[R] Argentina - Australia [R] @ Confed Cup in Germany

I didn't watch the match (here in England only matches that are relevant for England are shown... bloody island mentality) but both webpages I followed it on (sportschau and sport1) were quite clear about Argentina dominating. Hats off to Australia for such a strong come back though!

Anyway unless we improve by quite a bit sounds like it'll be very difficult to at least draw with Argentina, or what do people who watched the games think? And what about Huth's performance, is he really getting better? About bloody time.

 

Sportschau = Bayern??? God you are paranoid. I'd listen to you if you would have said that about Sportstudio.

So what's your point? Bayern and Bild want to make Argentina look good? Sounds reasonable....

Der Spiegel said the same btw, but they are obviously Argentina/Bayern-supporters too.

 

For a moment I thought you were trying to convince me that Guether Netzer is a Bayern fan...

I don't take sport1 seriously either of course, unfortunately they have the best live updates I have found (although the Sportschau is a bit faster). Do you know any better webpages where to follow football matches on the web? The Spiegel and Kicker ones don't have enough detail, the Guardian one is far too slow and very selective, the BBC and Sporting Life ones are very selective as well... any other good ones?

Anyway let's see what happens during Germany vs Argentina! I'd really rather not play Brasil in the semifinal.

 

Well of course you're going to say all this, but try speaking from a neutral perspective and not a biased one, then we'll talk.

 

I still don't understand why all German webpages I read say that the win for Argentina was well deserved, but you guys claim the opposite.

http://www.spiegel.de/sport/fussball/0,1518,361168,00.html

http://www.kicker.de/content/spielp...spieltag=2&spielpaarung=705910&turnier=698&bv

are two of the usuallY fair ones.

We've been invaded by Argentinians! It's a conspiracy!

 

Argentina was clearly the better team. Whether they "dominated" is a largely irrelevant and misleading question.

But how do you know the Aussies would have scored the other two goals? If the game had been tighter, maybe Argentina wouldn't have relaxed. Besides had the penalty been given, Australia would have been behind by a goal. The same place they were after Aloisi's two goals anyway!

As it wasn't when Argentina was up 3-2.

Very scrambled? Didn't they win by two goals and have the majority of the possession?

 

Since Figueroa is a part of the Argentine side, that's a very odd argument. Only Argentina's good form denied Australia points. Huh?

 

To be fair it's like the argument 'Germany only made it to the WC 2002 final cos they had Kahn and Ballack' or 'Arsenal ows the Premiership win in 2004 to Henry'. Of course you know that he means a win is sweeter if the whole team contributes equally to it, and you are just splitting hairs.

But as we already established that something good will come out of your sophism in the end, I should really shut up.

 

Perhaps, but I still find it a weak argument. Especially since Figueroa didn't score his goals against the run of play. If you play with a lone striker up top (Saviola was mostly on the wing) and he converts his chances - that's how you design the plan.

 

Same here, and there's actually a chance that they'll show it on TV in England so that I don't have to refer to dubious web pages... I also remember the 1986 and 1990 finals of course, but given the nature of the tournament and the fact that the German team is still very much in transition it'll be very different. Still there's the motivation of not wanting to meet Brazil in the semifinal... anyway here's to a good match, and a slightly better German defence than in the previous games.

 

Again I didn't watch the match but maybe he meant there were a few things like Heinze's mistakes which were clearly not party of the plan. Anyway I'll stop debating matches I haven't watched.

Simply based on statistics, lots of credit to Australia for scoring 5 goals against Argentina and Germany. Who would have bet on that beforehand.

 

My whole point is that Argentina DIDN't dominate this game, dominance would be 70% possesion but it was 53 to 47 which is not a giant difference.

And Argentina's third goal WAS against the run of play, right after that obvious penalty wasn't given, had it been given, that immediate goal from Argentina wouldn't have been scored when it was. The penalty that wasn't given was part of that Argentina goal as it allowed for space on the counter.

Now, who knows what might have happened if Australia got that goal, Argentina might not have scored the others, point is that even without that outrageously bad refereeing decision, Australia still put the heat on Argentina, especially in the second half.

I'm not saying Australia was the better team, what I am saying is that Argentina wasn't that of a clear cut winner as the sites or other people might say.

P.S. nicephoras...you should be happy because Huth got his shyte together in this game.

 

Hai guys,
I watched the match, well those u say said that argentina didnt dominate, perhaps didnt watch the match, in the first half for first 7 min aussie were attacking, that was the only time in that first half that they were threating, it is nothing new even in the match aginst Tunsia, they started slowly, after the spell of 10 min, aussie never had much of ball. End of 1st half Arg 2 - Aus 0 ; Possession arg - 65 % to aussie 35%, if this isnt dominance , i cant understand what is dominace, in the 2nd half aussie had no option but to attack, again arg started slowly in 2nd half and scored in counter, and began to relax, thats when aussie fought back, i fould by coloccini on viduka was clearly a penlaty, but not given, again coloccini made a mistake and gave a penalty, aussie attacked, a terrible defensive lapse of arentina gifted aussie 2 goal, but arg never look threaeneted. I think arg relaxed after they were 3 - 0, it was clear dominace by argentina, for aussie, i think viduka made the difference, may be if he had started, we could have seen a better fight.

 

Domination is when a side is in control of the game the entire 90 minutes, which Arg didn't have, especially after Australia scored 2 goals.

 

Argentina sure suffers when they are under pressure and the other team attacks.They need to learn to control the game.

Other than that,Argentina have played really well showing good plays in offense.The defense is still a little shaky at times and their goalkeeper Lux is a disaster.They really miss Abondanzieri from Boca Jrs.

 

If this were a World Cup match, I'd bet you that Germany wouldn't put so much effort into the Argentina game now, just because Mexico seems an easier proposition than Brazil. Not that I agree with this kind of tactics... but I think it might happen. Though who knows...

Anyway, given that it's just the Confed Cup, I think beating Argentina will be much more important than an easier semifinal spot so it should still be a great game. Hope our defense will get their act together... otherwise it might get painful.

And they don't seem to show it on terrestrial TV here, crazy Brits! Two of their three biggest rivals playing each other, and they won't show it! Will have to drag my freshly reconstructed ACL to the pub.

 

I've been saying this for a while and this has been true for a while now, Argentina is a more well balanced team than Brazil.

Brazil is either in great form and things are rolling for them or the opposite like the Argentina game in the first half or the Mexico game today. They have a terrible defense, Lucio is the only decent defender and you can't really call him a total defender either.

Mexico and Argentina are both well balanced teams and will present a tough challenge to Germany. Brazil's progression just depends on what form theyre having at the moment because it can swing either way now it seems. I think Juninho should start over Kaka or Emerson next game.