The only way we will play like that again with this ageing squad is if we know there is no match the following days (i.e. It's a final).
POrtugal is definitely fatigued. Some players like William Carvalho and Raphael Gurreiro havent had a summer off in 3years.
It was total domination. The stats say total domination. The shots say it all. Passes and possession don't mean crap if you can't do anything with it. I've seen teams with low passing statisitics beat teams with the opposite at club and international competition. It's what you do with the ball at the end. It may be a bore fest if all you care about is pass, pass, pass, But I'm a fan of direct football and upsets and red cards and fouls and just general fun, because this is the WORLD CUP, not the EUROPE and SOUTH AMERICA all stars. Also, not too long ago your team was doing the same exact thing and getting slapped around by you guessed it, African teams.
Domination, in football, really is to have your opponents do, what is best for your team. And well, Australia finished with a draw against Cameroon, where Cameroon only achieved a goal while playing the extra time of the first half, and whom got equalized 15 minutes later of playing time, in the second half. Now if Cameroon's intention really were to score first and get equalized by their opponents, 15 minutes later, then and only then would be total domination,as Cameroon would have finished exactly what they came for. A very big question mark would appear, if at the same time, it were Australia's intention to get scored on by opponents first, and wanted their team to equalize 15 minutes later, as in that case, it could be also said, it was Australia whom total dominated Cameroon, instead. Sorry to say it to you, but Chile at the WC, has only lost once, by only one goal diference to an african team (against Argelia in 1982, final score 2- 3), where we gave valuable assistance to Germans and Austrians, in eliminating them at group stage, with that result...... . At the WC, we've never again lost to african teams, but still eliminated at group stage another, after a draw vs them (vs. Cameroon, in 1998). With that draw, we went through to the next stage, and they went home, so you tell me who slapped who, with that result. . . Oh, and btw, this thread is not about the WC, but the Confederation cup instead, where till now, historicly, we are undefeated, where we've defeated every african team we've faced before....
I won't go too far off topic here but the fact is that Cameroon created more dangerous chances and out shot Australia so off of those stats they dominated the game. I bet you think that Chile dominated Germany in their game later on in the day.
You mean the game where Cameroon scored a legitimate goal, which was called off for some inexplicable reason (possibly two - one called off for a highly suspect offside call and the other for an imaginary foul), after which Chile should have gone home after the group phase, but progressed unjustly and in which Cameroon were the better team, despite playing with 10 men? Hell, they even outplayed you guys with 9 men! Zamorano himself called it 'divine intervention'. Really not a good example. Only a good example of referee bias / bad calls that historically affect African teams more than they do other continents. Starting from Roger Milla onside goal vs Peru in 1982. One of the reasons I'm happy with VAR. Less chance of cheating African teams.
Cameroon played better than Australia, I give you that. But from there to say it was total domination, you are jumping too much on your bias. Fact is, that with a draw, both teams got exactly the same thing from the match between them, which is not indicative of any type of domination. And no, we didn't dominate Germany later on, but we had a great match against them.
whatever, fact is the match finished in a draw as how history books records it, where with that result Chile finished one point over Cameroon, which is the only thing that matters. If you can't digest reality, as how things went, not my problem to make you feel better.
You can dominate a team and get a draw. A team parks the bus or as in this case bad finishing. I've seen this happen to the best teams in the world, so rather than being snide just observe that. That's no bias because the stats back it up.
Ok, I give up, then you are correct. Cameroon dominated Australia. As Cameroon didn't want to win, through their "domination", they forced Australia to get the draw. ............
19 shots on goal to 5 shots on goal. And I wrote: For the most part total domination. After the penalty Australia couldn't get out of their half. Cameroon didn't make their domination count, so no one else is to blame but them. Be it Aboubakar's profiglacy or Maboukou's pointless foul. By comparison Chile vs Germany 9 shots vs 11 shots. I really don't understand what your problem is. Australia was dominated, but managed to maintain a draw. What's the problem?
Actually, if Australia wouldn't have scored, Cameroon would have won, as it was Australia whom achieved the draw. Not Cameroon. Their suposed domination, only lasted 15 minutes.
Don't bother with zahzah, there where pages upon pages of discussion about how Ghana totally dominated Germany in the 2:2 draw in the recent worldcup.
Just curious, did you watch the game? Ironically even Australian players who were interviewed after the game felt they got dominated in the second half, probably like the rest of the fans in Kazan or anyone who watched the game. Imo Australia should just thank Aboubakar. If that game were to be replayed with the same performance from both teams Cameroon will probably win 90% of the time.
Yes, I know. Thanks for the advice, but I respect @zahzah , as despite his stubborness to accept being wrong sometimes, together with his high bias toward african teams, he is a very well informed member here, and usually comes up with very meaningful contributions to the forum, reasons why I usually reply to his posts, even if I disagree completely with him.
With the same performance, they would finish exactly the same way, as failures and success to achieve things, are part of the performance exhibited. To have a diferent result, you need a diferent performance by both teams, in which case, you really can't predict anything.
That's just it though. A dominant performance doesn't end in a draw. It ends in a 2+:0 scoreline. "If we had just more luck in this or that situation..." is not a great argument for a dominant performance. But maybe we just have different ideas of what domination means.
Liar! Liar! Pants on fire! Never happened. Ghana never dominated Germany, but they played them like equals and there was a moment where instead of a 2:2 draw it could have been 3:1. It was end to end stuff, but Germany and Ghana went head to head in what was arguably the best game of the 2014 World Cup. And what argument do you have against TheHitman and DazerII? That doesn't change that other posters agree with me. And why are you making this an ad personam attack? Plus its really below the belt. Not to mention lying is just poor form. Cameroon dominated the game, but were their own worst enemy.
I agree with you Cameroon deserved to go through. I also thought Chile got some bad calls (hand ball) against Italy. Var will be effective once its debugged and we get used to it.
Silly. The point is that Aboubakar missed 3 clear sitters that if taken would have put this as an overwhelming victory. So rather than acting arrogant about it, look at the match stats.
I agree on the Chile - Italy part. I remember back in 1998 and thinking that it seems like Chile got screwed to benefit Italy, so in the final game they decided to screw Cameroon to repair harm done to Chile But thats just conspiracy theorist stuff
ALTERNATIVE FACTS vs FACT: My first summary of the Ghana vs Germany game back in 2014: "Either team deserved to win, neither team deserved to lose... it was just crazy... if I wasn't biased I wouldn't know who to route for..." Troll!
Sure, but if you would've taken more time to actually read the post which you are quoting, you probably would have understood it better. For Aboubakar, to actually score those sitters as you say so, he would need to have a diferent performance to the one he had in that match. Truth is, that his performance as a striker, was simply horrible that day, as he didn't even score once. So, before calling others as being arrogant or silly, please read completely what you're quoting (specially the first part of it, which is very clear)