PBP Thread: Match #6, Peru vs Denmark, 16 June 2018 [R]

After the match, Simon Kjær mentioned that he was happy about the VAR decision, but very unhappy about it not being used when he quite clearly was fouled 3 times in the Peruvian box at corner kicks,... two times he jumped to make a header but was pushed hard in the back with both hands by the Peruvian standing behind him, and the 3rd time he was being hold and pushed down by a Peruvian defender when he was about to make his move to reach the ball, so it seem the referee was not going to call any of these fouls going on in the box, unless he was told so by the VAR team.

https://www.bold.dk/fodbold/nyheder/simon-kjaer-foelte-sig-snydt-for-straffespark/

 

This is straight from your own imagination ... I have said that ireland totally parked the bus (possession Denmark 72% v 28% Ireland) in the away game, which is how they were able to get that 0-0 result, but that they got punished at home when they opened up and were trying to attack (possession Ireland 41% v 59% Denmark)... I have also said that when playing qualifiers in Europe almost all the opponents you are facing at home will more or less park the bus ... it's their tactics and sometimes it works and sometimes it do not... but then we are also mainly talking about teams that do not care about keeping possession and Denmark is not that kind of a team, as the possession figures from the Peru game also show... Peru only had slightly more possession (52% v 48% to Denmark according to FIFA), which came to be during the last 30 minutes or so ...

 

That is not what I'm saying ... I'm saying that giving up only 3 corners in a match where you are under pressure, is a sign of quality defending ...

 

Regarding the use of VAR, then there would probably easilly be called loads of penalties in each game if the VAR team were to look closely at all the fouls going on in the box ... so obviously, not to ruin the game, they are not going to tell the referee about all that is going on, but only pick out one or two major incidents a game ..

 

Here is what the Irish think of your team against Peru

Waiting for your excuse now.....

 

That is a 13 minute video. I watched the first three minutes and just heard things other commentators have been saying, "Peru played well, deserved at least a draw but couldn't finish, it wasn't pretty but Denmark is a team that knows how to win, Eriksen only needs one moment of space, etc." What specifically was said that you are referring to, and what minute of the video can it be found?

 

Honestly, it doesn't because pressure isn't the only reason to concede a corner.

More accurate can be the number of tactical fouls, to stop the rival from progressing at speed. You know who kept doing that, and it was the same to Neymar against Switzerland.

 

Hehe, so not calling a penalty has its reason in not ruining the game. Dang, you're good

 

At some point, most go into defense, either because they choose not to risk an advantage, or because they're being dominated. As I said, it's part of the game and no one should complain when not scoring or losing against such tactics.

Now, no strategy can foresee the referee won't call a penalty, or that the rival will miss one. Some thought that aerial balls would give an advantage, well they didn't. Same with physicality and "World Class Players". None of such made an impact on the result, but a good GK and some odd definitions from a team that, as previous matches demonstrate, collects its chances when available.

Point is, the same as Peru lost its unbeaten streak and most of its chances to advance in the WC, Denmark also lost its bragging rights on its quality after being dominated that clearly by a team whom, by all "European press" standards, shouldn't have had a chance, or after Poland also gave a sample of "European quality" against Senegal.

 

The old Irish dude with the white hair has been saying over and over again, that Denmark has players in the big leagues but they are all poor and a poor team except for Eriksen (fact, they are just about all key players for their clubs in the English PL, Spanish and German league)... he also said more or less the same about Denmark after the 1-5 trashing of Ireland, while looking very emotional and being on the brink of crying, because he could not believe how Ireland could play that bad and lose the game that way ... so obviousy he still has a grudge against Denmark...

I have not seen an English speaking European "expert" so far who know anything about neither Peru or Denmark, except that they know and praise Eriksen for obvious reason ... but they know nothnig about a Delaney, Sisto or any of the other Danish players in the Spanish, French or German leagues... and they know absolutey nothing about Peru ... the fact that an "expert" would call a Danish NT with the all-time unbeaten record for any Danish NT in history a poor team is just laguable .. but then they do not know about this being an all-time unbeaten streak, because you would find no mention of this in any English language media...

 

I remember that you were all sure that the South American teams would do great at this WC, because they have a much tougher path to qualify.... fact is that it does not matter one bit, and that South America is especially not doing well at getting points against the "European" style of play ... Ireland and Iceland are exactly the park the bus kind of team that you for the most part would face in the European qualifiers and these kind of teams are not at all as easy to beat as you would think, though you need to do so in just about every single game if you are to qualify from Europe ...

 

In every european qualifier group, with no exception, there are lat least 2 teams among the teams in them, that maybe wouldn't even win against teams from Oceania (diferent to New Zeland that is,), and against the rest, well you do lose a lot of points along the way, so don't make it up as if you're almost invincible there, because you weren't.
In fact, Denmark lost not only to Poland and Montenegro once, but also only got 2 draws against Romania, and of course one draw against Ireland, at the playoff's.

And besides of what you are saying, on regards to Conmebol as a whole, till now in direct confrontations between Uefa and Conmebol teams, at this WC, due to a bad start for Conmebol (which in a long time didn't happen), there are 2 draws and only 1 win for Uefa, which in itself is not such big numbers, to act as if Uefa has been excesively superior to Conmebol.
Still a lot of WC still to be played to get any conclussions yet, on who did better than the other.

On my part, I still believe that at least 4 of the 5 Conmebol teams will make it through to the next stage, and nothing has changed much.

 

Oh really ... well, then let us have a look at how France did against the two bottom teams in their WC-18 qualifiyng group, Luxembourg and Belarus ... they managed a 0-0 away and a 2-1 win at home against the bottom team Belarus ... and against Luxembourg they managed a 3-1 away win but then only managed a 0-0 draw at home ... and you are talking about Denmark looking weak because they lost a match all the way back in 2016 to 3rd placed Montenegro and only drew with a fairly solid team like Romania.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_UEFA_Group_A

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_UEFA_Group_E

 

Lol, no Oceania team would do any damage in Euro qualies besides NZ.

Even San Marino, Lichenstein, Andorra, Luxembourg would all beat any team not named NZ.

This statement makes you sound super biased and a little clueless.

 

Lol, as a neutral German, I did not see a Peru team dominate.

Dominating is not having almost equal possession, and loosing. It is not giving away morr than a few good chances.

Peru played well, but let us not make it sound like this was not a fluke Danish performance.

Danes looked nervous and frustrated even at the beginning, yelling at each other and using gesticulations.

This was a case of Denmark being ill prepared and tactics clashing.

btw, the flow of the game was ruined every time the Danes had the ball.
the hit on Kvist should have rewarded a card.

3 times at least I saw a Danish player getting pushed and pulled in the box, should have been VAR.

Denmark were penalized for being bigger, the ref whistling for Peru every time they had a battle for the ball, ground or air, or just ran into each other.

untill Denmark scored it looked even.

This is all consideringDenmark played horrible.
I mean they didn't even meet passes, instead running away from them.

Yes Peru were good, but Denmark can definitely play alot better. And this was a bad day, like any team can have. Like Brazil 4 years ago, now that was domination.

Very negative vibe
against Denmark from a few hotheaded hyperbolic posters.

Btw I still believe Denmark will struggle tomorrow.
they seem shaken, as my Germany.

 

I'll probably end up having to eat my words, but from what I've seen of Australia, they look like an antidote for Danish shakiness.

 

Hopefully!

But I think the Danes might not be over that Peru game.
Hareide is also not my cup of tea tactically.

 

Funny how you don't even try to counter the argument that defeating Poland proves nothing.

About your memory... you may try B–12 vitamin. I hardly if ever praise something using "great". What I did was to ridicule arguments such as "if not playing in Europe then no quality", based on the fact that, save a hand of good NTs in Europe, the rest are media inflated.

The results have saved some Uefa sides from the mockery after... 1–2 Matchdays. Great sample. But on the pitch, most are laughable. And I wouldn't trust the results that much: Mexico, the same that made Germany looked that bad, was defeated months ago not only by Denmark in a friendly, but also by Jamaica in an official match (meaning Mexicans did care about the result, particularly after drawing at group stage), yet no one in his right mind will say that Jamaica is better than Mexico, or has quality to become a World Champion.

And on "difficult to defeat" sides in Europe, that's exactly the sort of advantage Europeans have when having 3 times the representatives of South America: You already know who you're dealing with, while we have to figure it out on the run. But this doesn't make such sides less awful: Playing not to be defeated isn't something that drives people to the stadiums, and a result not related to what was seen on the pitch don't make a side any good by itself.

 

You sure do like to cherrypick buddy.

 

Nope, not at all.

 

You are just speaking out of your bias.

Do some research for the very few matches between Oceania teams (diferent to New Zeland) against Uefa's lower tier teams, and you'll surprise yourself.

Not that they play regularly against them (fact is they hardly ever do), as for them is not that easy to travel all around the world. Some of them do have a few matches against other south eastern asian teams, lots better ranked than Uefa's lower tier, against whom they have won some games. From time to time they also scrape positive results from New Zeland and even against Australia.

Last November, for instance, Estonia (currently ranked 94 at FIFA), which also happens to be better ranked to 13 other Uefa teams, played against New Caledonia (ranked 154 at FIFA), where they only got a 1-1 draw. Estonia also played against Fiji (ranked 165 at FIFA) and Vanuatu (ranked 162 at FIFA), where they won both (2-0 and 1-0), accordingly to their respectful ranking diferences.

These last 3 results proves that the level in Oceania, is low indeed (no one is saying that they are at the top), but not much diferent to Uefa's lowest tier.

 

Can you guys decide? Do friendlies count, or do they not?

Imo, friendlies are horrible measuring sticks, I consider them highly moot.

I still hold onto the position, that any team not named NZ would struggle badly in a Euro quali.

These teams face strong opposition in non friendlies regularly, while the best these teams face in any games that matter, are the occassional games against NZ, and boy are these often lopsided.

I agree that CONCACAF is the hardest to qualify from, but only because it is a set group, with a very top heavy 4-5 teams usually taking the spots.

But you guys are for sure underselling the European middling teams, and the qualifiers in general.