PDA

View Full Version : Post-Mortem On Your Team


Pages : [1] 2 3

goldeargentina
01 Jul 2006, 02:06 PM
Mine - Argentina.

Let me begin by saying that as someone who has grown up watching the Argentinian squad since I was a baby, I am no different than the rest of so many others who are in a state of mourning today over yesterday's loss. My disappointment stems from so many reasons and I want to list a few now.

The potential -
This squad was, by almost anyone's standards, loaded with talent. Looking especially at the attack and midfield there are few teams who had as many options as this one with a mix of both young and experienced players to choose from on any given day. It all seemed to be coming together. If you wanted quickness and flair with some balls you had Tevez or Saviola. If you wanted a quintessential striker type with speed and a killer touch there was Crespo. If you wanted a player with pure class who you could set any attack on any team up with there was Riquelme. If you wanted the prodigy to come in and run the attack through while being wowed with individual skills there was wonder-kid Lionel Messi. I could go on, but I wont on this topic. The point is that the options were virtually limitless and it was a matter of putting it all together, something this team seemed to be doing. This is amplified by the poor showings in the last two cups with teams full of riches obviously lacking the stuff in the middle that changes a bunch of solid bricks into a house of gold. Everything looked different this time around and there was actually credible evidence to actually believe in the potential for greatness.

The lead up -
This team was playing a quality of football seen by both casual fans and extreme fanatics as pure class. There were games that weren't necessarily pretty but they had to win - Ivory Coast - and even these games had flashes of brilliance (Riquelmes thread to Saviola and into the back of the net). There was domination - a 6-0 slaughter of a team with a stout defense in Serbia and Montenegro. Most of all though, there were guts. You could not watch that game against Mexico and not walk away with respect for the effort put forth and you could not walk away after that final clash with Germany without realizing that you had watched a team that played with every ounce of blood and bone it had. I have never watched a world cup in which the Argentinian squad garnered such respect from traditionally spiteful fans of opposing countries such as England and yet this cup was different. One could hardly argue that the lead up to this squad's finish made the early exit somehow expected.

The final bow -

The match against Germany was a clash of the titans. This deep squad from Argentina with quick passes and an attack built through the midfield out and this German squad of bulldozers with players unquestionably at peak physical fitness and height playing with the winds of hometown expectation at their backs. There was appropriate hype before this one and in my mind it was all met. Yesterday had every element of an epic. There was skill with two goals in regular play of the highest quality. There was luck, both good and bad depending on perspective, including an Argentinian keeper, who had gone from unfairly maligned to revered within the span of a cup, having to be substituted off due to an injury that happens when two teams are fighting with everything they have to win. Lastly, there was controversy and perhaps this is the part that leaves me the most upset.

Tactics can be debated until the end of the time, but in my book, the best evidence is winning; the worst evidence, losing. The Argentinian team led 1-0 at minute 49. The idea that Argentina could hold off Germany from scoring for 41 more minutes could not have seemed more unrealistic to me, another was clearly needed. Argentina pressed and tried to score for about 20 more minutes and then the demise began. First there was the substitution of the keeper, hardly a good sign with a German squad fighting for its life - however bad luck is bad luck and this could not have been changed. Then the questionable moves began. Taking out the captain of the attack - Riquelme -in a game of this magnitude when only leading by 1 goal is not without reasonable questioning, but bringing in Cambiasso instead of playmakers such as Messi or Aimar, to me, is a grave mistake. Cambiasso is a good player with positive showings in qualifying and in the cup, but you cannot run an offense through him. Then, 6 minutes later, the striker of the squad, the one man you can count on to put the ball in, Crespo is taken out for someone who many think should not have been on the team to begin with - Cruz. At this point the attack was dead. There was no organization to the charge with lobs to the struggling Tevez the only hope - fighting for his life, for his team's life. Two minutes later with a header by Klose, I knew it was over. The only hope was to go to penalty kicks and for what? To kick without players that normally score your goals. To defend with a keeper who had just played his first brief minutes in the cup. To beat a team with a whole home country at its back. Impossible.

If there is a lesson to take from this tragedy it is this one - a winner, a champion, plays to win the game, not to not lose the game. Argentina was stricken by a bit of bad luck, poor tactical decisions, and a decision by a manager to try to last instead of to try to strike a defining goal in for assurance's sake. There will be another world cup in 4 years and several young players from this Argentinian team will be back. They have built a solid foundation upon which much more can tower, but for this cup there are now only questions surrounding hypotheticals that will change nothing. Someday I hope to be on the other end.

signing off from this one - goldeargentina

leg_breaker
01 Jul 2006, 04:59 PM
England.

The potential: Huge. A team stacked full of talent, a backline that would match any team in the world, midfielders like Lampard, Cole and Gerrard, players who were brilliant both in the Premiership and in Europe. Probably the best set of players since the one we took to Mexico in 1970.

The lead up: Awful. The team had never played convincingly, in qualifiers and friendlies. No cohesion, not much passing, we only scored more than two games in one qualifying game. The first four games were scraped results, we were playing awfully. Our supposed world-class players completely miss-fired. Our prolific striker broke a ligament in the third game, our right back injured in the first game.

The final blow: A combination of poor a formation, misfiring midfielders, and bad luck. Lampard was poor all tournament, and blew countless chances, yet wasn't dropped. Gerrard looked lethargic. Cole, Beckham and Rooney were isolated from the game. Our backline held up like a brick wall, completely faultless.

After the red card it became mission impossible. But miraculously we kept fighting, creating chances, they just wouldn't go away. In the end it went to penalties, and we just bottled it. Poor technique, poor composure, our players looked like they were going to miss before they even put the ball down.

This was probably the best chance we've had to win the cup since 1970, and the last we'll have probably in decades. That's what makes it so gutting. More gutting than 2002 or 98 when we never expected to do much. I can't fault the effort though, it wasn't three lions, it was ten lions.

$crooge
01 Jul 2006, 05:47 PM
This was probably the best chance we've had to win the cup since 1970, and the last we'll have probably in decades.

Dont be too hard with your team. Just look at France - noone expected them reaching the semis. Or Germany in 2002. We celebrated the lost final like we won it since we didnt expect anything from a team poor like that.

Basically, talent doesnt mean anything. Or at least not that much. Talent is overrated. :)

botch
01 Jul 2006, 07:37 PM
Argentina -

Peckerman screwed up. He didn't trust Messi. Now they are out.

Reaper2004
01 Jul 2006, 07:39 PM
nothing much to analyse bout Trinidad and Tobago.

We had problems on the attack but did well with defense, had a few bad calls but all in all we are proud of our first time experience.

We came as walkovers and left with more Respect than many nay sayers realised.

See y'all in 2010

Autogolazo
01 Jul 2006, 08:48 PM
U.S.--

I think it's simpler than many people are making it out to be.

We lost because our coach was deeply afraid of our opponents and of failure, and he transmitted this fear--through his tactics and his pre-WC preparation--to most of the team.

We were afraid to play quality opposition ahead of the Cup for fear it might burst our confidence bubble (and promptly lost to Morocco's B-team), afraid to replace our aging veterans, afraid to attack in numbers.

The coach had backed himself into a corner with this fear of everything, then exploded when we lost to the Czechs by turning on some of his players.

The U.S. played like a squirrel still guarding its hard-won stock of nuts from LAST winter and not bothering to forage for more.

We played as if trying to retain something (our quarterfinal finish from last time) that cannot be retained other than by fresh achievement.

One of my lasting images will be of Bruce Arena sitting on the sidelines of the Czech match in the 2nd half and exhorting his team to "play, play, play" with his hands showing rapid ball movement.....after putting out a 4-5-1 with only a 33-year-old box scorer up top. ???????

Only against Italy--where fear was put aside from the opening whistle because we felt we had nothing to lose--did we show a glimpse at what this team was capable of in 2006. Oh well....

tigerdave
01 Jul 2006, 08:56 PM
US - Poorly prepared and highly unmotivated. Bad tactics and questionable subbing. Underachieved, but we're still a work in progress. To get out of our group was achievable, but not much past that. With better preparation (read: a tougher friendly schedule) and better management during the group stage, we might have made it to the round of 16, but to get past that - I think - would have been an unreasonable expectation.

Dempsey is the man, and will be the next WC. He needs to get the hell out of MLS and go to Europe where he can raise his game. The same goes for the perennially underwhelming golden boy Donovan.

There's talent in the pipeline to work toward that next level, but we need someone with fresh ideas and a style that's more conducive to American sport - similar to what the Germans have going right now where it's exciting and open for the most part. There's a lot of offensive talent, it just needs to be maximized and showcased.

SoccerMomof2
01 Jul 2006, 09:12 PM
Nigeria - Couldnt even qualify! :mad:

roninmedia
02 Jul 2006, 08:47 AM
* This is a acquaintance of mine's analysis of the English team, which I agree with *

the english enemy is actually sven goran erikson... he's DESTROYED our international game, he quite literally came to this world cup to lose... there is no doubt in my mind of this...

for 1. our 2nd goal in the ending minute's of the sweden game, made him look dissapointed... DISSAPOINTED his team were going to win... you gotta ask how he can keep his job with things like that...

2. he has continually played gerrard and lampard together in the center of midfield, for their respective clubs, these players play the EXACT same position... how the hell are they gonna work together? both sort of out of position, both confused as to which one should cover which play, which gave them both SERIOUSLY lacking performance's...

3. the guys picking up the slack from these 2 players (and even beckham), were lennon, and mainly, Joe Cole, who really has been englands man of the tournement, yet joe cole has been subbed out a lot, and lennon can't get a start...

4. after the 2nd game, Lampard should have not been allowed to start... his performance has been down right SHAMEFUL for english football, and he played every single minute we had, AND it was because of his reputation alone... which is STUPID.

5. the squad selection.... rooney, owen, crouch, walcott, okay, we have rooney, good player, injured... fair enough, bringing him was justified... owen, he was of questionable match fitness, but still was good to come... crouch, a tall man, can use his head, and THAT IS IT, useless... made us play long balls all the time, giving up posession constantly and putting more pressure on ourselve's... finally walcott, why bring a god damn teenager if your scared to play him, SERIOUSLY. we could had defoe and vassel, 2 FULLY FIT strikers... not forwards, ACTUAL STRIKERS, both on decent form, very match fit, and used to our traditional 44freaking2.

i am actually glad to see us drop out, we were disgracing our country with every minute we spent on the pitch, going has only been detrimental to english football...

AND LOSING ON PENALTIES, AGAIN, WILL THEY NEVER LEARN......

(though props to the ten men who played out the game, they really did fight for it, shame they never tried doing that with 11.... and a forward who can actually control a ball with his feet...)

mallorca_skyblue
02 Jul 2006, 12:29 PM
* This is a acquaintance of mine's analysis of the English team, which I agree with *

the english enemy is actually sven goran erikson... he's DESTROYED our international game, he quite literally came to this world cup to lose... there is no doubt in my mind of this...

for 1. our 2nd goal in the ending minute's of the sweden game, made him look dissapointed... DISSAPOINTED his team were going to win... you gotta ask how he can keep his job with things like that...

2. he has continually played gerrard and lampard together in the center of midfield, for their respective clubs, these players play the EXACT same position... how the hell are they gonna work together? both sort of out of position, both confused as to which one should cover which play, which gave them both SERIOUSLY lacking performance's...

3. the guys picking up the slack from these 2 players (and even beckham), were lennon, and mainly, Joe Cole, who really has been englands man of the tournement, yet joe cole has been subbed out a lot, and lennon can't get a start...

4. after the 2nd game, Lampard should have not been allowed to start... his performance has been down right SHAMEFUL for english football, and he played every single minute we had, AND it was because of his reputation alone... which is STUPID.

5. the squad selection.... rooney, owen, crouch, walcott, okay, we have rooney, good player, injured... fair enough, bringing him was justified... owen, he was of questionable match fitness, but still was good to come... crouch, a tall man, can use his head, and THAT IS IT, useless... made us play long balls all the time, giving up posession constantly and putting more pressure on ourselve's... finally walcott, why bring a god damn teenager if your scared to play him, SERIOUSLY. we could had defoe and vassel, 2 FULLY FIT strikers... not forwards, ACTUAL STRIKERS, both on decent form, very match fit, and used to our traditional 44freaking2.

i am actually glad to see us drop out, we were disgracing our country with every minute we spent on the pitch, going has only been detrimental to english football...

AND LOSING ON PENALTIES, AGAIN, WILL THEY NEVER LEARN......

(though props to the ten men who played out the game, they really did fight for it, shame they never tried doing that with 11.... and a forward who can actually control a ball with his feet...)

would agree with most of that, with the exception of the comments about crouch. he is far from a one trick pony and i thought he held the ball up superbly when he came on yesterday.

the biggest negative to have come out of this tournament by far is that the rest of the world now see england as a team of spoilers who play dour, defensive football. that is NOT how we play the game in england, and never has been. thanks sven, thanks for nothing.

at least in previous tournaments people have said that at least england had a go and played the game the right way. this time round, with our best squad in a long time, not only have we gone out early, we have lost a lot of friends along the way.

goldeargentina
03 Jul 2006, 02:33 AM
Nothing else? No comments on the death of Brazil? What about Spain? Any agreement or disagreement on what has been stated about the teams above? Do not go gentle into that good night!!

goliath74
03 Jul 2006, 10:01 AM
Ukraine

This was a team comprised of piano carriers with only one piano player. Blokhin was able to morph a very decent team despite a lack of quality players. Ukraine were the team that, if you don't score quickly, you have a very little chance to break down. Tough defensively, they were too dependent on Shevchenko upfront. So, when Shevchenko was not in the top form due to his recent injury, Ukraine were very one-dimensional in the offense. overall, they did ok, due to great recovery after the 0-4 in the first match and favorable road to quarterfinals.

I thought their best game was against Italy. italy had three chances and scored on all three, Ukraine had three chances and produced a crossbar, post, and Zambrotta's clearance off the line. Ukraine need to learn from Italy how to put away such chances.

Overall, I am not embarassed of Ukraine's performance. They will certainly be back in 2010. Their U-21 won second place at European U-21 championships, so reinforcements are on their way.

Maruti
03 Jul 2006, 10:51 AM
Nigeria - Couldnt even qualify! :mad:

I second... Cameroon - Couldn't even qualify! :mad:

ursula
03 Jul 2006, 11:15 AM
Third- neither could South Africa. Boo.

soccernutter
03 Jul 2006, 02:04 PM
The US - IMO, bad coaching. The only players playing motivation were Gooch, McBride, Dempsey, and Olsen. Everybody else was playing with lack of motivation. I fault Bruce for that.

Nothing else? No comments on the death of Brazil? What about Spain? Any agreement or disagreement on what has been stated about the teams above? Do not go gentle into that good night!!

Brazil, though they killed themselves. They have a great team, but didn't play like they wanted to win. The lacked the mental strength to even try to break down the French defence until Adriano came on.

Ecuador, if not for one lucky/poor goalkeeping free kick, Ecuador might have played Portugal.

argentine soccer fan
03 Jul 2006, 03:33 PM
Argentina:

We came, we saw, we kicked some ass, and we got our asses handed to us by a hot goalkeeper.

MarioKempes
03 Jul 2006, 04:32 PM
U.S.--

I think it's simpler than many people are making it out to be.

We lost because our coach was deeply afraid of our opponents and of failure, and he transmitted this fear--through his tactics and his pre-WC preparation--to most of the team.

We were afraid to play quality opposition ahead of the Cup for fear it might burst our confidence bubble (and promptly lost to Morocco's B-team), afraid to replace our aging veterans, afraid to attack in numbers.

The coach had backed himself into a corner with this fear of everything, then exploded when we lost to the Czechs by turning on some of his players.

The U.S. played like a squirrel still guarding its hard-won stock of nuts from LAST winter and not bothering to forage for more.

We played as if trying to retain something (our quarterfinal finish from last time) that cannot be retained other than by fresh achievement.

One of my lasting images will be of Bruce Arena sitting on the sidelines of the Czech match in the 2nd half and exhorting his team to "play, play, play" with his hands showing rapid ball movement.....after putting out a 4-5-1 with only a 33-year-old box scorer up top. ???????

Only against Italy--where fear was put aside from the opening whistle because we felt we had nothing to lose--did we show a glimpse at what this team was capable of in 2006. Oh well....

Absolutely perfect explanation! My thoughts exactly.

blueguitar322
04 Jul 2006, 09:49 AM
US - Terrible coaching strategy (highlighted above), Donovan didn't show up except for flashes against Italy, Beasley was the laziest man on the pitch

England - Too passive until a man down. Crouch played well, it seemed like every clearance ball that crossed the midpoint went straight to him...if he (or another striker) had played the whole 120min, he could've fed Rooney time and time again. Lampard didn't show up the whole tourney; Beckham was Beckham (zero game impact until there's a free kick); Rooney acted his age.

Holland - Let Portugal get in their heads and under their skin, and then tried to beat them at their own game (playing dirty, cheating and diving imho) instead of being patient and playing total football.

GRBomber
04 Jul 2006, 10:46 AM
Brazil:

A lot of deserved hype.
Could have been the best team of all time.

What went wrong:

1 - I really trusted Roberto Carlos and Cafu. Sure they are old, but they were playing decent for their clubs.
Parreira trusted them too, but refused to sub them after 4 bad games! That was the mistake.

2 - Fat Ronaldo: many consider that he was a failure, but I don't. After a horrible game against Croatia, he really improved but the midfield was not there to assist him.

3 - Ronaldinho never showed up. He got to play as a midfield and as a striker. So, can't cry about playing out of position.

4 - Kaka got injured against Ghana and never returned.

5 - Juninho finally started against France and did nothing.

6 - Parreira messed up with the subs against France. Took out Juninho and put Adriano. What for? The midfield was clearly the problem.
Then, gave Cicinho 15 minutes to play and 10 to Robinho.

leg_breaker
04 Jul 2006, 03:27 PM
The main responsibility for England's failure is the FA. They had the chance to offload Sven to Chelsea after Euro 2004 and his second failure. But instead they gave him a payrise!

He's ruined our golden generation of players and given us a reputation as a dull, negative team, and he doesn't even care!