Why are people surprised that germany...

[squidward123]

...played the way they did at the last world cup when the best german teams have always been very attacking and stylish (and better than last year's team)...?

[German Ham]

Probably because Germans always have the stereotype of being organised, boring, humorless etc so people think of them as a defensive type of side. And then that thought of the team gained a lot of ground when they actually did play very defensive and boring for a few years (see WC 2002). So people were surprised when they reinvented themselves seemingly overnight at the World Cup last year.

[johan neeskens]

...played the way they did at the last world cup when the best german teams have always been very attacking and stylish (and better than last year's team)...?

Apparently it has escaped the whole world that they played attacking and stylish football, it's just you who's cunningly spotted that.

[squidward123]

Apparently it has escaped the whole world that they played attacking and stylish football, it's just you who's cunningly spotted that.

it definitely escaped you too!

[squidward123]

Probably because Germans always have the stereotype of being organised, boring, humorless etc so people think of them as a defensive type of side. And then that thought of the team gained a lot of ground when they actually did play very defensive and boring for a few years (see WC 2002). So people were surprised when they reinvented themselves seemingly overnight at the World Cup last year.

I think you are spot on.

It also doesn't help when the most prominent media in the world (the english) do not count germany amongst it's fondest topics and continued to portray the team in a negative light since the 80s, and in the case of the tabloids - the 70s.

[Buschkauz]

I think you are spot on.

It also doesn't help when the most prominent media in the world (the english) do not count germany amongst it's fondest topics and continued to portray the team in a negative light since the 80s, and in the case of the tabloids - the 70s.

bla bla, let them talk, who cares? we give the answer on the pitch.

[Catel]

Platini used to say "a bad German team go to the final. A good German team wins it."

[squidward123]

Platini used to say "a bad German team go to the final. A good German team wins it."

was platini talking about the style of play?

[johan neeskens]

Seriously, with all due respect to German football, up until last year you weren't exactly known for playing beautiful football. You were renowned for your effectivity, not for your creativity.

[squidward123]

Seriously, with all due respect to German football, up until last year you weren't exactly known for playing beautiful football. You were renowned for your effectivity, not for your creativity.

Why is that?

The best german teams

ie. 66, 70, 72, 74, 76, 80, 90 all played very stylish and attacking football.

I don't know enough about the teams before that.

And the 1982 and 1986 (beckenbauer would have it no other way!) teams were quite good too in certain games like the two world cup semifinals. Would have been more in tune with the teams of the 70s or 1979-1981 if bernd schuster had played, rummenigge was not crippled and hansi muller hadn't broken down.

The team of 1996 I am certain would have been more stylish had it not been for literally 11 players breaking down before and during the tournament.

I think that as well as what german ham said and what I added to his comments, maybe it's because even when germany were not playing stylishly, they still got results. (was that what platini meant?). That is why germany have this ridiculously good record.

So a defining feature became that ability to get results by playing only efficiently.

People forgot though that the 1972 side was easily a match for any team ever in terms of creativity and style. More specifically brazil 1970 I am referring to.

That side were the first to play "total football" at international level. Then Holland of course at 74, as well as germany at 74.

[johan neeskens]

Why is that?

The best german teams

ie. 66, 70, 72, 74, 76, 80, 90 all played very stylish and attacking football.

I don't know enough about the teams before that.

And the 1982 and 1986 (beckenbauer would have it no other way!) teams were quite good too in certain games like the two world cup semifinals. Would have been more in tune with the teams of the 70s or 1979-1981 if bernd schuster had played, rummenigge was not crippled and hansi muller hadn't broken down.

The team of 1996 I am certain would have been more stylish had it not been for literally 11 players breaking down before and during the tournament.

I think that as well as what german ham said and what I added to his comments, maybe it's because even when germany were not playing stylishly, they still got results. (was that what platini meant?)

So a defining feature became that ability to get results by playing only efficiently.

People forgot though that the 1972 side was easily a match for any team ever in terms of creativity and style. More specifically brazil 1970 I am referring to.

That side were the first to play "total football" at international level. Then Holland of course at 74, as well as germany at 74.

Of course Germany always gets results, that's what they were famous for up until last year; winning even when they were rubbish.

Like other Dutch posters on this board I've been told by Romanians, Spaniards, Austrians and a bunch of other nations now also including Germans that they have invented total football and not the Dutch. I wonder who's next. Samoans claiming they were playing football back in the 1930s and that Michels and Cruyff stole their idea whilst on an island mini-break?

If you're a fan of German football then be proud of their many achievements. Don't big up these achievements in areas where they don't deserve to be bigged up.

[squidward123]

Of course Germany always gets results, that's what they were famous for up until last year; winning even when they were rubbish.

Not to forget that from 1998-2004, apart from a decent team in 2002, germany were actually rubbish, not comparatively rubbish (to their stylish teams).


Like other Dutch posters on this board I've been told by Romanians, Spaniards, Austrians and a bunch of other nations now also including Germans that they have invented total football and not the Dutch. I wonder who's next. Samoans claiming they were playing football back in the 1930s and that Michels and Cruyff stole their idea whilst on an island mini-break?


I think that the idea came from romania and it was taken by rinus michels for ajax.

What I was referring to was international football.

Not club.

Germany played it at euro1972 before holland did at world cup 1972.

The term "total football" was coined by the english right?

All the system is, is having players skilled enough and tactically aware enough to be able to interchange positions all the time so that marking would be very very hard.

The english saw holland play this at world cup 1974 and came up with that name for it. The reason why holland got it is that they played it at a world cup I suppose, which gets more attention than the euros. And they were impressive over 6 games unlike germany who only came to life in the last 3 and the final of world cup 74.

That germany played it very very stylishly at euro 1972 is an unknown fact, just like no one knows piet kaizer was arguably better than johann cruyff at ajax. In 1972 there was no word for that concept of football anyway.

http://football.guardian.co.uk/obituary/0,,2114649,00.html
http://football.guardian.co.uk/euro2004/story/0,,1233212,00.html

[johan neeskens]

Not to forget that from 1998-2004, apart from a decent team in 2002, germany were actually rubbish, not comparatively rubbish (to their stylish teams).



I think that the idea came from romania and it was taken by rinus michels for ajax.

What I was referring to was international football.

Not club.

Germany played it at euro1972 before holland did at world cup 1972.

The term "total football" was coined by the english right?

All the system is, is having players skilled enough and tactically aware enough to be able to interchange positions all the time so that marking would be very very hard.

The english saw holland play this at world cup 1974 and came up with that name for it. The reason why holland got it is that they played it at a world cup I suppose, which gets more attention than the euros. And they were impressive over 6 games unlike germany who only came to life in the last 3 and the final of world cup 74.

That germany played it very very stylishly at euro 1972 is an unknown fact, just like no one knows piet kaizer was arguably better than johann cruyff at ajax. In 1972 there was no word for that concept of football anyway.

http://football.guardian.co.uk/obituary/0,,2114649,00.html
http://football.guardian.co.uk/euro2004/story/0,,1233212,00.html

Like I said, German football has a lot to be proud of. Why do you feel the need to claim successes that aren't yours? Germany did play very well in 1972 as is commonly known, but why call it total football? Can I just ask you what your definition of total football is in the first place?

[Teso Dos Bichos]

Why do you feel the need to cling onto a accolade that you do not deserve?

[johan neeskens]

Why do you feel the need to cling onto a accolade that you do not deserve?

Who was that for then?

[squidward123]

Like I said, German football has a lot to be proud of. Why do you feel the need to claim successes that aren't yours? Germany did play very well in 1972 as is commonly known, but why call it total football? Can I just ask you what your definition of total football is in the first place?

Well now you say german football has a lot to be proud of, but you didn't acknowledge the original point of me posting this thread at the start?

My definition is what I said in the last post. Players able to interchange positions seamlessly. That makes marking and stopping them very difficult.
It's not a complicated idea. Just executing it very hard as the players have to be so skilful and tactically aware.

So west germany (72) played it internationally before holland.

Who cares though? Both teams played it brilliantly. I was only pointing out a fact.

If feyenoord and ajax could get their players to stop fighting before 1974, then holland would have been stronger than they were in the very early 70s too.

[johan neeskens]

Well now you say german football has a lot to be proud of, but you didn't acknowledge the original point of me posting this thread at the start?

My definition is what I said in the last post. Players able to interchange positions seamlessly. That makes marking and stopping them very difficult.
It's not a complicated idea. Just executing it very hard as the players have to be so skilful and tactically aware.

So west germany (72) played it internationally before holland.

Who cares though? Both teams played it brilliantly. I was only pointing out a fact.

If feyenoord and ajax could get their players to stop fighting before 1974, then holland would have been stronger than they were in the very early 70s too.


Germany has played excellent football throughout its history. You are not known, however, for attractive, creative football. Why on top of your world cup and european championships wins you also believe you have to claim total football and some recognition for playing attractive football, I don't know. Why do you need that extra recognition?

Fighting of Ajax and Feyenoord players? I don't think you even know where Dutch football came from. 1974 was the first post-war world cup they even qualified for. Fully professionalised football only came to Holland in the 1960s. We don't have the history that football nations like England and Germany have. For that reason alone, what the Dutch did in 1974 was a massive achievement, and it would suit you to give credit where credit's due.

By the way, the Turks first cultivated tulips. But the Dutch build a global export business with tulips. That's what counts, not who invented it. I will also ask you what I asked our Romanian posters: if you invented total football, why didn't you play it?

[squidward123]

Germany has played excellent football throughout its history. You are not known, however, for attractive, creative football.

And the point of me opening this thread was to ask why, as obviously germany have played attractive, creative football quite a lot in it's past.

The best german teams have played that way. Almost all the title winning teams.


Why on top of your world cup and european championships wins you also believe you have to claim total football and some recognition for playing attractive football, I don't know. Why do you need that extra recognition?

I'm not here to ask for or to give recognition based on sympathy. I'm here to state facts.

As germany did play a type of total football in eueo 72, I will say it as such. 1972 is before 1974, hence germany played it at a major international level before holland. However, you can say that holland made it famous as it was holland at the world cup that played it throughout the world cup.

Also, the best german teams have played attractive attacking football. Another fact.

My question to you is why do you want the recognition for inventing total football? I'm not claiming germany invented it either. It's obvious holland played it really well, as did germany.

Who cares who invented what.


Fighting of Ajax and Feyenoord players? I don't think you even know where Dutch football came from.

Actually I have a DVD at home called "the story of dutch football". I haven't watched it yet but I'm pretty sure holland were held back because the players from feyenoord didn't want to let cruyff control them on the field.

All I'm saying is that holland could have been better even earlier. It's a compliment.


1974 was the first post-war world cup they even qualified for. Fully professionalised football only came to Holland in the 1960s. We don't have the history that football nations like England and Germany have.

Germany didn't go professional till 1964. That's when the bundesliga was created.

And all the clubs in the league became professional only in 1970.

Countries like england and italy were pro for decades before that.


By the way, the Turks first cultivated tulips. But the Dutch build a global export business with tulips. That's what counts, not who invented it. I will also ask you what I asked our Romanian posters: if you invented total football, why didn't you play it?

I think that rinus michels kind of modified the idea. It wasn't refined enough to be played on the pitch yet. As far as I know that is.

And as you say yourself, what counts is not who invented it. So who cares if it was the dutch or the germans or the romanians. I was just saying that germany in 1972 did play that way too.

[Catel]

Maybe you're cursed because you won your first and second World Cups against Puskas' Hungary and Cruyff's Netherlands. It gave you a bad reputation.

And your players were barely some Brazilian-kind technicians. There's a confusion in people's mind between "technique" and "offensive" in a same concept: "beautiful game".

[squidward123]

Maybe you're cursed because you won your first and second World Cups against Puskas' Hungary and Cruyff's Netherlands. It gave you a bad reputation.

You have a point.

Hungary - fair enough. 4 years unbeaten. However germany did deserve to win that final

Holland - strange, as a great team in 1970, which played so well in 1972 with an average age of 23 or so, was expected to take the world cup easily in 1974.

Of course holland were more impressive during the 2 group stages, even though germany were approaching their 1972 form in the 2nd group stage.

But in the final germany did deserve to win on the balance of play.

They also had a clear goal disallowed by gerd muller, a clear trip on holzenbein disallowed (to cancel out the first penalty). Also worth noting that
cruyff was fouled outside the area for the first penalty.

What is strange is that it is seen like it was some upset win (even if it's acknowledged that germany deserved to win the final).

Compare germany to france in 06. No one would really say france is a surprise if they won the world cup, because of the generation that won 98 and 00.

Same for germany, except they were brilliant in 70, brilliant in 72 and 74 is only 2 years after 72, not 6 in the case of france (00-06).


And your players were barely some Brazilian-kind technicians. There's a confusion in people's mind between "technique" and "offensive" in a same concept: "beautiful game".

Are you saying germany played long-balls and were offensive that way?

YES they had great technique. 'Brazilian-kind" technique when they played this attractive football I am talking about.

Have you guys even watched games from the late 60s, 70s, or early 80s?

The whole point of me opening this thread was because of this confusion that germany have not played this way