In the entire 2010 World Cup, there were three come-from-behind victories. This is where a team that was losing at some point in the game, ended up winning. Through just the first 29 games of the 2014 World Cup, there have been eight.
Here's another metric that shows how much the games have been back-and-forth. You count the goals that either broke a tie, or tied the game. Basically "lead-changing" goals. But you don't count the first goal of the game, because then you are just counting the number of games that had any scoring. So basically, any goal after the first, that results in a team taking the lead, or tying the game. Entire 2010 tournament: 29 goals 2014 tournament so far (29 games): 28 goals
what about a game like today´s USA-Portugal? You count 2 goals (USA tying, Portugal tying) or you count 3 (USA tying, USA in advantage, Portugal tying again?)
Another 11 goals today including 2 deciding goals at the end. I expect tomorrow to be a goal fest. Brazil will put up at least 3 on Cameroon. Spain-Australia will be totally open since neither team has any pressure. Holland-Chile will be open since that's the only way those teams know how to play.
94 goals already after 32 games. 2.94 goals per game ... There's something in the water in Brazil. I think we should just have every World Cup there
Has anyone counted how many defensive errors have lead to this high scoring? That's the story of this WC: SH1TTY DEFENSE
you are the glass half empty kinda of guy lol I guess you loved 2010 because, with the lowest goals scored in history, it meant very good strong defenses???
Anybody can see high scoring, it takes football knowledge to appreciate good defense. Good offense wins games, good defense wins cups. And btw I loved watching the Italian defense that won 2006. That was a work of art.
Another trend is late goals. I think 17 goals after 80th minute and 7 after 90th minute. Most of them had impacts on their games. Belgium wins both their games after 80th minute. Argentina wins one after 90th minute. So does Switzerland. Uruguay wins one in the 85th. The USA games have had 4 goals after the 80th minute ... each one creating a lead change. And several other late goals that turned a 1 goal lead into a 2 goal lead or the reverse where a 2 goal deficit turns into a 1 goal deficit.
True, it's hard to think of a country that doesn't have at least one of its fullbacks constantly bombing up the field.
not really. It just takes an overrated self-esteem. Any average football adult fan has seen matches for at least a few decades. That qualifies as football knowledge in my book. The rest is snobish blabbery.
you can watch football for 100 years and still fall for the smoke... oh look! lots of goals! that must be an awesome game! look look! I'm on the giant screen!
I agree that more goals doesn't necessarily mean better soccer. But, fewer goals doesn't mean better soccer either. Some low scoring games are great, well-played, full of good defense. But frankly, most of the low-scoring games from 2006 and 2010 were duds. Teams playing too cautious, with a lack of inventiveness. Pathetic offenses. Yes there have been a few defensive gaffes, but most of the goals in this World Cup are the result of creative, attacking soccer.
Replace "championships" for "cups" and you have a nice cliche from American football (all American sports, really). It's bullshit there and bullshit here.
And yet... Italy 1982 Germany 1990 Brazil 1994 Italy 2006 Were all defense-first squads. Hell throw in Spain in 2010 (Pique, Puyol) and France in 1998 (Desailly, Lizarazu, Petit, Blanc) as teams with stellar defenses. Even Brazil in '02 won the World Cup final ultimately only because they were able to shut out the German attack (Klose, Ballack, Bierhoff, Jancker)
I think a strong defense is a prerequisite, but it had to be accompanied by reasonable attacking capability. Every one of the teams you listed, except Spain, scored at least 11 goals over the course of the tournament in which they won.