Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

World Cup Final: Eighty Years' War, Part Deux


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
379 replies to this topic

#351 filthywater49

  • 1,532 posts

Posted 14 July 2010 - 03:36 PM

QUOTE (Spacemans Bong @ Jul 14 2010, 04:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
And I think the public opinion on Cruijff in Holland can be summarized by my uncle: "Become bondscoach, then". I think a lot of people outside Amsterdam (where he's still God) just think of him as a guy who could probably still be a very good national team coach but is ducking the responsibility.


I've heard some things here and there about him basically ducking the responsibility in Ajax and essentially quitting on the project after like a month a couple years back. Anything to that?

#352 Spacemans Bong


  • chapeau rose


  • 16,540 posts

Posted 14 July 2010 - 05:01 PM

QUOTE (filthywater49 @ Jul 14 2010, 09:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I've heard some things here and there about him basically ducking the responsibility in Ajax and essentially quitting on the project after like a month a couple years back. Anything to that?

Van Basten and he had a falling out.

Also, pictures:




















#353 Tony the Pony


  • Fork You Schpors


  • 3,126 posts

Posted 15 July 2010 - 07:22 AM

You lose the final, played like shit for large portions of every game in the tournament, and still a bunch of people who have probably never paid a gulden or euro for a ticket to a football match cheer you on in fuckin Amsterdorp while you float around like you're the fuckin Beatles.

What the fuck am I missing here?

Look, good result getting to the final, Gio scored the goal of the tournament, Holland had a great run with two dozen wins in a row orso, etc etc etc - but you just lost the biggest fuckin game in your life. And mine. What are we fuckin celebrating?

(Oh, and you two doofuses are so off the angle re: Cruijff, it's not even funny)

#354 Dummy Hoy


  • Angry Pissbum


  • 2,964 posts

Posted 15 July 2010 - 08:05 AM

(Oh, and you two doofuses are so off the angle re: Cruijff, it's not even funny)


Care to expand?

#355 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25,690 posts

Posted 15 July 2010 - 08:09 AM

Tony, I'd also like to hear your thoughts on the style the Dutch played in this tournament. They got a frightful beating in the articles I've read after the Final. Do you think they need to go back to another style of play? On the one hand, the way they played got them to the Final. On the other, the Final was pretty damn ugly.

#356 Spacemans Bong


  • chapeau rose


  • 16,540 posts

Posted 15 July 2010 - 08:33 AM

You lose the final, played like shit for large portions of every game in the tournament, and still a bunch of people who have probably never paid a gulden or euro for a ticket to a football match cheer you on in fuckin Amsterdorp while you float around like you're the fuckin Beatles.

What the fuck am I missing here?

Look, good result getting to the final, Gio scored the goal of the tournament, Holland had a great run with two dozen wins in a row orso, etc etc etc - but you just lost the biggest fuckin game in your life. And mine. What are we fuckin celebrating?

(Oh, and you two doofuses are so off the angle re: Cruijff, it's not even funny)

you know, it'd be nice if you actually explained yourself every once in a while instead of sitting there all butthurt and whining that other people's takes on things don't agree 100% with yours. you're actually Dutch, it'd be nice if you actually used the authority that you hold as our resident Dutch football fan to explain to us what went down at Ajax instead of just being casually insulting.

also, it's fucking ironic that you're criticizing fans for turning up on the canals and going mental over the team when I remember you posting some blog in Dutch that said following the Oranje was something for casual fans and beneath the dignity of real football fans. and you posted that you barely cared when they lost and how it wasn't even remotely as important to you as Feyenoord winning the UEFA (!!!) Cup.

Edited by Spacemans Bong, 15 July 2010 - 08:39 AM.


#357 Verryfunny2

  • 397 posts

Posted 15 July 2010 - 04:22 PM

Problem with cruyff is that the dude is retired for about 15 years now. He has no recent XP in any competition but can't stop himself talking about how the dutch team should play. Which is not so bad if he isnt stuck in the 70's, and believes in a system which no team in the world is playing anymore. He can point to Barcalona but even they are playing 4-2-3-1. Football is so mercenary that in most cases players will only play with eachother on the national squad.

The history of Cruyff with the dutch football organisation is long and complicated. Starting as a player when he demanded more money for the players, then agreeing to coach the team for the 1990 world cup. When the team consisted of Van Basten, Rijkaard en Gullit were at peakform. Just before the championship he and the KNVB let the deal blow on some stupid clothingdispute. Cruyff wanted to wear his own brand and the KNVB wanted him to wear the adidasbrand i think. That soured a lot of dutch fans towards him.

He then put his cash on Van Basten and the dutch flamed out on the worldcup against Portugal and the european championship against Russia. Van Basten then proceeded to make a mess of Ajax. Cruyff and him had a big falling out on tactics.

I have been suprised by the dutch this tournament, ive been very dissapointed in the international press. And they get crusified by the dutch press too. So we are allowed to be the lovable losers but trying to win the world cup without beautifull football is forbidden. Remember how young this team is, there is plenty potential to grow, we played without Robben for a couple of matches and some of our players were out of form, RVP and van der Vaart to name a few. In 2 years we will be the favorite to win the European cup and in 4 years most of these players will be peaking.

Ofcourse we would like to see attractive football but you can't argue with results. Last time a dutch team won a european championship 1988, last time a dutch club won a european cup 2002 with Feyenoord. So we dont have that much succes with the beautiful game no do we.

I think you can split the dutch people in 2, there are those with the view of the past in which they think football was golden. Look at this footage from 1974 in what has been described as one of the greatest matches of all time. Its about the worst tackling i have ever seen.
http://nos.nl/wk2010...ndbrazilie.html

Then there are the realists who see where the game is going and can think logically. So i play 4-3-3 and my opponent plays 4-2-3-1, so im outnumbered 5-3 on the midfield, how do you think most of those matches will end up. This is the modern football, if you dont like it please stop watching modern football and stop commenting on it. Buy some dvd's from the 70's and watch them with the older old folk. Im suprised at Tony for not applauding this kind of football, it has Feyenoord written all over it.

Great party and well deserved. Oh and the true measure of a fan isnt when things go well but when things go bad, so losing the final and still being able to give this rousing homecoming was about as great as i have seen dutch fans ever.

#358 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10,149 posts

Posted 15 July 2010 - 06:11 PM

Remember how young this team is, there is plenty potential to grow, we played without Robben for a couple of matches and some of our players were out of form, RVP and van der Vaart to name a few. In 2 years we will be the favorite to win the European cup and in 4 years most of these players will be peaking.


This isn't true. Robben will be 28 at Euro10, and 30 in the next World Cup. Van Persie will be the same, as will Sneijder. van der Vaart will be 29/31. The only regulars in the Dutch lineup in this World Cup that were younger than 26 was van der Wiel and de Jong.

Contrast that with Germany...they had Nauer, Boatang, Aogo, Schweinstager, Ozil, Kroos, Podolski, and Muller 25 and under.

Spain had Pique, Ramos, Cesc, Busquets, David Silva, Navas, and Pedro 25 and younger.

Not only are the Dutch not young, but they will not be the favorites in Ukraine/Poland.

#359 Infield Infidel


  • teaching korea american


  • 8,278 posts

Posted 15 July 2010 - 10:36 PM

Eh, 30ish is fine. Forlan just won the Golden Ball and he's a golden-locked adonis 31. Henry was pretty good four years ago when he was 30.

Edited by Infield Infidel, 15 July 2010 - 10:37 PM.


#360 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10,149 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 09:49 AM

Eh, 30ish is fine. Forlan just won the Golden Ball and he's a golden-locked adonis 31. Henry was pretty good four years ago when he was 30.


But 30ish isn't peaking, which is what he said. He said the young Dutch players would be peaking.

They will be exiting their prime. The Germans will be peaking, and I'm willing to bet some American currency that Germany is the favorites for both Euro12, and WC14 (well, other than Brazil).

#361 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10,149 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 09:56 AM

Ronaldo has famously accused Iniesta of being a diver. While I apparently don't follow the sport in a meaninful way [whatever that means] maybe his opinion has some merit?

I watched yesterday's game in a bar -- the crowd seemed roughly 60-40 in Holland's favor -- and shouts of "Get up!" happened more than once with Iniesta writhing around on the pitch after minimal contact. The man is a great player, but I'm not the only one who feels he is also a poor actor.


Hey, I just saw this and felt it deserved a response.

1. Cristiano Ronaldo, a player for Real Madrid who is famous for diving, told Andres Iniesta, a player for Barcelona, to stop diving after a Real-Barca game.
2. If you followed the sport in any kind of meaningful way (it means, you actually watch and pay attention when it's not the World Cup), this would be a major red flag.
3. You watched in a bar where the majority were rooting for the Dutch, and your supporting evidence is that people in the bar yelled get up? Wow, shut my mouth. In my neutral living room of about 10 people, people actually clapped when Iniesta shoved van Bommel to the ground and thought the Dutch should have been down to 8 men (reds for van Bommel, Heitenga and de Jong). Checkmate.
4. Soccer fans yell "Get up" at every foul. You still haven't demonstrated how Iniesta is anything but the deserving MOM winner, and is now a national hero in Spain.

#362 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10,149 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 10:01 AM

What really was comical was Iniesta collapsing to the ground when a defender momentary grabbed his shoulder. He literally let his legs just fly out from under him and that sends a guy off. In a ideal world, Iniesta gets a card as well for the flop, which should have been his second but some how his retaliation foul earlier in the game wasn't carded.
The problem, to me, is there is no cultural shame in being a flopping fraud and on the field it consistently rewarded by officials.

And I have heard multiple talking heads comment that the levels of diving has been pretty extreme.


If you carded Iniesta for diving there, it would have been his 1st card in the game. But Heitinga grabbed Iniesta's shoulder as he was running full speed. That's a card, unless you are making the argument that Heitinga was playing the ball.

Apparently I need my irony bone fixed and about 36 months added to my calender


You do need it fixed.

Also, you need the ability to comprehend what you are actually reading. The problem is the credibility of people who only follow the World Cup (which lasts a month) every four years (48 months). If you follow more than the World Cup, then what I'm saying doesn't apply to you. Follow, or is it time for Social Studies?

#363 MentalDisabldLst


  • Prefers spit over lube


  • 13,699 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 10:52 AM

URI, his latter comment was because you typed this up on July 12th:

The whining about diving from people who don't give a shit about this sport 47 out of 48 months of the year is comical.


I'd personally like to see more angles of the Heitinga red card, because it didn't look as though he redirected the Dutch guy's momentum very much, but as Heitinga *was* the last defender there and there would have been a shot on goal, I don't think it's hard to defend that card. I'd just like to see it so I can feel a little better about a WC final being decided, essentially, on a red card.

#364 kenneycb


  • Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play


  • 7,293 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 11:11 AM

URI, his latter comment was because you typed this up on July 12th:



I'd personally like to see more angles of the Heitinga red card, because it didn't look as though he redirected the Dutch guy's momentum very much, but as Heitinga *was* the last defender there and there would have been a shot on goal, I don't think it's hard to defend that card. I'd just like to see it so I can feel a little better about a WC final being decided, essentially, on a red card.

Saying the game was decided on that card is a pretty big jump to conclusion. It's not like it gave Spain a penalty or anything. Teams play all the down a man and are able to salvage draws (or penalties in this case) or even win the damn thing. Spain was attacking the Dutch pretty good in extra time so it's not entirely surprising that a goal came, man down or not.

#365 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10,149 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 11:16 AM

Fuck it...47 out of 48 months. Ugh I suck.

It wasn't decided on a red card anyway. Howard Webb didn't fuck up that card, he fucked up calling a goal kick rather than a corner when the ball hit both Cesc and Iker.

And Heitinga didn't get a red card in the purest sense, he got a 2nd yellow. Guys that are running around with a 10 minute break for 7-8 miles are a lot easier to go down when they are grabbed while running from behind. Iniesta went down because he was running, and a bigger, stronger guy grabbed him on the shoulder from behind.

The Dutch played like thugs (and dove) more than the Spanish dove in that game. There are a lot of reasons in my head for what it is that the Spanish are getting a ratio of shit for it, but the Dutch very fairly lost that game.

#366 Curtis_Lesspanic

  • 512 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 11:28 AM

If you carded Iniesta for diving there, it would have been his 1st card in the game. But Heitinga grabbed Iniesta's shoulder as he was running full speed. That's a card, unless you are making the argument that Heitinga was playing the ball.


Iniesta should have been carded for his retaliation to getting stepped on earlier. I remember him shouldering down someone right after that challenge away from the ball. A foul was given but inexplicably no card. The dive should have been his second card.

Heitinga grabbing Iniesta's shoulder isn't a card unless Iniesta hits the pitch. And unless there is some nerve on your shoulder that instantly causes your legs to fly out from underneath you, it was a dive. If he doesn't fall to the ground it's not a card. Poyul's arm bar and leg sweep of Robben were both Cards (Yellow for the Arm, Red for the Cobra Kai). Robben doesn't drop so there is no foul.

You do need it fixed.

Also, you need the ability to comprehend what you are actually reading. The problem is the credibility of people who only follow the World Cup (which lasts a month) every four years (48 months). If you follow more than the World Cup, then what I'm saying doesn't apply to you. Follow, or is it time for Social Studies?


I think Mental covered the Phonetic origin of my friendly jab adequately.

And I do follow soccer outside of the World Cup. My inlaws are Brazilian and we have this discussion when ever we watch a game together. I ask them why it's acceptable for guys to play like their petitioning for the golden flounder and they say that if it gets an advantage or a goal then it's a smart play. It's socially acceptable for soccer players to flop because it gets rewarded. So, in my opinion, there has to be some type of consistent repercussion imposed on players like Iniesta for going prostrate at the slightest provocation. Call me old fashioned but there should be an element of shame associated with playing like a fragile Nancy.

#367 Infield Infidel


  • teaching korea american


  • 8,278 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 12:16 PM

This isn't true. Robben will be 28 at Euro10, and 30 in the next World Cup. Van Persie will be the same, as will Sneijder. van der Vaart will be 29/31. The only regulars in the Dutch lineup in this World Cup that were younger than 26 was van der Wiel and de Jong.

Contrast that with Germany...they had Nauer, Boatang, Aogo, Schweinstager, Ozil, Kroos, Podolski, and Muller 25 and under.

On what planet is Aogo (3 caps) a regular, but Elia (15 caps) not? They are both 23 years old. Not to mention Ryan Babel, who while not a regular is still only 23 and has 39 caps.

And one could say you conveniently used 25 as your cut-off, when their are seven Dutch players, five regulars, who are 26 yrs old.

But 30ish isn't peaking, which is what he said. He said the young Dutch players would be peaking.

They will be exiting their prime. The Germans will be peaking

That's a fine line you carve there. In four years, Schneider, Van Persie and Robben will be exiting their prime at 30, but Schweinsteiger, Lahm, Podolski, and Mertesacker will be peaking at 29? Baring injury (cough Van Persie, cough), I don't imagine any of these guys being markedly worse in four years than they are today.

Klose and Cacau will be gone by the next WC, if not Euro 2012 (so will Kuyt). In fact, Muller is their only forward under 25; how good will he be when Klose is gone and he's paired with Podolski and Gomez (who at 29 will either be peaking or exiting their prime)? I don't think it'll matter as long as Ozil is making plays.

But every player is different, and some (Klose, Gio) maintain their peaks longer. Basically, the Dutch are significantly older at the back and midfield, and a little older up front.

None of this really matters, because Spain has youth and experience, with six players 24 and under with 20+ caps

and I'm willing to bet some American currency that Germany is the favorites for both Euro12, and WC14 (well, other than Brazil).

So, how much American currency are you willing to bet?

2012 Euro Soccer Betting: Futures Odds and Predictions by T.O. Whenham - 7/16/2010 (all odds are from Bodog)
Spain (4/1) - Spain obviously is favored to win the tournament - they are defending champions of both Euro and the World Cup. Given that recent success and their popularity at the World Cup, Iím frankly surprised that this price is as high as it is. Itís still too low for the risk of betting on a team in a tournament that doesnít start for two years, but itís way better than it could be, and better than it will be if the team that enters that tournament is essentially the same as the one we just finished watching. Thereís a risk of a letdown, but there wasnít one after the last Euro win, and this team could really be looking to define their legacy. The most impressive thing about this team is that despite winning the World Cup, I donít ever feel like they played their best soccer in South Africa. They have lots of room for improvement, and thatís really bad news for everyone else. They will obviously be a major factor.

Germany (11/2) - There is no team in the world that gained more respect at the World Cup than Germany. Their semifinal loss was disappointing, but the fact that they not only got there but were so incredibly dominant en route was extremely impressive. The most exciting part of this team was their depth. We knew that they had some good older players, but their younger stars - most obviously the incredible 20-year-old Thomas Muller, who won the Golden Boot - really stepped up and showed off a bright future. Itís easy to be bullish on this team.


Edited by Infield Infidel, 16 July 2010 - 12:34 PM.


#368 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10,149 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 01:10 PM

Iniesta should have been carded for his retaliation to getting stepped on earlier. I remember him shouldering down someone right after that challenge away from the ball. A foul was given but inexplicably no card. The dive should have been his second card.


Yeah, but he wasn't, so now we're just playing a woulda, shoulda game, which isn't very interesting. What's more interesting is why you thought that Iniesta should have gotten a card there for diving...the 2nd diving card (I think) in the entire World Cup there.

Heitinga grabbing Iniesta's shoulder isn't a card unless Iniesta hits the pitch.


Grabbing his shoulder is a foul, especially since he had a clear path to shoot. It's a card because he grabbed his shoulder, and he didn't play the ball.

And unless there is some nerve on your shoulder that instantly causes your legs to fly out from underneath you, it was a dive.


Iniesta was running, and someone who is bigger and stronger than him, grabbed his shoulder. The biological makeup of the nerves is irrelevant in the face of Newton's Laws.

If he doesn't fall to the ground it's not a card. Poyul's arm bar and leg sweep of Robben were both Cards (Yellow for the Arm, Red for the Cobra Kai). Robben doesn't drop so there is no foul.


If he's not grabbed by the shoulder while moving at top speed it's not a foul. Webb called advantage on Puyol. Robben was grabbed, but Spain didn't gain an advantage from it, because Robben kept his feet. That's the rule.

..which is funny because that's the first time Arjen Robben has ever been looked at on the field without falling down.

I think Mental covered the Phonetic origin of my friendly jab adequately.


He did, and I ate retard berries.

And I do follow soccer outside of the World Cup.


Cool, then my rant about people that don't follow outside of the World Cup getting all indignant doesn't apply to you.

My inlaws are Brazilian and we have this discussion when ever we watch a game together. I ask them why it's acceptable for guys to play like their petitioning for the golden flounder and they say that if it gets an advantage or a goal then it's a smart play. It's socially acceptable for soccer players to flop because it gets rewarded. So, in my opinion, there has to be some type of consistent repercussion imposed on players like Iniesta for going prostrate at the slightest provocation. Call me old fashioned but there should be an element of shame associated with playing like a fragile Nancy.


This is all well and good for the people that flop (which Iniesta certainly does). I'm arguing that he didn't when Heitenga grabbed his shoulder. Or when van Bommel tried to break his ankle before he swept the leg.

#369 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10,149 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 01:19 PM

On what planet is Aogo (3 caps) a regular, but Elia (15 caps) not? They are both 23 years old. Not to mention Ryan Babel, who while not a regular is still only 23 and has 39 caps.


I, of course, think Aogo is so awesome due to his regular playing time with Germany this World Cup.

I listed all the youngish German players and deleted those who didn't make a mark. I just missed Aogo...he's obvioulsy worse off than Babel and Elia.

And one could say you conveniently used 25 as your cut-off, when their are seven Dutch players, five regulars, who are 26 yrs old.


The cut off was actually 30 for the next World Cup, since that is about the time soccer outfield players start to drastically lose their effectiveness.

That's a fine line you carve there. In four years, Schneider, Van Persie and Robben will be exiting their prime at 30, but Schweinsteiger, Lahm, Podolski, and Mertesacker will be peaking at 29? Baring injury (cough Van Persie, cough), I don't imagine any of these guys being markedly worse in four years than they are today.


No. Sneijder, Van Persie and Robben will be exiting their prime at 30, and Schweinsteiger, Lahm, Podolski and Mertesacker will still be at the end of their primes.

Pretty much the most important players on the Dutch team will not be peaking was what I said.

Klose and Cacau will be gone by the next WC, if not Euro 2012 (so will Kuyt). In fact, Muller is their only forward under 25; how good will he be when Klose is gone and he's paired with Podolski and Gomez (who at 29 will either be peaking or exiting their prime)? I don't think it'll matter as long as Ozil is making plays.


Which is why Germany will be more likely to be favored than Holland, which is against what our Dutch friend said.

But every player is different, and some (Klose, Gio) maintain their peaks longer. Basically, the Dutch are significantly older at the back and midfield, and a little older up front.


Robben and van Persie aren't known for their ability to stay on the field, so I would guess that they are less likely to be Klose than say...Schweinsteiger.

None of this really matters, because Spain has youth and experience, with six players 24 and under with 20+ caps


Yeah, Spain is very good and young, but their best defender and three of their best five midfielders will be exiting their primes (Xavi, Iniesta, Puyol, and Alonso).

I just know that the Dutch will not be the favorite.

So, how much American currency are you willing to bet?


Not enough two years before the event to make it very interesting. Let's have a chatty chat in 18 months.

#370 Curtis_Lesspanic

  • 512 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 02:22 PM

Yeah, but he wasn't, so now we're just playing a woulda, shoulda game, which isn't very interesting. What's more interesting is why you thought that Iniesta should have gotten a card there for diving...the 2nd diving card (I think) in the entire World Cup there.

Actually there were two cards for diving... in the same game. Germany had Ozil and Caucau both booked for flopping against the Socceroos. Julian Rodriguez Santiago suffers no shenanigans.




Grabbing his shoulder is a foul, especially since he had a clear path to shoot. It's a card because he grabbed his shoulder, and he didn't play the ball.

Iniesta was running, and someone who is bigger and stronger than him, grabbed his shoulder. The biological makeup of the nerves is irrelevant in the face of Newton's Laws.


There are people grabbed on just about every corner kick and it's called only when someone hits the turf. If Iniesta doesn't go down I doubt that card gets issued.
But I agree with you on Newton's Laws. When you deliberately kick your legs out from under you, your going to fall.

If he's not grabbed by the shoulder while moving at top speed it's not a foul. Webb called advantage on Puyol. Robben was grabbed, but Spain didn't gain an advantage from it, because Robben kept his feet. That's the rule.

..which is funny because that's the first time Arjen Robben has ever been looked at on the field without falling down.

How can you possibly say Spain didn't get an advantage from it? They funneled him right into the Goalie. Sticking an Arm in front of him and then attempting to leg whip him absolutely impacted what Robben could do with the ball. And again, the fact that neither of these are fouls because they failed to ground him is a problem.


He did, and I ate retard berries.

I eat those too time to time. No Worries.



This is all well and good for the people that flop (which Iniesta certainly does). I'm arguing that he didn't when Heitenga grabbed his shoulder. Or when van Bommel tried to break his ankle before he swept the leg.


And I think he did & Goal.com thinks he flopped too.

After so many yellow cards it appeared only a matter of time before a red would follow and with only 11 minutes remaining it finally came, though it did seem a little harsh on John Heitinga when he became the fifth player to be dismissed in a World Cup final.

The Dutch defender laid a soft hand on the shoulder of Andres Iniesta as the Barcelona man broke front and center, but an exaggerated fall came after contact had been released. Nevertheless, Howard Webb saw fit to send off Heitinga for a second offense.



http://www.goal.com/...vs-spain/report

#371 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10,149 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 04:01 PM

Actually there were two cards for diving... in the same game. Germany had Ozil and Caucau both booked for flopping against the Socceroos. Julian Rodriguez Santiago suffers no shenanigans.


Apparently not...I'll take your word for it though. I think I blocked that game out of my memory.

There are people grabbed on just about every corner kick and it's called only when someone hits the turf. If Iniesta doesn't go down I doubt that card gets issued.
But I agree with you on Newton's Laws. When you deliberately kick your legs out from under you, your going to fall.


Yeah, but that wasn't a corner kick, it was a through ball from Xavi. Iniesta's momentum is impeded he stumbles and falls. He went down as a result of Heitinga's action.

He was compelled to stumble because of Heitenga's force was impressed on him. He fell face first, by the way.

How can you possibly say Spain didn't get an advantage from it?


Easy. They didn't.

hey funneled him right into the Goalie. Sticking an Arm in front of him and then attempting to leg whip him absolutely impacted what Robben could do with the ball. And again, the fact that neither of these are fouls because they failed to ground him is a problem.


Robben didn't lose control of the ball. It squirted lose to Robben's left, he controlled it, dribbled it left and Iker collected it.

It's a funny paradox that Robben's ego kept him on his feet, and his skill at maintaining control essentially lost the Dutch the game. If he had gone down like he had 100's of times before, Puyol would have been sent off and they would have had a free kick 20yds from the box.

Unfortunately for the Northern Europeans, Robben kept control of the ball.

And I think he did & Goal.com thinks he flopped too.



http://www.goal.com/...vs-spain/report


Martin Tyler and the ESPN studio team all said it was a foul.

But there are millions of Spanish supporters, Howard Webb, FIFA (by action) and a good number of the uninterest who don't think so.

That game was brutal not because of Iniesta (who wasn't the worst diver in that game) or Howard Webb. It was brutal because of how negative the Dutch were, and how the Spanish responded to the thuggery (by playing keep away for 70 minutes). You can blame diving all you want, but like you said, it's old school.

Which means the game is not going to be played the way it was in the 70's anymore. And economically, FIFA has no cause to change it anyway, since the sport is growing in the two biggest markets (USA, and China) that had no particular foothold in it. A

nd let's not get all indignant about the diving when there are very serious issues that were exposed in this World Cup that should be dealt with first: Incompetent, overwhelmed referees, and the ignoring of basic technologies to help incompetent, overwhelmed referees.

#372 Verryfunny2

  • 397 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 04:18 PM

Lots of good things are being said. A couple of points to try to clear up my statement about the Dutch being favored in 2 and 4 years. Defending a title is almost impossible. Number of times a champion repeated in the european championship, zero times, and thats since the 1960's. Thats why i eliminated Spain. In my opinion most of the dutch team plays at european top level, and the ones that aren't will be soon. The important players are stars in europe for big clubs. Most german players are still playing in the bundesliga. And im not yet comparing Muller, who has a great rookie season to someone like RVP who has been playing at arsenal for years now. Lets see his sophmore year first.

The germans are a good bunch though and im curious if they can keep developing.

Lets just say it has been quite a dissapointing world cup for the lovers of soccer. Not much scoring, mostly tactical matches, lots of defending, by most of the teams. Just not sure why the dutch get burned for it as they have been.

#373 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10,149 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 04:31 PM

Perception. The Dutch should be attacking beautifully using 10 moving, interchangeable parts in a wave of football totality.

Instead, the final...the most exposure the Dutch team gets...they play negatively with thugs like van Bommel and de Jong doing everything but raping Xavi and Xabi Alonso right on the pitch. They have guys like van Persie and Robben that bitch after every seemingly anti-Dutch decision. I was talking to a friend during the Netherlands games about the likability of the Dutch team and the only players that really had any traction were Sneijder, Kuyt, and Gio.

Is that fair?

Probably not, as I know I've been hyperbolic in this thread towards the unlikablility of the Dutch. I will say, as someone who started watching the Dutch team with Bergkamp, Winter, Davids, JFH and Seedorf playing, I know I'm not very enthused with their style this go around.

#374 Spacemans Bong


  • chapeau rose


  • 16,540 posts

Posted 16 July 2010 - 04:58 PM

Perception. The Dutch should be attacking beautifully using 10 moving, interchangeable parts in a wave of football totality.

Instead, the final...the most exposure the Dutch team gets...they play negatively with thugs like van Bommel and de Jong doing everything but raping Xavi and Xabi Alonso right on the pitch. They have guys like van Persie and Robben that bitch after every seemingly anti-Dutch decision. I was talking to a friend during the Netherlands games about the likability of the Dutch team and the only players that really had any traction were Sneijder, Kuyt, and Gio.

Is that fair?

Probably not, as I know I've been hyperbolic in this thread towards the unlikablility of the Dutch. I will say, as someone who started watching the Dutch team with Bergkamp, Winter, Davids, JFH and Seedorf playing, I know I'm not very enthused with their style this go around.

I think people like van Bommel in an anti-hero way. He's almost like a more skillful Vinnie Jones in that he's pretty honest about his dirtiness. He knows no one likes him, and he's cool with that.

As for their unlikeable status.. I mean, I like the fact they're a sea change from your average Dutch team. The team they've got is not particularly skillful except for two players, and so they did what they could with the resources they'd have. I'm sure van Marwijk would love to have legions of skillful players blow tikinaccio off the park with strength and style, but he doesn't have that. Shit, when was the last time you could say a Dutch team legitimately overachieved in a competition? Uh...never?

Edit: I also like that people are throwing off their Dutch shirts in disgust over their style of play. To paraphrase Chipper Jones, time for the bandwagon Dutch fans to go put their Spain shirts on. and many are.

Edited by Spacemans Bong, 16 July 2010 - 05:00 PM.


#375 Nick Kaufman


  • protector of human kind from spoilers


  • 8,369 posts

Posted 17 July 2010 - 04:18 PM

Problem with cruyff is that the dude is retired for about 15 years now. He has no recent XP in any competition but can't stop himself talking about how the dutch team should play. Which is not so bad if he isnt stuck in the 70's, and believes in a system which no team in the world is playing anymore. He can point to Barcalona but even they are playing 4-2-3-1.


Barcelona most definitely aren't playing 4-2-3-1. What they re playing is an asymmetrical system based on Cruyff's 4-3-3 and transformed by the need to adapt to Messi's proclivities.

Then there are the realists who see where the game is going and can think logically. So i play 4-3-3 and my opponent plays 4-2-3-1, so im outnumbered 5-3 on the midfield, how do you think most of those matches will end up. This is the modern football, if you dont like it please stop watching modern football and stop commenting on it.


What are you talking about? A 4-3-3 in defense becomes a 4-5-1. The difference between 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 is that the first requires only one defensive midfield instead of two. Other than that, how offensive or defensive they are depends on how far deep the wings will drop on the defense and how high the wing backs will go. 4-3-3 is very much alive today, still serviceable.

That game was brutal not because of Iniesta (who wasn't the worst diver in that game) or Howard Webb. It was brutal because of how negative the Dutch were, and how the Spanish responded to the thuggery (by playing keep away for 70 minutes). You can blame diving all you want, but like you said, it's old school.


Everything that needs to be said about the final should start and end here. It's laughable to get hang up on Iniesta when clearly the Dutch did worse and got away with much worse, while the Spaniards tried to at least play a game.

As for their unlikeable status.. I mean, I like the fact they're a sea change from your average Dutch team. The team they've got is not particularly skillful except for two players, and so they did what they could with the resources they'd have.


If the Netherlands with Robben, Van Persie, Van Der Vaart and Sneijder isn't skilled enough to play attack-minded attractive football, I don't know which team is. And oh btw, they did play attack-minded attractive football in Euro 2008 when they steamrolled through France and Italy.

As for the thuggery, well, that takes the cake. Say what you will about Greece -which doesn't possess half the talent the Dutch do- but save for the flopping Karagounis, they play clean.

Even Uruguay who in the past played the worst brand of thug football, this time they tried to play. That's when they won me and Holland lost me. In the semis. You had a decimated team of no-names + Forlan trying to play ball while the Dutch held back. The Dutch don't have worse players than the Uruguayans, do they?

Edit: I also like that people are throwing off their Dutch shirts in disgust over their style of play. To paraphrase Chipper Jones, time for the bandwagon Dutch fans to go put their Spain shirts on. and many are.


I am sorry, the regular rules of fandom don't apply here. I do not switch my allegiance for Chelsea after the millions start pouring in without suffering through the bad times. I already have one team I support through the bad times and the good, my national team. After that, I am free to root for whichever national team offers attractive football that doesn't make my eyes bleed.

Personally, I felt sympathetic towards the Spanish after they got hosed by the Koreans in 2002. I also rooted for them in 2006.

#376 Verryfunny2

  • 397 posts

Posted 20 July 2010 - 02:51 AM

Barcelona most definitely aren't playing 4-2-3-1. What they re playing is an asymmetrical system based on Cruyff's 4-3-3 and transformed by the need to adapt to Messi's proclivities.


Well they have a back four and 2 defensive minded midfielders, Sergio Busquets, Seydou Keita and then 4 moving parts in Xavi, iniesta, messi and pedro. Then Zlatan as lone forward. Just because it moves around doesnt make the system any different does it?

What are you talking about? A 4-3-3 in defense becomes a 4-5-1. The difference between 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 is that the first requires only one defensive midfield instead of two. Other than that, how offensive or defensive they are depends on how far deep the wings will drop on the defense and how high the wing backs will go. 4-3-3 is very much alive today, still serviceable.


One defensive midfielder, so like where does that poor fellow play? Like an old fashioned sweeper in front of the defense? Problem in the modern game is that the transition is so freaking fast that most teams get crushed, prime example is how Germany dismantled Argentina. So in youre post everybody plays 4-3-3, only if they hold back its a defensive 4-3-3. Seems like the real discussion isnt what system teams are playing but with what kind of players. If you remove Messi from Barca its a total different team.

I have to say this loss crushed me, i haven't been this down since the playoff loss of Boston in 2003. And im putting this one on the coach also. Van Marwijk had the choice to start with Huntelaar up front and pull RVP one line back. Kuyt is a servicable player but has a clear ceiling, which became obvious in this game. A midfield consisting of RVP, Sneijder, Robben would have made for a much more attacking side.

Edited by Verryfunny2, 20 July 2010 - 06:04 AM.


#377 filthywater49

  • 1,532 posts

Posted 20 July 2010 - 05:12 AM

Well they have a back four and 2 defensive minded midfielders, Sergio Busquets, Seydou Keita and then 3 moving parts in Xavi, iniesta and pedro. Then Zlatan as lone forward. Just because it moves around doesnt make the system any different does it?


First of all, Messi is completely omitted from this for some reason. Secondly, Ibra usually doesn't play higher than the other two strikers. Third, you can't just lump Pedro in with Xavi and Iniesta. They are midfielders, he's a striker/high winger. He almost never plays as low as those two (assuming Iniesta is in the midfield, which he usually is.

They play a 4-3-3. When Messi plays as a false nine, they're in a 4-3-1-2. Sometimes they play a 4-2-4 with Iniesta higher than usual near three forwards in order to press really high and pressure ballhandling defenders.

Zonal Marking tactical breakdown of Barca

#378 Verryfunny2

  • 397 posts

Posted 20 July 2010 - 06:47 AM

First of all, Messi is completely omitted from this for some reason. Secondly, Ibra usually doesn't play higher than the other two strikers. Third, you can't just lump Pedro in with Xavi and Iniesta. They are midfielders, he's a striker/high winger. He almost never plays as low as those two (assuming Iniesta is in the midfield, which he usually is.

They play a 4-3-3. When Messi plays as a false nine, they're in a 4-3-1-2. Sometimes they play a 4-2-4 with Iniesta higher than usual near three forwards in order to press really high and pressure ballhandling defenders.


Interesting website, youre right i had a massive brainfart in ommiting messi. Well that's the big question in this whole discussion, why can't i lump in pedro with Xavi en Iniesta? They all play in the same area. Just calling him a striker doesnt make him one. Neither Messi, Pedro or Robben are classic wingers. Messi gets most of his passes in midfield and then start his action same as Robben and Pedro. Most of it driven towards the goal and not towards the backline for a cross.

I dont think busquets play's at the same height as xavi, iniesta. In offence both backs move up and become in facto wingers, so in offence they play 2 - 4 - 4. With both brazilian backs acting in midfield, or moving over the wing and a striker falls back. With Zlatan deep and pedro/messi roaming around. In defense they still pull back and are in facto 4-2-3-1, they can go on the break with xavi en iniesta feeding messi and pedro.

Better question is why is the system they play in so important. I feel barca play's beautiful football, But i think the system is less important than the players who execute it. Without iniesta, xavi or messi this team is good but not great.
Good example is Ajax from 1995/1996, also a team you can argue played 4-3-3 and dominated. When a couple of those players left the system failed.

http://www.zonalmark...uardiola-messi/

makes the comment that most people have difficulty naming the system barca plays. They call it a 4-2-4 others call it a 4-2-3-1. Perhaps this is one for the ages. I can remember this discussion during the 1988 european championship, did the dutch play a classic 4-3-3 then? With van het schip they had a classic winger, but Gullit liked to roam the field like Messi now, and with Wouters and Erwin koeman playing defensive midfielders :). They played a 3-2-3-2 system really.

#379 AusTexSoxFan

  • 1,994 posts

Posted 20 July 2010 - 11:54 AM

Finally back from vacation so just now able to comment on Espana winning.

Xavi might get the accolades and Villa gets most of the goals but for my money Puyol was the best player in the tournament for Spain and he showed his stuff again in the final. He's retiring from La Seleccion and will be sorely missed. It's hard to believe he's been around this long. All he does is play his ass off. Truly one of my favorite players ever.

As someone who's been following La Seleccion since the early days of Javier Clemente, this title brought me alot of joy. For so many years the Spanish thought that players like Raul, Hierro, Mendieta and Morientes would usher in the days of glory for Spanish futbol but it never came to pass for whatever reason. Underachievement, bad luck and just plain awful goalkeeping (ie - Zubizarreta @ WC '98 game against Nigeria. Still makes me shudder).

And it's awesome to see all the different regions of the country having a hand in this victory with players from Catalunya, the Basque Country, Canarias, Asturias, Andalucia, Valencia, La Mancha, etc... And great seeing people flood the fountains and plaza mayors of cities and towns all around the country. I'm not saying that the Basques or Catalunyans are ready to host a national team match, but it was nice to see them show some Spanish national pride.

#380 Nick Kaufman


  • protector of human kind from spoilers


  • 8,369 posts

Posted 20 July 2010 - 12:42 PM

Interesting website, youre right i had a massive brainfart in ommiting messi. Well that's the big question in this whole discussion, why can't i lump in pedro with Xavi en Iniesta? They all play in the same area. Just calling him a striker doesnt make him one. Neither Messi, Pedro or Robben are classic wingers. Messi gets most of his passes in midfield and then start his action same as Robben and Pedro. Most of it driven towards the goal and not towards the backline for a cross.

I dont think busquets play's at the same height as xavi, iniesta. In offence both backs move up and become in facto wingers, so in offence they play 2 - 4 - 4. With both brazilian backs acting in midfield, or moving over the wing and a striker falls back. With Zlatan deep and pedro/messi roaming around. In defense they still pull back and are in facto 4-2-3-1, they can go on the break with xavi en iniesta feeding messi and pedro.

Better question is why is the system they play in so important. I feel barca play's beautiful football, But i think the system is less important than the players who execute it. Without iniesta, xavi or messi this team is good but not great.
Good example is Ajax from 1995/1996, also a team you can argue played 4-3-3 and dominated. When a couple of those players left the system failed.

http://www.zonalmark...uardiola-messi/

makes the comment that most people have difficulty naming the system barca plays. They call it a 4-2-4 others call it a 4-2-3-1. Perhaps this is one for the ages. I can remember this discussion during the 1988 european championship, did the dutch play a classic 4-3-3 then? With van het schip they had a classic winger, but Gullit liked to roam the field like Messi now, and with Wouters and Erwin koeman playing defensive midfielders :). They played a 3-2-3-2 system really.


Look. I ve seen Barca play a two or three times, but I ve really played attention to the formation they played.

Barca plays a nominal 4-3-3

Pedro, Ibra, Messi upfront.

Iniesta, Xavi, Busquet in the middle.

Abidal, Puyol, Piquet, Alves as back 4.

Now, I say nominal because this is not the formation they keep on the pitch, though that doesn't change the fact this nominal 4-3-3 derives from the tradition Cruyff established.

What happens is that Messi likes to track to the middle, because of the Argentinian tradition of the enganche, the player who plays behind the two strikers. When that happens, and it happens most of the time, Alves gets high up the pitch playing effectively as a right winger. Pedro OTOH, maintains his position up high as a left winger. So those two, Pedro and Alves maintain Barca's width, up front. Ibra plays up top while Messi, Xavi and Iniesta doing all the magic on the center of the pitch.

So in offense, with Abidal not veering too much high, it's an asymmetrical 3-1-3-3 or 3-1-5-1.

In defense, they do play more like a 4-3-3.

In no way shape or form do they play a 4-2-3-1.

One defensive midfielder, so like where does that poor fellow play? Like an old fashioned sweeper in front of the defense? Problem in the modern game is that the transition is so freaking fast that most teams get crushed, prime example is how Germany dismantled Argentina. So in youre post everybody plays 4-3-3, only if they hold back its a defensive 4-3-3. Seems like the real discussion isnt what system teams are playing but with what kind of players. If you remove Messi from Barca its a total different team.


Yeah, the problem is that Argentina plays a 4-3-1-2 with Maradona giving in effect license to his attacking players to defend with their eyes. Another crucial difference of course is that on a 4-3-3 the wingers will pick up on the opposing full backs. So against a 4-2-3-1, you have everyone picking up everyone at the center of the pitch while lacking a player up top and saving an extra player in the back.

I do think that 4-3-3 has the advantage of allowing for better spacing and more triangles across the pitch, perhaps it's the best in that regard. I also think coaches prefer the 4-2-3-1 because they like the extra safety the extra defensive midfielder provides.

Obviously, the kind of players you have will make a difference and so will the tactical instructions the coach gives. But the point is that the 4-3-3 is still a very very serviceable formation.