The Ultimate Football/Soccer Thread (2010/2011 Season)

[Chumblywumbly]

A lot of key matches havent been played, correct. If Cameroon beats Japan and Ivory Coast beats Portugal, things get very interesting.

It means teams in those groups must play to win. That's what's happened in Group C: because the Slovenia-Algeria match wasn't a draw, both the US and England have got to fight it out to go through, not simply relax and draw their matches.

Not that there was much doubt they're the two best teams in the group, simply that from a spectators point of view the matches will probably be more fun to watch.

[Nobel Hobos]

Assuming Germany win all three of their games.

Ghana has 3 points already, (with +1 goals compared to -4 for Australia). If Ghana defeat Australia, they go to 6 and the Aussies are out. If it's a draw, then they go to 4 and the Aussies need to win against Serbia AND make up the five goals. I.e, they're almost certainly out.

Australia can go through with only one win, one draw and one loss. And that without considering goal difference: draw with Serbia, win against Ghana produces Germany 9, Australia 4, Ghana 3, Serbia 1.

So when Ghana beat Australia 3-1 next Saturday, it will all be over ...

[Sel Appa]

Not that there was much doubt they're the two best teams in the group, simply that from a spectators point of view the matches will probably be more fun to watch.

Group C or D? Slovenia is interesting now. I honestly could see 3-0 Slovenia like what Czechia did last time.

Group D, Ghana beating Serbia was key, although it wasnt quite the win they wanted.

So when Ghana beat Australia 3-1 next Saturday, it will all be over ...

That would rock.

[Chumblywumbly]

Not that there was much doubt they're the two best teams in the group, simply that from a spectators point of view the matches will probably be more fun to watch.

Group C or D?

C.

When I say "the two best teams in the group", I mean the US and England.

[Valanora]

I can see the Yanks maybe drawing Slovenia but I can't see them losing to the Slovenians. Algeria looks overmatched and out of place and should be an easy win for both USA and England. The win from the Slovenians does make it interesting though, but it still should be the USA and England going through.

[Aivus]

USA and England will both win their other two matches, so the final in the group will be:

England:7
USA:7
Slovenia:3
Algeria:0

Unless they play Green again.

[Nobel Hobos]

USA and England will both win their other two matches, so the final in the group will be:

England:7
USA:7
Slovenia:3
Algeria:0

Valanora is right, the win by Slovenia means the US has to take more risks. Three draws won't do it.

Applying a similar assumption as I did for group D:

England wins against Slovenia and Algeria. 7 points.
USA draw with Slovenia would mean Slovenia 4, USA 2. Then they have to win against Algeria.
USA loses to Slovenia would mean Slovenia 6, USA 1 and they're out regardless of what happens against Algeria.
USA wins against Slovenia would mean Slovenia 3, USA 4.

So certainly the US is better placed than Australia after one game. A win against SVN would see them through, a draw wouldn't be disastrous.

If Slovenia draws against England, though, it could come down to goal difference between Slovenia and the USA (assuming USA beats Algeria). At the moment, the USA are one down in that goal count.

[The Archregimancy]

Some thoughts on yesterday's matches:

I don't think either the USA or England will be too worried about either Slovenia or Algeria, even if Belhadj and Yebda will at least be familiar with Glen Johnson's propensity for leaving his flank exposed when he moves forward (bit of a pot/kettle situation there, in truth). That match was dire.

I like what I saw of Ghana - as does the Ghanaian man 5 minutes down the road from me, who was standing on his flag-draped balcony waving at passersby yesterday afternoon - but I worry that they don't quite have the forward penetration to match their impressive midfield and compact and well-organised defence. Serbia were a disappointment.

I always suspected Australia would do poorly this cup (and when I was in Melbourne a couple of weeks ago, most of the normally optimistic Australians I spoke to agreed with me), so it's hard to say whether Germany were really that impressive, or Australia really that poor. I agree that Cahill's red was harsh - though it was clearly a yellow card offence - and his unavailability will give Ghana a lot of hope in their next match.

Today's predictions (not that I'm proving to be very good at this, mind):

Netherlands 2 - 1 Denmark [I like the Dutch, but suspect the Danes won't roll over]

Japan 0 - 2 Cameroon [Japan have been poor in their warm-up matches after an indifferent qualifying campaign; Cameroon are having their usual disorganised run-in, but look too strong for the Japanese]

Italy 0 - 0 Paraguay [Neither are attack-oriented; Italy are aging fast, and Paraguay lost their leading scorer from qualification when he was shot in the head in January; I fully expect this to be a dour encounter, and a draw suits both teams]


So Far:

Correct results: 4 / 8

Perfect scores: 0 / 8
(I have to get one right eventually, dammit)

[Cybach]

Their top 3 players arent even German. I think that tells us all we need to know.

Which 3 players we talking about? Podolski and Klose are Silesians whose families emigrated to Germany on the "Law of Return" by claiming German culture and ancestry, as well as being "ethnic Germans." Neither really ever saw themselves as being Polish. Hell, Podolski has the first line of the German anthem stitched into his shoes. That's more nationalistic than most of the team.

Of course Silesia is kind of a clusterfuck. Most modern Silesians speak Polish, but their unofficial regional anthem is a German song "Schlesierlied - Kehr ich einst..." Same as some other regions there such as Posen or Pomerania. Since no one is really sure if they're Germans or Poles, it's part of the reason the borders were drawn so badly after Versailles and all the drama/tension that built up until in 1939 shit hit the fan. It even continues to this day with most Silesians refusing to put themselves down as "Polish" during census; opting to leave it blank, put in "mixed" or just flat-out writing in "Silesian."

[Vonners]

News from the England camp -

Wayne Rooney, Ashley Cole and Ledley King all missed training...seems King is out for three weeks due to groin injury...

http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2890/wor ... le-sit-out

World Cup 2010: Ledley King, Wayne Rooney & Ashley Cole sit out England training session
Trio being monitored...
By Zack Wilson
14 Jun 2010 10:01:00

England players Wayne Rooney, Ledley King and Ashely Cole have left training in Rustenburg today, and have headed off to work separately.

King sustained a groin injury in the Three Lions' opening game against the United States, being replaced by Jamie Carragher at half-time of the 1-1 draw.

His injury will continue to be assessed on a day-to-day basis, but he looks set for a at least a three-week lay-off.

Rooney did pick up a knee injury ahead of the tournament but has looked in good shape so far.

He did take a kick to the ankle during the game against the Americans though, and

Cole was out of action with a fractured ankle for the last few weeks of last season, but did not look in any discomfort on Saturday.

The Blues left-back needs an extra day to recover from his weekend exertions.

All three players are reportedly training in the swimming pool this morning.

[Starblaydia]

Serbia-Ghana was abysmal, Slovenia-Algeria was like watching two pub sides.

If Holland click going forward, they'll be awesome. However I have no clue what their defenders are like, having only a passing familiarity with Heitinga, knowing Van Bronckhorst is aging fast, and knowing nothing about any other defender. Conceding only 2 goals in Qualifying is very impressive, though, I'd like to see what a good attack can do to them.

[Barringtonia]

Some sobering stats..

Steven Gerrard

Shots - 1
Goals - 1
Passes - 61 (Short Passes13 Medium Passes32 Long passes16)

Long passes 16
Long Passes complete 5
Long Passes completion rate 31.25%

Medium Passes 32
Medium Passes complete 24
Medium Passes completion rate 75.00%

Short Passes 13
Short Passes complete 7
Short Passes completion rate 53.85%

Passes Completion Rate
59.02%

46.15% SHORT PASSES INCOMPLETE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

4 out of 10 of all his passes didn't get to another England player !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Does Gerrard need to get his eyes tested ?

Did you watch Germany and Argentina ?

How much does Gerrard get paid ?

Can anyone say Hamann or Alonso !

Wayne Rooney

In 90 minutes Wayne Rooney made 38 passes and gave the ball away...wait for it...16 times. That's 1 bad pass every 5 minutes - against the USA !

Total Passes 38
Passes Completed 22
Passes Completion Rate 57.89%

Long passes 8
Long Passes complete 3
Long Passes completion rate 37.50%

Medium Passes 22
Medium Passes complete 14
Medium Passes completion rate 63.64%

Short Passes 8
Short Passes complete 5
Short Passes completion rate 62.50%

From the comments in this article.. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog ... d-cup-2010

[Starblaydia]

A bad passing percentage (have you seen the stats of when they have good games,to compare? Probably not) is often a result of a good defence, too. The Americans pressed well, closed down quickly, and fouled often.

[Barringtonia]

A bad passing percentage (have you seen the stats of when they have good games,to compare? Probably not) is often a result of a good defence, too. The Americans pressed well, closed down quickly, and fouled often.

Well, it's an aspect of England's game, which is to defend and go for an incisive through pass (or long ball if I'm not being so generous) rather than holding onto the ball and building up attacks but..

..a lot of basic short passes went awry, it's just a waste,

[Starblaydia]

A bad passing percentage (have you seen the stats of when they have good games,to compare? Probably not) is often a result of a good defence, too. The Americans pressed well, closed down quickly, and fouled often.

Well, it's an aspect of England's game, which is to defend and go for an incisive through pass (or long ball if I'm not being so generous) rather than holding onto the ball and building up attacks but..

..a lot of basic short passes went awry, it's just a waste,

English football is, generally, about all-out, fast-paced aggression and swift penetration (oo-er), be it a long ball over the top or said incisive through pass. Buy it's very nature it's high-risk and you lose the ball more often than not. The Dutch, the Italians, etc, all play quality possession football with slower build-up. Diff'rent strokes.

[The Archregimancy]

English football is, generally, about all-out, fast-paced aggression and swift penetration (oo-er), be it a long ball over the top or said incisive through pass. Buy it's very nature it's high-risk and you lose the ball more often than not. The Dutch, the Italians, etc, all play quality possession football with slower build-up. Diff'rent strokes.

Likewise the Brazilians, the Germans (usually), the French, the Uruguayans, and the Argentinians.

That makes 17 victories for teams playing quality possession football with a slower build-up, and one victory for a team based on all-out, fast-paced aggression and "swift penetration" (though you could argue that the best German teams combine the best elements of both approaches).

Add in the runners-up, and that gives us 33 finalists playing quality possession football, 1 playing the English style, and 4 I'll admit I don't know much about (Czechoslovakia '34 & '62; Hungary '38; Sweden '58).

On that basis, one might be tempted to say that, regrettably, playing quality possession football is likelier, in the long term, to lead to World Cup success than the English style. But us academics are no doubt prone to drawing the wrong conclusions from such inconvenient matters as facts.

[Barringtonia]

Likewise the Brazilians, the Germans (usually), the French, the Uruguayans, and the Argentinians.

That makes 17 victories for teams playing quality possession football with a slower build-up, and one victory for a team based on all-out, fast-paced aggression and "swift penetration" (though you could argue that the best German teams combine the best elements of both approaches).

Add in the runners-up, and that gives us 33 finalists playing quality possession football, 1 playing the English style, and 4 I'll admit I don't know much about (Czechoslovakia '34 & '62; Hungary '38; Sweden '58).

On that basis, one might be tempted to say that, regrettably, playing quality possession football is likelier, in the long term, to lead to World Cup success than the English style. But us academics are no doubt prone to drawing the wrong conclusions from such inconvenient matters as facts.

Fair enough, Jose Mourinho showed you can win a major Cup title by forgetting about possession and running the fast counter-attack style of England, just 24% possession against Barcelona in the 2nd leg of the semis, not much better against Bayern Munich either..

Still, that's with a tightly-honed team constantly playing with each other (oo-err) over 2 years so they've a highly understood reading of each other, not a disparate group brought together every 2-3 months,

I'd glue Crouchy's feet to the penalty spot, get past the byline and then thwack it as hard as I can against his head, one or two are bound to ricochet in,

Sure it ain't football but it would get us through the last 16 at least, we can lose playing actual football in the QFs,

[Starblaydia]

I'd glue Crouchy's feet to the penalty spot, get past the byline and then thwack it as hard as I can against his head, one or two are bound to ricochet in

The fatal flaw in that plan is that Lennon and SWP can't hit a cross worthy of the name. Group stage exit it is!

[Barringtonia]

I'd glue Crouchy's feet to the penalty spot, get past the byline and then thwack it as hard as I can against his head, one or two are bound to ricochet in

The fatal flaw in that plan is that Lennon and SWP can't hit a cross worthy of the name. Group stage exit it is!

Ha, totally, fu-u-u-u-uck!

[Vonners]

I'd glue Crouchy's feet to the penalty spot, get past the byline and then thwack it as hard as I can against his head, one or two are bound to ricochet in

The fatal flaw in that plan is that Lennon and SWP can't hit a cross worthy of the name. Group stage exit it is!

This.

Which is why Joe Cole needs to start as many matches as possible. I cannot believe Capello is not playing him.

[Cirona]

Netherlands 1 - 0 Denmark

Off to a shower before watching

[Neu Leonstein]

I don't see how posession football equates to "slow" build-up. Argentina and Germany both demonstrated what you do: you pass the ball around, trying to draw players out of the opponent's formation and creating spaces. And as soon as such a space is there, all happens very fast. Sometimes it takes longer for the opportunity to open up and sometimes it doesn't. But it makes little sense to me to attack and waste the ball when there is no opportunity.

[Juristonia]

If Holland click going forward, they'll be awesome. However I have no clue what their defenders are like, having only a passing familiarity with Heitinga, knowing Van Bronckhorst is aging fast, and knowing nothing about any other defender. Conceding only 2 goals in Qualifying is very impressive, though, I'd like to see what a good attack can do to them.

Our defence is pretty shitty at the moment, to be honest.
We're really depending on our mid-field and attack.

[Starblaydia]

I don't see how posession football equates to "slow" build-up. Argentina and Germany both demonstrated what you do: you pass the ball around, trying to draw players out of the opponent's formation and creating spaces. And as soon as such a space is there, all happens very fast. Sometimes it takes longer for the opportunity to open up and sometimes it doesn't. But it makes little sense to me to attack and waste the ball when there is no opportunity.

Therein lies the problem. English football - in general - appears to want to break the barriers down, rather than pass, keep the ball, and wait for opportunity to present itself.

HULK (or rather Shrek) SMASH is the way we roll

[Barringtonia]

I don't see how posession football equates to "slow" build-up. Argentina and Germany both demonstrated what you do: you pass the ball around, trying to draw players out of the opponent's formation and creating spaces. And as soon as such a space is there, all happens very fast. Sometimes it takes longer for the opportunity to open up and sometimes it doesn't. But it makes little sense to me to attack and waste the ball when there is no opportunity.

That could be what's meant by 'slow' build-up - not as a linear progression from one end to another but more teasing and poking and passing around midfield for a while,

England just seem to go forward, lose it, defend, go forward, lose it, defend, with little of the probing - in my opinion because they are just not very good passers of the ball, they're trained to run onto a ball and lash it towards goal,

EDIT: Anyway, I'm going to watch Holland now,