Argentina vs Germany: Final Match Game Day Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'World Cup 2014 - Knockout Rounds' started by bungadiri, Jul 11, 2014.

  1. Pipiolo

    Pipiolo Member+

    Jul 19, 2008
    Nat'l Team:
    Argentina
    More like FIFA owned Argentina for that match, taking Caniggia and Giusti out of the final. Caniggia plays, Germany loses.

    You wish you were that good at anything, drugs or not :rolleyes:
    Also, cocaine decreases performance, even while addicted to it he is orders of magnitude better than any German player ever. Just sayin'.

    Europe sends 14 teams to the WC versus four or five by South America. I already discussed this in another thread, South America wins the comparison at every stage when normalizing for the number of teams. Europe has Germany, Italy, Spain, Netherlands and France that carry it, everyone else is mediocre (or less).

    But they do have performance enhancing drugs, WC54 tells it clearly.

    So you Germans can't even make up your own chants? Like most things German, even the football is disciplined but soulless.
     
  2. Cris 09

    Cris 09 Trololololo

    Nov 30, 2004
    Westfalenstadion
    Club:
    Borussia Dortmund
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    Soul ain't gonna win you titles.
     
  3. dna77054

    dna77054 Member+

    Jun 28, 2003
    houston
    I judged the teams by a four year time span encompassing the Euro to get a better understanding of their overall quality.

    So the Euros are tough because they play Euro teams like Croatia and Ireland who only beat other Euro teams to get their inflated FIFA rankings and play well against other Euro teams, but those same teams crash and burn within a two year window when they must play non-Euro teams. How long was Norway a pot 1 teams in qualifiers without ever doing anything? AMAZING how everybody peaked for the 2012 Euros, but cannot do the same for the WC, against supposedly weaker competition in the first round. Maybe most European teams just have a really small window for peaking, if that is the case I hope you never argue that a Euro is tough because a team did well in the previous WC, because perhaps they were peaking then and came back down to earth for the Euro.

    You talk about the eye test and how the teams played, which certainly has some meaning, but when looked at within such a incestuous sample, it may not mean as much. How many Euro teams have looked great in qualifying against other Euros only to be found out at the WC, like Serbia 06, Portugal 02, Czecks 06, etc... Looking good while only playing teams in your own confed has some meaning, but imho not as much as you place on it, especially when that performance cannot be replicated against supposedly lesser team from other confeds within a short time frame. At least when a team looks good in South America, like Colombia in qualifying, they do it against teams that had success in the last WC, like Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay. A team can qualify for the Euros looking good only against the like of Macedonia, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Israel.

    Lets look at my argument form a different perspective, If to win a Euro tournament you were told ahead of time you would be playing 1 team who had not qualified for a WC since 2002, one team that went 3 and out in 02, DNQ06, DNQ10, and would go 3 and out in 2014, 1 teams that went 3 and out in 2010 and would do the same in 2014, one team that could only score against N Korea in 2010 and would go 3 and out in 2014, and one team that went 3 and out in 2010 and would make the QFs in 2014, YOU WOULD JUMP AT THAT DRAW. Much easier to be objective without the names attached.

    The next Euro will have 24 teams and at most 6 of them will have made the second round of the most recent WC. Not looking particularly difficult if 75% of the field was not good enough to advance at the most recent WC, even sticking with 16 teams we get 69%. Euro is still the second most difficult to win, but their is a larger gap NOW between the WC and Euro than in recent memory, now that the rest of the world is improving, especially the second tier South Americans who have greatly outperformed the second tier (and some first tier) Euros in the last 2 WCs, and the second/third tier Euros make up 75% of the field in in the Euro.
     
    Brasitusa and Pipiolo repped this.
  4. Tukafo

    Tukafo Member+

    Oct 12, 2013
    Club:
    FC Bayern München
    Looking at some of the posts here one would think European football was dead and without success while South American football rules the world. One wonders if some of the posters here have ever watched a World Cup with their eyes open.
     
    jerrito and Dage repped this.
  5. White/Blue_since1860

    proudly banned from 5 sub forums
    Jan 4, 2007
    Bum zua City
    Club:
    TSV 1860 München
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    Oh, we do have loads of our own chants. But we also collect opposite fan chants like trophies. We sing football's coming home every time we meet the English. Now that weve trolled you guys long enough it is legit to gladly take your chant as well, dont you agree?
     
    jerrito and Dage repped this.
  6. Pipiolo

    Pipiolo Member+

    Jul 19, 2008
    Nat'l Team:
    Argentina
    That's one thing Germany will be always have a safe advantage...who wants to even try a German chant? :cool:
     
  7. Tukafo

    Tukafo Member+

    Oct 12, 2013
    Club:
    FC Bayern München
    Indeed, reminds me of an old gag from the show Red Dwarf

    Q: who is the most unpopular man at a Borussia Mönchengladbach game?
    A: the guy who shouts "give us a B" :)
     
    Pipiolo repped this.
  8. Cris 09

    Cris 09 Trololololo

    Nov 30, 2004
    Westfalenstadion
    Club:
    Borussia Dortmund
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    I'll take a trophy over being the leader in making "cool" chants.
     
  9. Tukafo

    Tukafo Member+

    Oct 12, 2013
    Club:
    FC Bayern München
    Don't you BVB fans always say that being great fans is more important than winning things? :)
     
  10. Cris 09

    Cris 09 Trololololo

    Nov 30, 2004
    Westfalenstadion
    Club:
    Borussia Dortmund
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    Of course...but titles are nice too. ;) We aren't as spoiled as the Buyern fans....
     
    Tukafo repped this.
  11. benztown

    benztown Member+

    Jun 24, 2005
    Club:
    VfB Stuttgart
    #1636 benztown, Jul 24, 2014
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2014
    Had you followed the discussion, you would have seen that you're cheery picked examples don't hold as it goes both ways...teams doing well at the World cup crashing and burning at the EUROs:
    England fourth in 1990, out in group stage in 1992.
    Italy third in 1990, DNQ in 1992.
    Bulgaria fourth in 1994, out in group stage 1996.
    Sweden third in 1994, DNQ in 1996.
    Italy runner-up in 1994, out in group stage in 1996.
    Croatia third in 1998, DNQ in 2000.
    Turkey third in 2002, DNQ in 2004.
    Germany runner-up in 2002, out in group stage in 2004.
    France runner-up in 2006, out in group stage in 2008.
    Netherlands runner-up in 2010, out in group stage in 2012.
    So according to your logic, since all these teams performed terribly at the EUROs only two years after having a great World Cup, the EUROs must obviously be the superior tournament, right?

    And of course, since we're talking about the EUROs here, these are all examples of European teams. But the same is of course true for teams elsewhere, only that there are no EUROs but in Europe. Duh.

    Also I can just as easily come up with some statistics. Looking at the last three World Cups:
    3 out of 3 champions were European (and all different ones at that)
    5 out of 6 finalists were European (again all different ones)
    9 out of 12 semi finalists were European
    So obviously the EURO must be a tremendous tournament, because all those teams are competing there, right?

    You're way too much obsessed about past laurels...which seems to be a Latin American thing it appears. There's virtually no resemblance between two national teams that are separated by 4, 6, 8 or more years. Players age new players come in, coaches change, tactics change, etc.

    You see, what IS objective about any given team is something like the FIFA rankings. Now I'm the first to admit that they aren't perfect but you obviously need to throw them out completely in order to hold on to your ever weakening position.

    Again, had you followed the conversation, you would have seen that I said pretty much the exact same thing. That the world has caught up and that the World Cup is moving towards having tough groups like the EUROs, whereas the EUROs move away from that with the expansion.
     
    jerrito, Loddar, raviept and 2 others repped this.
  12. SamKyon

    SamKyon New Member

    Nov 4, 2011
    Club:
    West Ham United FC
    Croatia right? They qualified in 06. Though 3 and out.
     
  13. Brasitusa

    Brasitusa Member+

    AC Milan
    Italy
    May 14, 2014
    Club:
    New York City FC
    I think we've already established that the across-years comparisons don't work. Teams can change dramatically in two years (sometimes in one year). We have also established that the WC is seeing second tier teams from South America, Africa, and even CONCACAF, toughening up and becoming, if not yet serious title contenders, at least serious competition. We've also established that the expansion of the Euro to 24 teams does dilute it a bit.

    Everybody here seems to agree that the World Cup is the superior tournament. Our European friends feel that the Euro is just a tiny bit behind in quality, and even if there isn't unanimity about that from non-European fans, at least we non-Europeans can appreciate and understand, now, why the Europeans like and uphold their Euros so much.

    On the other hand, the trends in the first paragraph above will tend to increase the gap between the two tournaments. This doesn't mean that the top European teams will have any drop in quality. It only means that the WC will tend to be tougher and tougher (it already is very tough) while the Euro will tend to dilute a bit, featuring a bit less quality in its bottom half, given more spots and less do-or-die qualifiers.

    Summary of conclusions from this thread regarding official national teams competitions:

    The world's most prestigious and hardest to win tournament: FIFA World Cup.
    The world's second most prestigious, second hardest to win tournament: UEFA Euro Finals
    Gap between the two tournaments in overall quality (doesn't necessarily apply to top teams): tends to increase

    Other tournaments with a lesser degree of prestige and quality, in decreasing order:

    Copa América
    Africa Cup of Nations
    CONCACAF Gold Cup
    Confederations Cup
    Asian Cup
    OFC Nations Cup

    Europeans' view* of relative strength/interest in a scale of 1 to 10 of the WC vs. the Euros:
    WC 10
    Euros at least 8, for some people 9

    Non-Europeans' view* of relative strength/interest in a scale of 1 to 10 of the WC vs. the Euros
    WC 10
    Euros 6 or 7 depending on how hooked up the fan is on European football versus the fan's own region

    South Americans' view* of relative strength/interest in a scale of 1 to 10 of the WC vs. the Copa América
    WC 10
    Copa América 5

    * "view" here has to do with perception, not with objective quality/strength

    I think the above is pretty accurate. The only controversial number would be - are South Americans more interested in the Euros than in their own Copa América? I would say, yes. By a little bit, thus the 6 (or 7) versus 5, because I believe South Americans care more for the WC South American Qualifiers (where all teams are in full strength) than for the Copa América itself, when sometimes nations send their B teams. So, for sheer entertainment value, it's more interesting to watch the Euros on TV and see the likes of Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, England, France and some worthy second tier teams in full strength, in a format similar to that of the WC, than to see a tournament with B teams. This however can and does change when the main rivals reach the semis and when nations send their best teams. Still, South Americans tend to care more for the long, spread-out WC qualifiers which feature all teams against each other all in full strength, than for the Copa América which is a bit too frequent as compared to the Euros (resulting in some dilution of interest as well).

    I can't speak for Mexicans and Central Americans, but I believe Americans (as in, citizens of the United States; those among us who are passionate about soccer) do care for the Gold Cup, more than South Americans care for the Copa América. The Euros on the other hand don't really have a lot of impact on the American market. It's not that we are not Euro-centric, since the EPL and the Champions League are wildly popular here. The Euros just don't seem to have the same cachet.
     
    benztown, Tukafo and raviept repped this.
  14. Lemonade

    Lemonade Member

    Jun 29, 2010
    Don't pick on him, not everybody can have the smarts to coach a team, we need people who excel working with their hands, too. :whistling:
     
    jerrito repped this.
  15. Dage

    Dage Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jun 4, 2008
    Berlin
    Club:
    Borussia Mönchengladbach
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    The Euros do not decrease at all. It hasn't top match ups all the time in the future anymore but in the end you have to play one more game and thats a hurdle even against mediocre to good teams. And its a chance to get exhausted or to lose players through suspensions or injuries. Also there are noch weak teams quarter finals+ after the round of 16 most likely sort them out. It will be in fact easier to go out of the group but actually harder to win it all. The Euros are more a 8 to 9 and for many football fans over here a 9,5. It will celebrated like a World Cup over here in the streets and the players will be legends.
     
    jerrito repped this.
  16. Brasitusa

    Brasitusa Member+

    AC Milan
    Italy
    May 14, 2014
    Club:
    New York City FC
    Well, the Europeans here are the ones who said that with 24 teams the tournament will be a bit less interesting given that qualifiers won't be as do-or-die as they were with 16 teams, and obviously for all tournaments in the world, the more teams you qualify for the finals, the more dilution in quality. That's a fact. It's at the core of the debate here in the US about our NFL - they are proposing to increase from 12 to 14 playoff teams and everybody is crying out loud due to the likelihood of dilution in quality and the divisions being less do-or-die with two more teams making the playoffs. Again, it doesn't mean the top teams and the later phases of the tournament will have any less quality - those teams who are in top form at the time of the tournament would have made it regardless of 16 or 24 teams - but it does mean dilution in the bottom half. We are bitching and complaining here about adding 2 more teams to our NFL playoffs... adding 8 to your Euro finals, no doubt, dilutes the quality.

    Now, the 9.5... you guys are pushing your luck a bit. To say that the Euro is almost the same as the World Cup (I mean, a 0.5 difference is negligible) is a bit excessive... This would indicate a lot of homer thought and Euro-centrism. There isn't anything in football as compelling and prestigious as the World Cup. If you ask 1,000 professional players and managers - "if you had to pick only one, which one would you rather win, the Euro or the World Cup?" I'd be surprised if even 1 out of the 1,000 replied "the Euro." I think all 1,000 would pick the World Cup.
     
  17. Dage

    Dage Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jun 4, 2008
    Berlin
    Club:
    Borussia Mönchengladbach
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    #1642 Dage, Jul 25, 2014
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2014
    Well I don't know what's so dufficult with "it will be easier to go out of the group but actually harder to win it all". How you can claim a decrease as a fact there is hard to understand for me. You have to beat more teams and almost all if not all European powers will participate, therefor the achievement to win it all can't be decreased.

    For your second part, well I never said the EC is as worthy as the WC so I agree. But even if it's hard for you to understand the EC is in fact felt as almost as important as the WC. There is no doubt about that. Eurocentric? As a European talking about the EC? I do not doubt that non-euripeans think different that's why I said that the EC is about a 8 for neutrals as an achievement.

    In the end you should accept that an international career is labeled very successful if it has achieved a EC trophy. The WC is a step above of that but it's like talking the difference of a gigantic and a legendary achuevement. Just google some impressions from former ECs e, g. the semifinals of 2008 . It's celebrated like the win against Brazil 2014.



    That's not on a place or public viewing it's on the middle of one of the biggest strrets in Berlin with about 2 hundred thousand people celebrating over several kilometres not to mention the thousand of other parties over the whole city and that's just Berlin. It's the same all over the country. And it's the same over all of Europe when their home teams celebrating a win.
     
  18. raviept

    raviept Member

    Jun 11, 2010
    Braga
    Club:
    Sporting Braga
    Nat'l Team:
    Portugal
    #1643 raviept, Jul 25, 2014
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2014
    The Euros do not conflict with the WC in anyway, since they are separated by two years, and the qualifiers do not overlap. There is the issue of the impact of a player participating in the tournament on his performance at his club. However, given the compensations that both FIFA and UEFA give to the clubs, this is not a significant problem. That's why no European team considers winning the WC over the Euro when you can win both. These are two different competitions that are worth the effort. And since UEFA has depth in terms of competitive teams, you always end up having a competitive tournament.

    Regarding the extension to 24 teams, it will definitely dilute the quality. However, Dage has a point in that it's not necessarily easier to win it. On the contrary, you will have a better distribution of top teams across groups, making it more likely for these teams to meet in later stages, while diminishing the likelihood of having smaller teams in advanced stages of the competition. In summary, more boring matches and higher quality in the later stages.
     
    Dage repped this.
  19. Brasitusa

    Brasitusa Member+

    AC Milan
    Italy
    May 14, 2014
    Club:
    New York City FC
    I never said anything about the expansion making it easier to win the tournament. I said there will be a dilution in quality. This seems quite obvious to me. If you have a tournament with the top 16 teams, that's higher average quality than a tournament with the top 24 teams, since supposedly the bottom 8 are not as good as the top 16 (which is not always true but is generally true). Also, it might bring down the excitement of the qualifiers. When you only have a few spots to fight for, it becomes more do-or-die therefore more exciting. When you have 8 additional spots, it doesn't feel as crucial. Still, the dilution, like I said, doesn't affect the really top teams and it should continue to be as difficult to win the tournament, or more (given an additional round therefore more exposure to injuries, card bans, fatigue, etc., resulting in need for more depth).

    All that I said is that the quality is diluted. You seem to agree with me on this. Dage might have agreed as well, if he had interpreted correctly what I was saying. He took my wording of dilution of quality as equal to ease of winning, while the two concepts don't overlap.
     
  20. raviept

    raviept Member

    Jun 11, 2010
    Braga
    Club:
    Sporting Braga
    Nat'l Team:
    Portugal
    Just trying to add something to the discussion, since we have already reached a consensus.
     
  21. benztown

    benztown Member+

    Jun 24, 2005
    Club:
    VfB Stuttgart
    While I agree with your general point, I have to disagree there. By expanding the Euro, the groups will be less brutal, thereby increasing the chance of a smaller team coming through.
    It won't be easier to win it because the same teams will be there and the chance of a good team flunking in qualifying will be lower, but it will be easier to survive group stage.
     
  22. raviept

    raviept Member

    Jun 11, 2010
    Braga
    Club:
    Sporting Braga
    Nat'l Team:
    Portugal
    #1647 raviept, Jul 25, 2014
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2014
    I can see your point, but it really depends on the distribution of teams. If the 6 best teams are in a good shape and are distributed across 6 different groups, then it shouldn't be easier. Otherwise, you will have hard and every easy groups, just like in 2012. I'm not so sure anymore that it will be so different in terms of difficulty. The greatest impact is in the qualifiers. But you are right that with more groups and more decent teams in, the expected number of upsets increases, just not necessarily proportional to 2.
     
    Pipiolo repped this.
  23. Pipiolo

    Pipiolo Member+

    Jul 19, 2008
    Nat'l Team:
    Argentina
    It's always easier to win it when you don't have Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina. Plus some other very good teams.
     
  24. raviept

    raviept Member

    Jun 11, 2010
    Braga
    Club:
    Sporting Braga
    Nat'l Team:
    Portugal
    I think that is no longer under discussion.
     
  25. Dage

    Dage Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jun 4, 2008
    Berlin
    Club:
    Borussia Mönchengladbach
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    Sorry first I'm not stupid, second I think you really lost the big picture here.
    Your point was made to show that the quality of the EC will decrease. It's true for qualification and group stage.
    But the big picture was how the EC correlates in fame with the WC. To win the WC is the biggest achievement in the world no doubt about that. So now the question was how far behind the EC trophy actually is and it was said that the main point to list the EC second was his skinny but high class field and that it will lose this in the future. You then agreed that despite this opinion it will be harder for a team to go all the way. We so speak about the overall quality of the competition that correlates with the fame it achieves. From here your point is mute because it doesnt make any sense that the harder to win competition is ranked lower than the tournament that is easier to win.
    The EC will remain or even rise its value.
     

Share This Page