Well, for Brazil this World Cup was in their back-yard, and they were (perhaps correctly) given the odds as favorites. But I do believe we had the best squad--skill, steel, depth, fantasy; we had everything, it's amazing we didn't do more. Like most Italians I blame Sacchi for not using his players properly ............. In this respect Lippi appears better.
True, what I meant though was that even with quality players like Zola and Signori either underemployed and/or employed out of their role, we still managed to get to the final to face a relatively tired Brazil team that didn't exactly light the field up against us. Heck, our broken, scrambled team took them to penalties. With a fresh Zola and Signori out there, it might have been different.
94 had a lot to do with physical strength as well as quality, Italy had a great squad, no doubt and if they had won, i would admit it would have only been fair, just I think it was for brazil's vitory, we were comparable if not better, however in the end, it was decided in nerves and fitness (baggio had none) Brazil was much more prepared than anyother country, phisically, and they handled the exhausting heat better than most.... in my opinion that's why we won that world cup....
As far as I'm concerned yes, they played the best football of any Selecao side ever, but in reality they were poorly balanced in defence in goal and was probably the only WC ever where Brazil entered without a top flight striker upfront. Typical loser attitude eh?......Hmmm and what was that Perugia chairman's reaction to Ahn Jung Hwan's Golden goal.........
Yeah that Perugia chairman (Gaucci) was one of a kind. He is also the guy that wanted to sign two female Swedish players, not to mention actually signing Ghedaffi's son (whose only claim to fame is being Ghedaffi's son!). He also had numerous other half-brained ideas, not the least of which was firing Ahn after WC 2002. Glad he isn't around anymore (at least for now).
Well I did say "majestic midfield" right? Where else aside from midfield + Eder the brilliant left winger were they anything but horrendus. Not even good enough to be mediocre.
I don't think he will be back. He handed Perugia to his son (who didn't have te e finances to keep them in Serie B), and is now living in exile in Dominican Republic to avoid being jailed for tax evasion.
Oh yes, let me see here I was born in 1975 and from the age of 6 1/2 on in WC 82 to the present I cheered for Brazil. Which is roughly 23 odd years and counting. You have a rather confusing defintion of what a plastic fan is.
A fan of Brazilian futebol who thinks Tele Santana's teams were garbage? Please. What do you know about the Jogo Bonito? Most likely you're the joke poster of the Brazil forum. I'll ask my friend tpmazembe ....... Yes, I bet you're plastic. Now let's review how dumb you are: 1. In the Italy forum people who are passionate about calcio should not be allowed to discuss Italy's chances were Italy to play Brazil in '06--even though Italy and Brazil have faced each other 5 times at the WC and make up one of the great S. American/ European rivalries; 2. Fans of Italian soccer should only discuss Italy's chances against teams like Sweden and South Korea; a completely arbitrary statement that borders on flaming; 3. Brazil '82, widely regarded by many fans as expressing the essence of the Jogo Bonito, and considered by many others the greatest Brazilian team of any, is "the weakest team Brazil ever sent to a World Cup"---obviously you don't remember 1974, do you? And have you seen tape of that '82 team? They were absolutely fantastic. I won't go on because it's shameful to waste time like this, but if you still think you've posted respectable, intelligent, comments, you're wrong. You've added nothing to this thread but ridiculous garbage.
It is really ludicrous for someone to say that the 82 national team was one of the worst teams we've sent to the world cup, they were better than 94, 98 and 2002 together.... I wouldn't say best of all times, for 58 and 70 I think were better, however.. not by far..... But I'd suggest we take this discussion to a Brazil thread and let everyone else here discuss Italy's remote chance to beat Brazil... (sorry had to give it a little bit of spice)
IIRC there is already a thread in the Brazil forum (I'm on it) analyzing Brazil's major threats at the 2006 WC--Argentina, England, Italy, Holland, Germany, Spain, Czech Republic. But if you see a need to start a thread....................
no, no, I didn't suggest we start a thread.. all I meant is you were right.. we shouldn't be discussing this here
We shouldn't spending lots of time arguing with der_mongerer, yes. But this is the thread for discussing Italy vs. Brazil as a potential WC match.
No; as a potential for a draw or win. To judge by the sorts of performances Brazil has put in against the likes of Mexico, Croatia, Japan, Ecuador, and Uruguay recently, it is possible to see flaws in the team despite its tremendous talent. I'm in agreement with Pele that Kaka is the only team player of Brazil's attackers--Robinho, Adriano, Ronaldo, Ronaldhino all do no work running back to win the ball, and it means that Brazil's defensive mids and CBs are often exposed--and the quality of Brazil's CBs is not the highest, remember. It would not be a joke match. It would be close, it would very be interesting--I can say that with confidence.
There is much truth to the fact that Brazil does not have their attacking players going back to defend at all. I recall the thrashing Argentina gave them in WC qualifying. In that match, Argentina played in Brazil's half virtually the entire match; and further, when you do not have Adriano, Robinho, and Ronaldinho assisting them to try and get the ball back, you can beat them, and beat them good. For the life of me, I cannot understand how Brazil cannot produce a better central defender than R. Junior. The guy is absolutely terrible. Anyone with average talent that runs at him can beat him. The Argentina game demonstrated that the way to beat Brazil is to constantly pressure them and dictate the pace of the game as Brazil falls apart when they have to withstand pressure. That said, this is not the Italian game. We often do the contrary. We sit back and are mostly successful in our ability to contain the opposition's attack and then hit one of our attacking players with a long ball to isolate him with the defender, or if we are lucky, the goalie. I think this is the type of game that we would play against Brazil. It may work, however, it will be extremely frustrating and give every Italian fan a heart attack.
Some good points, but we need to practice imposing our game on other teams. Lippi has been stressing that concept lately--Italy imposing its game, its style, on the opposition. We did it versus Ireland and we'll need the confidence to keep doing it.
We'll see, but all too often, the big games come around and we end up playing in the conservative manner we have always played. This was especially true under Trap. I will never forget the Sweden game. The first half of football, where it was clear we needed to win, we played some of the most brilliant football I had ever seen from an Italian side. In fact, many said it was the best football of the tourney. Unfortunately, we got the lead in that first half. Off with the Trap half-time team talk, and in the second-half, we revert back to a horrible display of football.
Look you ^%&*$%, where did I type they were garbage? Quit the fabricatiobns please. I've stated they played the most exciting football ever of a Selecao side, but they were one of the most poorly balanced sides to ever come from Brazil. It was only their midfield that was 1st class + Eder. No centre-forward to speak of, never in recent memory do I recall Brazil entering a WC without a quality striker. No DM, a horrendous Goalkeeper in Oscar, terrible in defence too, plenty of defensive miscues as you can clearly see from Rossi's clinical 2nd goal. Not to mention the majority of that tournament they spent their time playing catch-up aside from the Argentina & N.Z. matches. Yes they were exciting to watch, but horribly erratic. In 1994, yes it was a dour side compared to 82, but C.A.P's side always looked self-assured and never spent a single minute of the tournament trailing. About that 74 side, at least they made the semi-finals, losing 2-0 to the greatest Dutch side ever is nothing to be ashamed of, considering they'd blasted Argentina 4-0 previously. And yes speak to your friend Tpmazembe about my "plastic" status, I could care less. It should be noted at one point even he'd stated (WC82) he didn't support Brazil.
My two cents. Argentina lost the Confederations Cup because of Pekerman the lineup he put out against Brazil had way too many holes in it. I still think Argentina's better than Brazil. Both teams didn't bring their strongest players so I think that argument doesn't work either. But if Pekerman ever figures out he needs both Aimar and Riquelme in midfield and that Tevez needs to start --- that'll be a team to fear. I won't even get into Messi cause he wasn't even in the picture then. But anyway back to Italy. I think the problem with Italy has been for at least the last ten years that the counter-attacking game is just detrimental to the talent you have on the field. Your Defenders are good, trust them to do their job and let the rest of the team play futbol. I'm not saying abandon all defensive responsibilities, but play some possession attacking futbol. Not the cagey knock the ball around the back, back to the goalie, let him kick it upfield, and then wait to recover to launch a counter-attack that somebody pulls the ball back to the defense on b/c they think you've committed too many players upfield. And once you score don't do the England thing and just sit 11 behind the ball.