Plays for the Clean Sheet is different to plays for Counter Attack. And this is the easiest tactic to play
which one is easier? For example Mourinho's way: loves 1-0 more than 3-1 win, or 2-0 ore than 5-2 win (only attack on opponent's mistakes LOL) Brazil (jogabonito) way: is totally reversed (attack either way) Tikitaka way: holding more balls than opponents and see what happens in attack (LOL)
Top Scorer:- No Top Assist:- No Win World Cup:- No Goal in Final:- No Goal in Knock out stage:- No Goal against big teams:- No Performance in Final Match:- Flop Performance in Semi Final match:- Flop Performance in Quarterfinal Match:- Flop And Goldenball goes to....MESSI , WOw what a decision!!!!
Even though I do agree with you I am so scared to rep your post out of fear for the Messi cavalry over the nearest hill. oh, be advise to watch out. The Messi cavalry is commanded by their most fanatic and loyal servant, call signed Bada Bing!
I would not say he flopped in the quarterfinal. Anyways who would you have given the golden ball to that fills in most of the above criteria? Gotze? edit: he wasn't top goal scorer or assister James? didnt perform very well in the Semi's or Finals. Robben? He wasnt top scorer and didn't do well in the Semi's or Final. Muller I guess would be the best candidate?
If you go by those criteria I would nominate Muller, except for his poor final. However, to me the player who played the best football at the WC was clearly James.
Zidane 2006 Top Scorer: no. Top Assist: no. Win World Cup: no. Assists in Group Stage: none. Goals in Group Stage: none. Goals from open play: one insignificant goal vs Spain when the game was already won. Goals from stopped play: two PK goals neither of which Zidane himself won. Assists from open play: none. Goal in Final: one PK goal where Zidane himself did not win the PK. Goals in Knock out stage: three goals, one insignificant goal vs Spain, and two PK goals. Open Play Assists in Knock out stage: zero. Stopped Play Assists in Knock out stage: one free kick assist vs Brazil. France Goals from open play in the KO stage: two. France Goals from stopped play in the KO stage: four. Open Play Goals against big teams: none, Spain 2006 had not done anything to be considered a "big team". Stopped Play Goals against big teams: one PK goal where Zidane was not the player to win the PK. Performance in Final Match: red card after headbutt, and quite an average performance prior to that. Performance in Semi Final match: absolutely average in the semi final. Performance in Quarterfinal: great performance by Zidane's standards, just "good" by other standards. Performance in Round of 16: just a "good" performance with no direct influence in the goals that mattered. Performance in Group Stage: 6.5 out of 10 performance. And Goldenball goes to... Zidane... Messi 2014 Top Scorer: no. Top Assist: no. Win World Cup: no. Assists in Group Stage: none. Goals in Group Stage: four. Goals from open play: four. Goals from stopped play: none, Argentina had no PK calls given in favor. Assists from open play: one. Goal in Final: none. Goal in Knock out stage: none. Open Play Assists in Knock out stage: one. Stopped Play Assists in Knock out stage: none. Argentina Goals from open play in the KO stage: two. Argentina Goals from stopped play in the KO stage: zero. Open Play Goals against big teams: none. Stopped Play Goals against big teams: none, Argentina had no PK calls given in favor. Performance in Final Match: a few good moments but average overall. Performance in Semi Final match: a few great moments but average overall. Performance in Quarterfinal: a few good moments but nothing great. Performance in Round of 16: just a "good" performance with a direct assist to the only goal scored. Performance in Group Stage: 8 out of 10 performance. And Goldenball goes to... Messi... Messi 2014 vs Zidane 2006 Messi 2014 vs Bosnia > Zidane 2006 vs Switzerland Messi 2014 vs Iran > Zidane 2006 vs South Korea Messi 2014 vs Nigeria >> Zidane could not play due to yellow card accumulation Messi 2014 vs Switzerland = Zidane 2006 vs Spain Messi 2014 vs Belgium << Zidane 2006 vs Brazil Messi 2014 vs Netherlands > Zidane 2006 vs Portugal Messi 2014 vs Germany = Zidane 2006 vs Italy Bottom Line Could've gone to either Robben or Messi. James could have challenged but his elimination at the quarter finals made it pretty much impossible that he would win the award, particularly when you consider that Messi and Robben were just as good as James at that point. To me it was just business as usual. I would have no complains had Robben won it, to me it could have gone to either Robben or Messi. As a side note, does anyone think that Robben's diving vs Mexico may have negatively affected his challenge for the Golden Ball award?
Agreed. James was clearly the best performer in this WC and its a pity that Colombia couldn't beat Brazil since a Colombia vs Germany SF would could have been a very interesting game. Still, IMO helping your NT have its best ever WC performance while playing a part in 10/12 goals scored by them during this run should definitely have been rewarded by more than a Golden Boot (which is earned more than given anyway). That he didn't even make the WC Golden Ball podium speaks for itself about the credibility of this tournament's award. Also, somebody seems to have an axe to grind against Zidane.
leadleader - sorry to 'argue' points with you twice in one day lol - but I'd say that a game at 2-1 that doesn't change to 3-1 can always change to 2-2 even right at the end. So I don't think Zidane's goal vs Spain was irrelevant, and it was also a nicely taken goal, completely wrong-footing Casillas.
Everyone plays for a clean sheet... usually people assume a team is playing for a clean sheet when they are being overly defensive, which happens only when you're playing for counter attacks... like.. parking the bus and waiting for a counter. aka... Real this year, Bayern last year, Chelsea the year before.
I didn't think Zidane deserved the Golden ball in 2006 either, I thought it was most of a marketing thing, same as Messi this year. I was pleasantly surprised by 2010 Golden Ball going to Forlan, because I thought maybe FIFA got over the whole marketing crap.
Mourinho does not know tactics... Winner of the CL with 2 underdogs by simply doing the same thing.. defending like crazy and countering. Also really!? Mourinho doesn't know tactics... by the way if you but a Ferrari and use it to go to the licor store and back carefully you'll have a much lower chance to get into an accident and die... Sure let's buy that Ferrari go 120mph everywhere and die, while the dude keeps getting his beers every day for the next 50 years. Who's the winner on this one? Mourinho's concern is not to lose a game... What do you think this is Harlem Globe Trotters vs The Generals? Because that's the only team that doesn't have to be concerned about losing a game, every other manager his priority should always be.. how do I stop from getting scored on... Then he can worry about everything else.
Are you sure you want to watch football? not Showbol? http://www.showbol.com/ Cause I don't think this is what you want to see...
Sorry - I must be in an argumentative mood today or at least one to as forcefully as ever put forward my views! But just one more return jibe (in good spirit - even if I have different preferences in terms of football I respect you as a poster and person) - are you sure you wouldn't prefer to invent a new game called Bunkerball? Ok, we're even now (if counting your original post on coaches being concerned first with not conceding - which equates to me to playing DM's and not playing openly - well it doesn't work if all a team can do when it goes down is to lob forward long balls as it lacks the creativity and talent to turn the game around - it might end up losing 7-1). Although I didn't really agree with prasing Van Persie (a centre-forward) for tactical fouls either. No hard feelings though mate (honestly). I just felt an extreme need to counter what I saw as a depressing view of football (not that you have to agree with that - even though you did say to me before you prefer flowing/beautiful football - I'm starting to doubt it honestly but maybe you just think the only way to win is to play a la Mourinho - I don't feel that way myself of course).
Sorry Guigs btw if this was a bit rash! If you just take it as banter that's fine though. It's just that I don't want to think of football the way you portrayed it in the post I quoted. Even though as I said in another thread sometimes great play to unlock a tight defence in a narrow victory can in that moment be just as entertaining as goals scored in an end-to-end flowing game.
What struck me (even visible from the highlights) is how this game was played in walking pace. I think many people underestimate to what degree football has been sped up in the past 10-15 years. But anyway, I don't think this was a bad semi-final game. Easily on par with Messi/Robben his semi-final performance (and Messi did not make many 'team of the semi-final' appearances either). Zidane does some valuable things here, is involved in the winning penalty, and makes rarely a cheap turnover or error (and that's not just because of the editing TBH).
Yeah, fair point - we all take pleasure from different aspects. Sometimes the most impressive defending can come when a team is fairly open and the defenders have plenty to do though I suppose. It's when the central midfielders are more like supplementary defenders that I'm not too keen. But in truth I'd already made my point before and you know that of course. In that moment your post just seemed like the George Graham approach was winning over the Brian Clough approach though! Although Clough did also say that every great team is built on a great defence and that sometimes the ball just needs to be kicked out of play I think (but also criticised cheating, said his teams played fair and didn't argue with refs and tried to entertain, said his teams were renowned for playing crisp football on the floor etc). Anyway, if everyone had the same view then that would be boring in it's own way I suppose. I hope relatively open football continues to have a part in the game though; with some managers, while wanting a solid defence, having a bigger emphasis on free-flowing football, skill and imagination including from central midfielders who aren't too restricted by defensive tactics. It doesn't have to be the Brazil NT playing like that though - another nation would do, maybe erm...England....
Ok it's like this. To me having a team go out there and completely shut down a free flowing passing game like Bayern did vs Barcelona while having 37% of possession and scoring 4 goals, 2 of them late after they put 2 holding DMs to play together, and then on the second game they go ahead 1 x 0 and same thing put 2 holding DMs to close down the midfield and just counter attack for the rest of the game and scores 2 more time... I enjoy seeing that. The year before Barcelona was up 2 x 0 against Chelsea, but they kept on attacking and gave up 2 goals in stupid counter attacks, Bayern the very next year showed Barcelona that the correct way to do it is, you're up.. make sure you stay up. And they even scored while making sure they were up... 4 out of the 7 aggregate goals came in a bunker formation.
I mean Atletico de Madrid for example beat Barcelona, but they were letting in shot after shot, that to me was just luck... Bayern and Chelsea actually didn't give up that many shots..
Yeah, we all like different 'football' and it's fair enough so RIP Football was a bit dramatic lol. I do like counter attacking goals too, but more of the free-flowing variety with the midfielders playing a part in a passing move from defence to attack. Each to their own is probably the right saying. We all favour and appreciate different things although sometimes a team or player does something most of us enjoy in one way or another.
Agree ... While Barca looks like a great winning team (thrashing many 4-0 or 5-0) but they hHAD NO SOLUTION to these two (with or w/o Messi) Bayern and Chelsea were like BARCA nemesis .... From 2006-n0w: Barca vs Chelsea W0 D5 L2 over 7games From 2009- now: Barca vs Bayern W1 D1 L3 over 5games
That's what forums are for mate -- I still disagree, though. Zidane scored a goal in minute 92, in a game that France already had sealed. That French generation was not known for giving up leads after the 90th minute. Sure, Zidane's goal was indeed quality, but it was insignificant to the greater picture, similar to how James Rodriguez's great goal vs Japan was great quality but insignificant to the greater picture. Vieira's assist (was it Vieira?) for France's first goal was much better than anything Zidane did in the entire game, and a better goal pass than any Zidane produced in all his World Cup games. Patrick Vieira then scored France's second goal. It's amazing how the solid performances by Patrick Vieira and Frank Ribery are ruthlessly underrated because Zidane had a "good" game with a "good" goal in the 92nd minute of the game -- Zidane obviously was not the best French player vs Spain, but his role and style of play is so central and appealing that most people will give undeserved credit to Zidane. The lesson of the story here is that we have a vast majority of romantic fans who will actually give points on "style of play" instead of doing what most objective people would do, which is simply to rate how good the players were "at their role" which would mean that "James Rodriguez having a stronger presence than Messi overall" would not be used as an objective criteria against Messi/Iniesta type players because it obviously gifts extra points to the players who have a more monopolizing role on their teams, instead of doing the logical thing which is simply to give the extra points to the players who best fulfilled their roles and at the same time were important to the team's success. Patrick Viera 2006 vs Spain > Zidane 2006 vs Spain The above example is a great example of such "genre based" rating. Zidane gets undeserved extra points just because his role is obviously more appealing -- but did Zidane actually fulfilled his role better than Vieira in that specific game, was Zidane more important to the team than Vieira was in that specific game? Doesn't really matter, Zidane will get all the credit every time because Zidane's role fits all the cliches of the beloved narrative. I mean, it's fine if you or anybody prefers a player with more "presence", but when you give extra points to certain players by using your personal preference as objective criteria against the players who don't fit the role descriptions of your preference... doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of rating players objectively or as objectively as we possibly can?