WCQ: Deutschland v. Aserbaidschan 9/9/09 [R]

Again, what you fail to understand is the ability to assess a player's strengths and football make-up. Would anyone in their right mind play Rooney as a target man? No. Why? He's played it in the past and has the football IQ as well as a scoring touch and he can bring players into the game. Well, logically, one wouldn't play him there because he lacks the traits a proper target man should have, and he is more suited to a #10 role or a supporting striker role. Those are his strengths. The same is true with Klose. Keep in mind this is an example.

His strengths are that of a supporting striker. He is rare case because he can play alongside supporting strikers. In essence he is a 9.5 who will play outside the box and play others in, then he can ghost in there and finish. Would you play Berbatov who is probably the only other player right now who is a #9.5 as a target man? Of course not. Those are not his strengths and nobody should put him under that pressure and even worse if the personnel changes don't accomodate him, you will never get the desired performance out of him.

A target man provides a clear focal point for the team the entire time he's on the pitch. The whole 90 minutes or however long he plays, he will move, pass, etc for one purpose and those around him will always expect that from him. Klose is too erratic a player to perform in such a role simply because he likes to drop deeper and play others in. A player like him will not always be in the role a target man will be and it takes an extremely versatile and intelligent team around him to accomodate (see Barcelona), and Germany isn't that kind of team (yet). I don't see how any of this is speculative. These are facts that any coach would happily point out to you.

 

The problem is that Rooney and Klose are different kinds of players. How many headers has Rooney scored in his career? How many goals has he poached? So basically, your assumptions about Klose's strengths and especially weaknesses are wrong to begin with. Berbatov's playing style is different to Klose's also.

Klose can be a supporting striker, he can be a target man also. He is a very complete striker actually who, on form, can be very deadly. He can hold the line, he can create chances for others, he can score goals and be a clinical finisher. Klose simply is a more complete forward than Gomez is.

It's interesting that you actually mention the Barcelona example. Why does Barcelona, who have been playing a 4-3-3 for most of their modern history, never have a "pure" target man in the classical sense? Yes, Germany is not Barcelona indeed, but that flexibility and unpredictability on the #9 position is an asset that suits our game also. Dropping deeper from time to time is not a problem, it should be encouraged. Klose's movement in and outside of the box is no problem, it's a plus on his side. That's not erratic, it almost always makes sense for the team.

In the modern game, a "target man" actually is a "playmaker" to a certain degree also. That's why a player like Toni is almost an anachronism these days. Not saying that Gomez is like Toni, of course, but Toni is a good example for a target man who has all the attributes you are asking for. Italy played a 4-3-3 last summer, with Toni up front, and we know how that ended.


Simply put, as long as there is no hard evidence that Klose can't play alone up front, and as long as he continues to do well like he did in the last two matches on that position, there absolutely is no reason why he shouldn't continue to do so. There really is nothing more to it, it's all about performance in the end. We can keep debating about this for another week, but nothing will change about that. I really think he deserves the benefit of doubt at least, even if it doesn't fit into your 'evaluation' of him as a player. As long as he proves you wrong on the pitch, the strongest arguments are on his side.

Klose is a player who has been underrated and written off very often in his career. In the long run, he always proved his doubters wrong. He is a player who can adopt to a new role btw., and if we are going to make that system change permanent, he will adjust his game accordingly, if necessary. That's what good and intelligent players do.

 

Schäfer. lacks. confidence.

He looks good in partnership with Genter. Someone he can combinate with. With Podolski or Trochowski... as a fullback you can't win a thing on a wing with them.... Simple, they keep the ball way too long with them. That is still a Mannschaftssports, and secondly it is not beautiful to watch a Podolski or Schweinstiger (Lahm can tell you) holding a ball more than 5 seconds before he himself notices that there is no gap to pass the ball....tick tack: passing back...

 

Schäfer's combinations were less of a problem, his bad defensive positioning and especially his awful crosses were. Podolski is a good scapegoat, but you can't blame that on him. Schäfer was disappointing today. Beck however used his chance and looked good.

 

Conclusion:

Keeper
Adler is more than solid and pretty reliable from what i've seen so far. In terms of ability, i think he's about the same as Enke's nut Adler has much higher ceiling and quicker response. So Adler without any shadow of a doubt


Defense
If Jerome Boateng really is gonna be nominated in the near future. I think he can be a very servicable backup. I don't think Loew is gonan start him against strong opponents such as Russia and Finnland. But both Tasci and Westermann are no CB imo.
In theory, Tasci has the attributes to be a good partner of Mertesacker; but practically, he isn't; Westermann is very mistake prone in general and really isn't a CB

It should be no question that Lahm is better at LB. Schaefer should be a backup, i wont complain. He is still a better defneder than Jansen and Pander for instance.
When Boateng is included, not only he'll be play at CB. There is also a chance that he'll be used as a RB. He is very versatile and has the pace n size to play various positions.At RB, Beck is more attacking minded, while Boateng is a solid defender.

Forwards
Loew play 4-3-3 in these 2 games, but it doesn't mean he will use thi formation forever. If he insists to play Schweini or Trochowski at the supporting wing forwards position, i'd rather have a 4-4-2. coz if u dont have the right players on both flanks, it actually means u only have one atacker on the field instead of two.

Schweini and Podolski are not the players who can spread the floor, are mobile, make runs and can switch sides, using pace/technique to make space for the targetman, and that is crucial in a 4-3-3, or else the targetman can possibly be the only attacker up front.
We used to have players like Oliver Neuville and Jan Schlaudraff......who, imo, are perfect supporting wing forwards in 4-3-3. Now, if we really are playing 4-3-3, two of this type of players are needed. Marin can be one of them, Ozil also has the pace n technique and movement on the field to keep our opponents in trouble. Podolski can be a plan C, but i realize Poldi, Oezil and Marin are better off on the left side. But how about the right?

If a 4-3-3 or 4-3-2-1 is used, i think Loew has every reason to choose Kiessling in his squad. Kiessling is very active on the right flank, can drive into the middle and shoot, and has good finishing for a striker. And due to the lack of options on the right, i think Thomas Mueller will be in Loew's national pool, if he continues to start for BM or having significant minutes there. Thomas Mueller, just like Kiessling, can be played as RW or CF and has great finishing, mobility, pace and technique

Whether Klose or Gomez as our no.9, it doesn;t make huge difference to me. Both are good players but Klose is at least not cursed when play for the NT. Whereas, Gomez is more phyiscal and has higher ceiling. There is no right or wrong of playing who. Kiessling can be the 3rd targetman if he's included by Loew.

For 4-3-3, i wish the forwards are:

------------------------------Rolfes/Hitz
----------------Schweinsteiger----------Ballack

-------------Marin/Kiessling---Gomez/Kllsoe----Oezil

For 4-4-2

-------------------------Klose------Gomez


I personally don't mind a 4-4-2. Like england, they also lack wingers and have to play Gerrard at LM. With Lmpard and Gareth Barry in the middle. A 4-4-2 diamond can be a solution for us.

In that case, Ballack n Schweini can play at CM, Oezil can play at AM. with maybe Hitz/ Rolfes at a more defensive role just like Barry does.

 

Lahm should be played as a LB

We shouldn't use one mistake (start Schaefer) to cover up another mistake (Lahm at RB)

 

I am just going to respond to your comments in general...

We have seen in the past that Klose is very effective when he plays for Germany - he scored five goals in both WC's he has played in. Granted the team and tactics have changed since then, but a goalscorer with that record is going to score goals if he is given the opportunity. He very quickly showed today why he should be played ahead of Gomez whether the formation be 4-3-3/4-5-1 or 4-4-2. Did you not notice how much better the attack became once Klose came on - I understand the Lahm/Beck situation helped out too, but you cannot tell me that had Gomez still been in, things would have looked that different in the second half.

And if Loew does play a 4-4-2, Klose is clearly the better option because he and Podolski have shown that they link up very well in the past. Last WC may have been four years ago, but both of these players are still earning callups and performing well for the national team. Eight goals between the two of them in '06 should be enough to convince anyone that they should start alongside one another.

Back to Gomez... he is absolutely terrible for the national team. Whatever he does at club level means nothing here. Last summer at the EC, we saw him choke more than once - and one time on a goal that anyone, I repeat, anyone, could have put away. It is simple, he has not shown enough good moments and screwed up too many gilt-edged chances to earn a spot ahead of proven NT strikers.

 

And as for the situation at LB/RB... I think it is clear that whether or not Lahm likes the right side, he plays much better on the left. This could be due to the fact that he has been playing on the left for the past while, but he always looks stronger on the left now. Not to mention that Beck has shown some really good play when he has been given the opportunity. I think it is clear that Lahm at LB and Beck at RB should be the way things are for the Russia match at least.

Adler looks good, but so did Enke. Whichever Loew decides on, he needs to do it soon because all this switching cannot be good for the confidence of the CB's - who looked good today.

 

Ironically, that's exactly what Schweini and Poldi did tonight.....for the first 15 minutes.

And therein lies the problem. For some stupid reason only the football god knows, we become passive and phlegmatic whenever we take the lead. This is a new, awful habit we have picked up this year. I don't know why that happens, it simply should not. Against better opposition, there is no chance in hell that we can afford such sloppyness.

As far as the 4-4-2 vs. 4-3-3 / 4-5-1 debate is concerned, I think that has really been discussed in extreme detail in the past. Most agreed that with the current crop of players, and especially the players we have coming through, 4-3-3 / 4-5-1 is the way to go.
Our 4-4-2 (4-2-2-2) system has repeatedly proven to be too fragile and especially too predictable and static on the highest level. Ever since Frings lost his great form and the great Ballack - Frings tandem broke up, we are simply too vulnerable in the centre of the park. As a result, Ballack has been overburdened with defensive duties and can't really lead the team and push it forward, play to his strengths.

There are a number of other reasons speaking against this system, but there is no point in beating a dead horse. Still, just for the sake of tactical flexibility, it makes sense to have the option to play a 4-4-2 (4-2-2-2), depending on the opposition and situation during a match. Flexibility is always a plus, and being able to play many different formations can only be a positive thing. But the shortcomings of the 4-2-2-2 remain and should not be overlooked. Against the strongest sides in particular, those limitations can be costly.

 

Either 4-3-3 or 4-3-2-1, the targetman needs space. With two supporting wing forwards like Schweinsteiger and Podolski (in bad form), we cannot have a 3 forwards effect. And we end up playing just one forward with two ineffective players out wide

In fact, it looked like Gomez was the only loner up front. 4-3-3 can be risky coz without the right supporting wing forwards, it can be a one forward formation with congestion in the middle, leaving it very difficult for our targetman. the two wingers/second forwards, preferably can dribble pass defenders or use pace/ mobilty to spread the floor so that the only striker can have less defenders to beat.

We all know how terrible Schweini is at RW, he is just not an attacker. And Podolski is in terrible form even he scored a goal. but like the Lahm's situation, Marin and Oezil who people assume can play at RW are better off on the left.

We don't have the right resources on RW/RSF, at all. Marin, Ozil and Poldi should only play on the left; while trochowski and Schweini are not attackers. And without this important piece, the formation looks imbalance.

4-5-1 or 4-3-3, have two forms: 4-2-1-2-1 or 4-1-2-2-1. Behind Ballack nad Schweini at CM, there should be a DM/a destroyer who does all the dirty work, thats why i'd prefer a 4-1-2-2-1. and Ozil and the other supporting wing forward are the two players ahead of Ballack and Schweini

This formation has never been considered by Loew coz he never thinks Schweini will be used at CM permanently.

So instead of :

----------------Ballack----------hitz
-----------------------Oezil

----Schweini-----------------------------Podolski
----------------------Klose/Gomez

It will be FAR FAR FAR better with

-------------------------Rolfes
----------------Schweini-------Ballack

----------?---------------------------Oezil
---------------------------Klose

In this case, we have a DM, Oezil can play at the supporting role where he also feels comfortable with and he has the pace and technique to spread the floor and create space for the targetman.

the problem now leaves to the RW spot. Who'll play therE?

 

Awful really but with Oezil in the team it should get better, thats if the likes of Ballack and Schweinsteiger allow him to take free kicks.

Which is odd because at Wolfsburg crossing is one of Schaefer's strong points. I believe he is a good player and starting material (better than all other fullbacks we have been rotating with Lahm in the last couple of years) but I would agree with a Lahm-Beck pairing just as much. Either way for me, much like the Klose/Gomez debate. Those two areas are not our problem.

 

Ooops. typo

 

Kirsten, the second system you posted is basically a classical 4-3-3 with no #10, but two #8s and a 'real' #6. It's the system Bayern now play under Van Gaal. The problem is that we don't have a real #6, and no right winger like Robben. And we actually do have a #10, unlike Bayern.

And it's a very attacking system, hence risky and vulnerable, too. It does have its advantages for sure, and I'm not against it. But just for the sake of playing Schweini on his best position? No, thanks. Schweini has to earn a starting place with good performances first, no matter where he plays. He is not irreplacable, hence not really qualified to (more or less) build the team around him.

But the biggest problem is that we lack a true DM for that system to work. Hence Löw's 4-3-3 / 4-2-3-1 hybrid with a central midfield tandem (instead of just one DM) is the way to go, especially against strong teams. If Schweini continues to be useless on the RW (RM) position, replace him with Marin, Trochowski, whoever and put him on the bench. He can be a sub then, both for the central midfield and wing positions. Schweini would probably do better on the left wing.

 

Schweini is ineffective on either flank

I think Podolski's case is similar to Schweini's too. he shouldn't be the player at LCF, unless Loew insists a 4-3-3 with Oezil at #10. he is in terrible form, 'nuff said.

That means Marin n Trochowski should start and Oezil plays at #10. Then Trochowski right, Marin left. Though it is still not Trochowski's best position, i think with his skillset and technique, he can be more effective than Schweini which won't be difficult.

With the players we have i prefer Oezil at the LCF position, Marin at RCF and Klose as the targetman. but then we won;t have a no.10. But with Ballack, Schweini and Rolfes at midfield, the team has solid defense and Ballack can feel more comfortable going foward.

This formation has its pros and cons of coz. If Kroos can develop later this season, it should be Kroos- Rolfes(DM) and Ballack at midfield, Oezil, Marin n Klose at forward

We currently only have one #10 type player in Oezil. We need to work on serveral formations since we can be vulnerable if he gets injured.

for the 4-2-1-2-1:

pros) Oezil can play at AM, more attack
cons) No playmaker other than Oezil (may need another formation change if Oezil is injured), a formation with no DM who does dirty work, no suitable RCF

for 4-1-2-2-1

pros) have a DM behind 2 CMS, Podolski won't play at LCF, ballack can feel more comfortable going forward
cons) no longer have a #10, the DM is not a good destroyer, still no RCF


We need a backup #10 (Kroos? Gebhart?), 1 solid DM (Kehl?) and 1 RCF (Kiessling/Thomas Mueller?)

 

Those were examples to illustrate the discrepancies in your argument. For said players are and have underwent similar circumstances at their respective clubs to Klose. And they certainly do have similarities. Berbatov and Klose are actually very similar and I've explained why.

Klose is a complete striker because he can play two roles but the crux of my argument is that in a tactical situation which requires a target man, Klose is simply not the optimal choice. However, just because he is more of a complete striker than Gomez doesn't mean he's more optimal as many examples of clubs and players throughout history illustrate that.

Also, do you consider at all Klose's age at all a factor?

What are you on about? Eto'o most certainly ticks the boxes of a target man. For their system to work, they need a capable #9, mobile and intelligent enough but with a striker's instinct whose first aim is ALWAYS to sniff out goals. Klose would not be able to perform the same role simply because his instincts football-wise are not worse, but different than what that role requires. Like I said before and we can all atest to that, Klose will always look for others and this is why he will also always miss and destroy more chances (the opposite is true as well but that's going out of context) and a target man's aim is always to be selfish. It's what made the great goal scorers of the game so great - take Gerd Mueller for instance.

1. Toni was unlucky that tournament. It had nothing to do with his inability to perform the role.
2. There were far deeper problems with Italy's creativity that tournament and the massive discrepencies in their selection which led to an imbalance as any Azzuri fan will tell you.
3. And Toni is older now, he doesn't necessarily simulate what a Gomez type would have done in that system who is more vital and technically capable at his young age.

 

Lucky you. Scoring from set pieces is one of our major weaknesses, so you have nothing to fear in this respect.

 

Can Germany play France in the playoffs or they will do seeding?

 

hahahahahahahaha

....but why Cris....it's so much easier to post without reading.

[needless to say, cannot rep]

 

I'll bet you Maldini's summer home this will never take place....

Funny if we met Portugal and Schweini has another "Da Terminator" moment.