs. Anway, we will have to see.

[Daniel_Alves]

It is pretty clear you haven't watched much of the US since we bounced Portugal in 2002.

This is great, we cannot beat you but other Euros can.

:rolleyes:

See? This exactly what I'm talking about. I've seen some people giving their sincere opinion about the quality of the US without using arrogance in their words...and most americans do is bashing their national teams or make sarcastic, empty and idiotic comments.
We were talking about quality and not who's going to win for sure. Saying that Italy is only better by a small margin is plain stupid.

[GOYA-GOYA]

Te coaches installed a mind set for the players where all they thought about was the result and this inevitably lead to them playing poor defensive football despite all the talent we have.

Isn't this why you play the game?

[Massimo_Oddo]

JSCD,

And precisely what evidence do you have to support your assertation that the gap between Italy/Czech and the USA is huge, right now, in 2006?

After all, the US did better in World Cup 2002 than both Italy and the Czechs, achieved better results than Italy against both of their common opponents in WC 2002 (S.Korea & Mexico), is currently champion of its admittedly weaker confederation whereas Italy didn't even make the quarterfinals of Euro2004, and is ranked higher than Italy by FIFA (admittedly a questionable ranking).

Certainly Italy has better individual talent than the USA, but I believe that they are only a marginally better team. And the Czechs have one clearly superior player (the almost 34 year old Nedved), but otherwise are not significantly more talented than the US.

Otherwise, if you are going to make such a blatant assertion, please back it up with some cold hard evidence...oh....whoops....you don't have any, do you!!


I don't think looking at WC 02 is useful since a lot has changed since then. Anyway if you looked at the WC you could come to the conclusion that USA and Senegal are miles better Portugal, Argentina and France yet i don't think you will find many neutrals agreeing with you there. Italy has players from the top leagues in the world playing for the top clubs. They show their class week in, week out and thats why Italy is rated so highly. The Czechs are similar, although they do have some players from fairly average clubs. USA takes its players from mid table teams or second rate leagues. These players are hardly the most impressive for their team and hence the USA does not have as a high a rep as Italy or the Czechs.

[GOYA-GOYA]

See? This exactly what I'm talking about. I've seen some people giving their sincere opinion about the quality of the US without using arrogance in their words...and most americans do is bashing their national teams or make sarcastic, empty and idiotic comments.
We were talking about quality and not who's going to win for sure. Saying that Italy is only better by a small margin is plain stupid.

First of all, you may want to look at the post. I didn't make the comment you pointed to in the end. Just shows how you jump to conclusions about us "stupid" americans.

Second, I am pointing out that you haven't watched the US recently. Do you know who EJ is? How about TT? These players are the future of the team...and they are finishers.

Make an intelligent comment and I won't give a sarcastic remark.

[Knave]

Not saying anything to anyone in particular here, just making a general comment ...

This is the third iteration of this thread. The other two got out of hand and the mods had to shut them down. I'd prefer not to shut this one down.

You can help. Cut out the snarky, cocky and sarcastic comments. Be on your absolute best diplomatic behavior. Do your level best to insure a high quality of discussion. If someone doesn't live up to these standards then report their posts. Either I or another moderator will deal with it.

But if things devolve ... I've got no problem shutting things down again, and I'm not afraid to ban people.

Cool? Sorry for the interruption.

[Massimo_Oddo]

Isn't this why you play the game?

Say if Italy is 1-0 up they will just concentrate on keeping it at 1-0. They won't play good football or even try to kill the game off.

[Massimo_Oddo]

Perhaps you could elaborate on this?

Kuffour, Essien, Appiah and Muntari have all played key roles for their teams in UCL campagins. For USA only Beasley has played a major role.

Reyna, Manchester City
Beasley, PSV (Champions League Semi-finalist)
Howard, Man Utd
McBride, Fulham
Bocanegra, Fulham
Keller, Monchengladbach
Cherundelo, Hannover


I guess the EPL, Eridivisie, and Bundesliga aren't the highest level? All of these playeres have been in the past, or are currently starters on their squads.

They all play for mid-table teams, except for Howard (who doesnt even start for Man Utd so he doesnt really count) and Beasley.

[mfw13]

Mr. Alves,

And what evidence do you have that in 2006, Italy is better than the USA by more than a small margin?

Massimo,

You are right that one result does not make a team, but the fact that Italy has better individual players, playing for better teams in better leagues, does not necessarily mean that they will play better as a team. It simply means that they have better individual talent, a point which I have already conceded.

However, the WC is between teams, and although I am biased, I believe that Bruce Arena is a manager who always gets the best out of his available talent, and that the USA, as a team, is better than the sum of its individual parts. Conversely, I believe (and past results bear me out), that Italy has often played below the level of its collective individual talents and been less than the sum of its parts.

Lastly, if we cannot use past results to compare teams, as you seem to be arguing, then by what evidence do people conclude that Italy and the Czechs are better than the US? If you cannot use past results, then isn't everyone a blank slate going into this year's WC? The only reason that people conclude that Italy is better than the US is that historically they have been. But you can't use historical evidence to make one argument, but then say that you cannot use it to make a different argument.

[GOYA-GOYA]

Say if Italy is 1-0 up they will just concentrate on keeping it at 1-0. They won't play good football or even try to kill the game off.

I am not following your point.

:confused: