September 18, 2006
Para los amantes del rally y/o el descalabro automovilistico:
Una hora y media de choques, piñas, vuelcos, derrapes, saltos y letales mordidas de banquina. Y todos salieron ilesos.
Bue… todos no. Por lo que vi, hubo un par de espectadores que si no palmaron, pegaron en el palo. Pero los conductores si. Todos ilesos.
Bah, algunos.
July 10, 2006
There’s a reason why this franco-german cutie is here: Because I couldn’t find a good Italian cutie. Shocking.
So that was it. It’s finally over, and Italy is a fair winner, all in all. They were not the best team, the most dangerous or even the nicest to watch, but they were pretty regular through all the cup. And they killed everyone with that.
Wish I could go to the common place and they were the best defensive team, but can’t even do that either. When you look at it, this a pretty offensive Italian squad, and despite having a rock-solid Cannavaro and not receiving many goals at all, you never really got the feeling that they were playing as defensively as you would expect from Italy. Other squads from previous cups were far worse in that regard.
So, of the favorites, they were one of the least likely. Along with France too. But they both got there through perseverance. There must be a lesson there, somewhere.
Anyway…
France 1 – Italy 1 (Italy wins 5-3 p.s.o.)
A good final game, intense for at least 90 minutes. They both tried, and worked, with recovery and offense in the middle, but they fizzled more and more as they approached the rival’s goal. Not only there were very few clear plays in front of goal, but they also had to deal with their own inadequacies in the first half, and their tiredness from the second half on.
Both were defensively spot on, with France turning that defense into offense a little bit quicker overall, but Italy stronger in the back, and winning the aerial plays all the time. In essence, it was the encounter of two very, very similar teams, with different styles of play. It was just too evenly matched.
There’s really not much to comment on. Just some quickies:
- Totti kept trying to play everything first touch, and was well-substituted. He never really got in the game as Italy’s conductor. As he should have been.
- Henry never really appeared through the cup, and he didn’t appear today either. A disappointing showing all around. Or perhaps it was us that were expecting too much to begin with.
- A frustrated Zidane loses his temper and gets correctly sent off. It was very odd to watch, and not the type of ending to a career that we all would’ve like to see.
- I think the ref was correct in most calls. A good showing. He did have that tendency of his to just wave play on sometimes, but that’s how he is. He was certainly up to the challenge in all the big calls, perhaps with the exception of the PK to France, which was difficult to spot and I’d like to see again myself.
- France did get the raw end of things with two important losses: Vieira due to injury, and Zidane due to stupidity. Regardless, it wasn’t felt that much, since by that point both teams were dead tired and were doing what they could.
In any case, it’s over and there’s not much to say. I would’ve like for the final game not to be decided by PKs, but on the other hand it was a much better final than in ‘94. Now Italy are the winners, fair winners overall I think.
Man of the Match: I guess Pirlo (ITA). Didn’t show much, but was an adequate conductor when Totti couldn’t (which was all through the game). I also liked Camoranesi in the first half, but he went MIA during the second period.
The good: Now we get four full years without having to hear an Italian complain about something.
The bad: 4 years until 2010… what the hell am I supposed to do now?
July 6, 2006
An odontological cutie for your viewing pleasure.
Well, short and sweet: I could only watch and pay attention to 15 minutes of the France – Portugal clash. I got a massive toothache out of nowhere, seeing stars and all that, so naturally my attention was elsewhere. That’s why not only Day 22’s report is late, but also… well, there’s no report.
But from what little I could see, Portugal played quite horribly, and despite my initial wish to see them pass through, I’m glad they won’t be in the final. France didn’t play half bad, and managed to contain a flat, aimless Portugal. Good for France.
Italy and France in the final, imagine that. Of the big names, those were the least likely, but there they are, and no one can take anything from them. Both playing better and better with each game. The stadium in Berlin will crack from the momentum alone when those two meet. Hopefully they won’t ruin the show and we get an amazing final.
That’s all. Oh, and I probably won’t cover the 3rd. place game in much detail either. Just saving myself up for a huge final game commentary extravaganza.
July 5, 2006
… doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
But first, a word about today’s Italian cuties. I know some people get off watching girls take all kinds of things to their mouths, but this is not why I put this picture up. The message these two cuties have is simple: you can tout your own horn, and that’s alright as long as you can back it up. And these two sure can. Look at those eyes.
Anyway, as I was saying. Intangibles. The ghosts. Those little things of football that shouldn’t affect things, yet they do. For example, the fact of Italy reaching the final every 12 years. Hey, don’t take my word for it. Look it up. ‘70, ‘82, ‘94 and now in ‘06. nobody knows why, but it happens.
This is not to say that Italy is in the final because it’s the 12th year but… mmm. Food for thought. If you have better ideas about why this happens, leave a shout.
Germany 0 – Italy 2 a.e.t.
Very, very nice game to watch as an unattached third party. Nice action from both, particularly during the 1st half and the extra periods.
Yet, this one is still simple to dissect: Italy won because they had more order going forward, they were stronger in recovery and better in defense. Yeah, I know. Terrible, shocking surprise that one, but there it is. Italy was the one that, seemingly, wanted to get the goal more. The one that through long spells of the game attacked more, and better. The one that not only found itself in possession of the ball with more clarity, but was also stronger in the challenges. When you had to put your foot in there to get the ball, they did it harder. And this doesn’t mean a foul. It means committing to a challenge to win the ball. Germany was a bit more lax in those, and they lost several balls (and the ensuing possession) that way.
I’m not gonna discover anything by saying Italy was solid in defense, however it still bears to be mentioned, despite what an obvious football fact it is. First of all, they had a huge amount of balls recovered through the center of the German attack, right outside Italy’s box (see: committing to challenges). Cannavaro was almost impassable for most of the game, and when Gattuso fell back to help, he didn’t feel out of position, and either himself or Camoranesi became Italy’s first line and first touch to decompress after winning the ball and getting quickly and precisely forward to Pirlo or Totti (whom pretty much fucked up everything he touched, but that’s another issue).
Second, Italy’s full backs were simply relentless in covering and marking Germany’s tries from the flank. It was only until Oronkor being subbed in that they started to show problems with his speed, however they still managed to contain most attempts. And third, they showed good transition, in speed and positioning, when they lost the ball and had to fall back. Only one or two German quick mini-counters caught them off guard.
So, add one two and three together and you’ll see why Germany never reached Buffon frontally with clarity (forget about one-on-ones, of course) and never troubled Italy with constant crossing. Italy’s box was kept safe very well.
Germany? What I saw today was, again, the Germany of the first half against Argentina. Not the strong, overcoming and overwhelming Germany, but the one that feels the pressure when is pressed, the one that makes mistakes and the one that can’t seem to create a good offensive circuit going when Ballack is missing/well contained. Add to this their passing imprecisions, specially during the first half (nervousism?), and Italy going to recover balls harder than them, and it’s no mystery why Italy dominated the first half rather easily. And I dare say for most of the match.
Now you would say “Right, if Italy dominated so much, how come they almost reached PKs with a 0-0″. Well, that’s easy to answer, and the answer has a couple of names attached: Francesco Totti and Michael Ballack. They were both either largely absent from the game, as in Ballack’s case, or just plainly messing things up with every ball they touched, as in Totti’s case.
Ballack might have been well contained, which seems visually not to be true, because it wasn’t as if he had 2-3 guys on top of him constantly. What happened with Ballack, I think, is that he couldn’t become the conductor the team needed, the passing man Germany needed because… many times he had no one to pass it to. See Italy’s good positioning and marking on defense. For a long time Germany really couldn’t penetrate Italy’s box effectively, so they had to resort to medium range shots. Which is fine, but it does expose the fact that, well.. you shoot because you can’t get in, mate. So no one to give the ball to, with space and comfort, makes Ballack a sad panda.
Totti? Just a forgettable game, really. Totti’s mistake all through the game was attempting to make every ball that came to him a first touch ball. Which is nice. Trouble is, when you play that fast and you’re transitioning from defense to attack (as Italy did every time they recovered the ball), it makes no sense to play first touch fast because… your team mates are still running behind you. Also, both Totti and Pirlo really went ahead and abused the frontal aerial pass, trying to win the backs of Germany’s CDs. A trick that works once, or maybe twice, but after that the CDs are not stupid and catch up quick, slow and cumbersome as they might be. The Midfield Adventures of Totti & Pirlo (that sounds so a sitcom waiting to happen) only produced quick and safe ball recoveries for Germany.
Pirlo, however, tried to stop the ball, look up and see if there was anyone clear to receive it. Even if it took 5 seconds instead of 1. He eventually got better and ended up being the offensive little engine of ball distribution for Italy. Totti never got out of his “I don’t want the ball – it burns” phase. Thankfully was substituted.
Both keepers were correct, with Buffon being perhaps a hair more secure than Lehmann, but conversely Buffon was tried less than Lehmann. It balances out. Italy’s first agonizing goal was a beauty. No one was expecting a backheel there, and Grosso’s touch was subtle, putting the ball exactly where it had to be placed to beat the keeper. Lehmann had nothing to do there. It was precious.
The second goal, with a distinct nail-in-the-coffin feeling (even if there had been 30 more minutes to play, it had that feeling because Germany nowhere through the game showed they had more than one goal in them), just exposed a lot of skill from Italy to deliver the fatal stab on an imbalanced defensive line that was pushing forward. Del Piero’s touch was great as well. Soft, and magnificently placed to beat the keeper. Lehmann had little to do.
EOF. Italy wins and gets to the final, as they like to do every 12 years. Germany will now play for third place (against France, I hope, but we’ll see tomorrow), with sadness because of getting so damn close to the final, but they also should play with their chins up, knowing they were one of the best teams to watch through the tournament. I don’t know if the best team, but easily one of the most cohesive, overwhelming and interesting to watch. And that is really, really good.
Man of the Match: I liked Lahm (GER), but I also liked Pirlo (ITA) once he stopped imitating Totti, and Camoranesi (ITA) a bit. Can’t really pick one.
The good: Intense action back and forth, two shots on the post. Second half decayed a little, but still worth a watch.
The bad: Seeing Ballack and Totti really not work makes you wonder if they were just being wonderfully contained, or if they were learning from Riquelme. Both are scary.
July 2, 2006
Open wide and say….oooooout. Yeah, yeah. It’s yet another Brazilian cutie, but I don’t mind. I promise it’ll be the last one.
Day 20. Quarter finals are done, just like that. Four remain. The best four? No, I don’t think so. I don’t think that has ever happened since 19whoknowswhen. What we have here are the four teams that were the most adequate in each of their games and/or the luckiest. Luck counts, and it’s an intangible that makes football what it is.
And now we have, just in a couple of days, the semis. Germany – Italy has, a priori, all the marks of a spectacular game. Always nice when two superpowers clash like that. Germany was shaken in their last game against Argentina, and will need a victory to chase away whatever doubts came up in that game. And they need for the victory to be as contundent as possible, not just because only a victory will put them in the final, but also a sizeable and dominating defeat of Italy, something they’re able to perform, will give them that extra ounce of confidence they’ll need later on. Italy? They’ve been good, but irregular, and perhaps they’re hoping their last game vs. Ukraine was the spark that lit a more even level of play. Of course Germany won’t give them the defensive gifts Ukraine did, but that doesn’t take from this offensive rennaissance they seem to be having.
France – Portugal will be another nailbiter, I think, because both arrive at this stage… I won’t say decimated, but rather against the odds. Few thought they’d be here, but here they are, and just knowing that with a little bit of effort they will be there in the last game, putting a lid on many (if not all) critics, will go a long way to give you confidence. Both are teams on the rise, something that’s specially evident in France’s case, but Portugal has its own claims to make. Most important of all, that a WC final will be the absolute last chance this current footballing generation of theirs will have to prove something and win something. Last chances are usually great motivators.
.
England 0 – Portugal 0 (1-3 on PKs)
At this point I think it’s safe to go ahead and say this about England: It’s the same old song every WC. Every time they come with a strong team. Every time, that team doesn’t perform as expected, but still manages to chug along and move forward. And at some point between second round and semis, every time, the whole thing comes crashing down.
England’s performances all through the cup showed it was never easy. Yes, they were the better team in most of them. Yes, they won games. But they were never clearly superior or completely convincing, and all their victories left a little feeling behind, that it always seemed they had to do much more work to win those games than their team would suggest. Sometimes they played well (vs. Sweden). Sometimes badly (vs. Paraguay). But they kept going.
But there was a feeling in the air that, sure enough at some point, that was going to stop, and that eventually they would come across the team that would kick them out if they didn’t step up their game. So I guess this time (this third time) that team was Portugal. Scolari’s Portugal.
Portugal… I dunno. They were always in the same boat as England, I think. Yeah, they won their games, but never crushingly, or even in a convincing way. They always left doubts behind. They play different from England, in the sense that at least they try to treat the ball a bit better and are generally more offensive, but on the other hand they can be a nasty team when they want to, or when it’s advantageous for them to do so. So, yeah, mixed feelings. If I had to come up with a matephore to explain this, I’d say Portugal are like a little diamond covered in mud. That they would shine so much brighter if they didn’t have that mud, but… they like having the mud.
As for the game, I think it was rather even, which is expected in these types of contests between teams of similar levels. Portugal had more possession overall, and they tried to use it well, but fizzled in the English box, and were never as incisive as they should’ve been to create serious problems. Despite having many more shots on goal, they were not an issue. England started playing like England, at least until ending up with 10 men, and I don’t know how good or bad that is. They were never really troubling either.
But then Becks had to come out injured, and Rooney made a fool of himself and saw a red. Catastrophe then? Far from it. England pulled themselves up, and the subs became a true breath of fresh air, because both Lennon and Crouch not only came in fresh and ready, but got into the game really quickly, allowing England a few good attempts to turn the tables. The game became much more even, and Portugal wasn’t handling things perhaps as comfortably as earlier.
England played better with 10 than with 11, and I’m sure there’s an explanation for it that doesn’t necessarily have to fall in the perennial common talking point of the English heart and gumption (which exists, and it’s good). But I just can’t find it.
In the end, the tie truly was the fair result, and had it been any other game, both would’ve gone home happy. But, hey. It’s PKs.
Bad day for England at PKs? Yeah, sure. Why not. Ricardo, a consumate PK stopper was in front? Yeah, sure. Whatever you want. But it strikes me that if you’re given five P’s to K, and of those you can only get one in, well… bad day and good keeper all you want, but still there’s something going on there, right? England does tend to choke on PK definitions (even without Beckham taking them), and I can’t find a sensible explanation for that. Full marks to Ricardo for his stops, which confirmed his status as one of the best PK stoppers out there.
Portugal through, England heads back home. And we’ve seen this movie before, there’s the rub.
Man of the Match: Ricardo (POR) for me. Crucial in the PKs and a couple of good saves here and there. I also liked Lennon (ENG), and I wish he had more time on the field to do more, perhaps, without the mental shackles of an ET on top of him. Hargreaves (ENG) had a great game as well.
The good: It was Sven’s last match, so… good times ahead for England.
The bad: Once again, Rooney loses his temper and fucks his team up. Again. Maybe he doesn’t deserve an automatic spot in the starting XI? Just a thought.
.
Brazil 0 – France 1
Well, take a dump in my eye and call me a shitty pirate. I knew way back, before even the start of the WC that it wasn’t Brazil’s this time. That something would happen, and they’d fall in the way. I don’t know what, but I had that feeling. I could imagine that, but I could’ve never imagined the executioner was going to be France, particularly given the amount of shit I piled on them early on, and the way they started playing.
Talk about a transformation. For both. France, started this WC playing like ass. Scraping draws again football powerhouses like Switzerland and South Korea. Their individualities missing, and lots of internal turmoil in the team. Brazil? All the contrary. Although they also faced football luminaries like Japan and Australia, they didn’t have many problems. They were playing relaxed, and winning. Really relaxed. Too relaxed perhaps.
And I said this not too long ago. That I wanted to see what happened to Brazil with a decent team in front. Well, what happened was France playing a very smart and very effective game against them.
So let’s see. Why did France win?
- Because Zidane played one of his best games recently, not just in this WC.
- Because Makelele was a ball-recovering machine in the midfield.
- Because Ribery got sick of running into the holes on that defense
- Because having Henry so far up there, even if he ends up on offside most of the time, is a constant and fast pain in the ass for a slow(er) and old(er) defensive line.
- Because they were defensively solid, never giving the spaces Brazil needed. Because they were fluid in the midfield, both for recovery and to turn possession into offense. And because they always tried to be troubling in offense.
And why did Brazil lose?
- Because their individualities never shone. Ronaldinho played his best game in this WC, and still ended up being a bit opaque. Kaká was all good intentions, but little results. Same as Ze Roberto. Ronaldo was well crowded and covered all the time. And neither Robinho or Adriano had time to do much at all.
- Because they had tons of problems covering the wings, and kept being surpassed there.
- Because France’s recovery and possession destroyed their midfield creative circuit for most of the game.
- Because France was solid in the back, covering every possible hole and never giving them good room until about 70′.
It was a smart game, in the sense that France played Brazil the way you have to play Brazil: Taking the ball from them first, because if they don’t have it, they don’t hurt. And then attacking them constantly, never respecting them. However, there was also a lot of passion there. They were tireless in their duties, never really giving up and letting Brazil control the game at all. not even for a little while, if they could help it. Also, Zidane finally became the leader and conductor they needed him to be in this WC, asking for every ball, going to every challenge and being there to push the French forward.
So… suprise result? Yes and no.
Yes: Because France, except against Spain, was playing terribly and never giving any signs of recovery, whereas Brazil passed each game and challenge without batting an eye.
No: Because, contrary to popular belief, it is physically possible to beat Brazil, and France not only woke up at the right time, but also woke up with the right idea on how to do it.
If they can keep this momentum… I can definitely see a Germany – France final. Which should be tres yummy.
Man of the Match: Zidane (FRA) no doubt.
The good: France waking up to beat Brazil the way you have to do it. With good possession and attacking mentality.
The bad: Brazil having something like zero chances on goal for a long, long spell of the game. Wow.
July 1, 2006
A nice Argentine cutie with a nice rack. What? Look, we’re almost done with this World Cup thing, and the stock of cuties dwindles.
Sooo… quarter finals. Not bad. Not spectacular either, but knowing that: a) The team played above average (and certainly above my expectations) and b) We’ve managed to position ourselves in the top 8 teams in the world(*) somehow makes me a bit happy. It’s not all lost.
But yeah, predictably, not only we have to suffer for our wins, we suffer for our defeats as well. You always suffer with this lot. And I think that’s mostly because we have the names, and the skill, and the technique, and the tactics, and whatever you want… but as a (national) team, we’re still in search of our identity.
Some teams have identity, and they stick by it. It’s what defines them. Not only it’s a way of playing, it’s also a way of understanding the game, and some would say a way of living. For example, Brazil, Italy, England, Germany… like it or not, and agree with it or not, they have their own identities. And they’re always at least willing to be faithful to it, despite the accidents of a football match.
Argentina doesn’t have one. Or rather, we had one, and the we lost it in the way. In the last fifteen, twenty years, we’ve tried to redefine us so much, that we lost ourselves in the way. Even now, this 2006 played in a completely different way than the ‘02 team. And the ‘02 team, in turn, played differently than the ‘98.
I suppose at some point it’ll be found again. And now, on with it:
.
Germany 1 – Argentina 1 (4-2 PKs)
It had it all, except brilliance.
There are a few readings to make into this, but eventually you always end up staring at the old glass half empty or half full scenario. Yes, Argentina comes home. Early, for many. The team didn’t work as expected against Germany, and never really got their game going after getting ahead in the score. A correct reading.
Another correct reading would be to think and see that Argentina, even not playing at the level that was expected, managed to hold out Germany until the PKs, and hold her well. And this is worth noting, not from a defeatist perspective, but merely from the realist point of view that acknowledges how Germany was (is) the team that had an enormous momentum going for them. Because of their home team condition, because of the fans, because of their less-to-more productions on the field, because of their confidence and, of course, of their results. So not all is lost when an average Argentina manages to hold out a huge block of Germany coming at high speed, and force things to even out for 120 minutes.
But let’s get into things. The first half I’ll give it squarely to Argentina, because despite footballistic pitfalls (which were evident in both — the Germans looked uncharacteristically nervous and imprecise), they took control of the ball and played their own game. Which is, possession, short passing, hide the ball from the opponent and wait for the opening. It was truly a midfield battle that Argentina handled, and did so very well for 45-50 minutes. Until the goal.
In contrast, during the first half we saw a German team that had their characteristic idea of fast, direct transitions into attack, and tried to do that, but found themselves getting increasingly desperate without possession of the ball. At some point I believe it was something like 70% in favor of Argentina, which is just ungodly. Defensively-minded teams can (and do) win without a need to have the ball in perennial possession. But offensively-minded teams, like ARG and GER, need the ball to be effective. So whoever has it, will be. The other won’t.
Still, Argentina had the ball, but not the clarity in offense to make that possession count, thanks to Germany closing the spaces tightly. There was simply not much room to do anything in offense, and while this was true for both teams, it was specially evident when Argentina was attacking, by virtue of their slow type of offensive buildup. Germany’s game is much more direct and fast, which also suffers when there’s lack of room, but it’s less visually evident merely by the speed of their plays.
Both teams were positioned well on the field, and never really went overboard with their pressing. It was a midfield half, through and through, since the ball very rarely made it clean to the respective offensive lines. The most clear of the first half… was the only clear chance. That header from Ballack that went over quite close. The rest was just a collection of good intentions and tough marking.
For the second half, there were no subs and no tactical changes. And this was evident in the first five minutes. However, Argentina got their goal from a corner and things started to change. Germany opened up and pressed forward, because they were given that obligation. And I guess at that point it wasn’t that ARG decided to fall back and wait: They were pushed back to that position.
All of a sudden, Germany was finding the room then hadn’t been given yet in the game. And they kept going. And going. And going. Argentina lost the midfield completely and it was looking more and more, as the minutes passed, that they were squarely betting on hitting the Germans on a counter, because it was all they had left. This lasted for about twenty minutes.
Then it all got weird.
Abbondanzieri has to come out, something that wasn’t in anyone’s realistic plans. That’s the least likely scenario, but it makes you burn a sub all the same. Soon after, one of the controversial subs from Pekerman, although not the weirdest: Riquelme out, Cambiasso in.
Now, the Cambiasso in part was fine. What’s the intention? To try and recover possession of the ball in the midfield, and through Cambiasso, carry the ball up front, since Mascherano doesn’t really do that. We know Cambiasso can. So that’s fine. The problem is the other part. The “Riquelme out”. And I don’t say that because I’m a sycophant of Riquelme. I think he’s an excellent player that’s simply not all that’s cracked up to be, and is something of a special case that I won’t go into detail here. So, in essence: Cambiasso in? Yes. I understand it (I would’ve put Aimar in, though). Riquelme out? No. Not because I’m in love with Riquelme. Riquelme was having another one of his “well, whatever” games, but he wasn’t the sub. The sub was Lucho Gonzalez, whom up until that point had done fuck all. It was like playing with ten men. So I don’t know.
And then… heh. The other sub. The one no one understands. Crespo out, Cruz in. For those not familiar with Julio Cruz, that sub is the equivalent of telling Germany “Hey, it’s okay guys. We’re done here, and we’re not planning on scoring anymore. You guys go right ahead”. I cannot fathom how a player like Cruz can get on the field (any field), and I cannot comprehendwhy he was chosen over Saviola or even Messi. It’s truly incomprehensible. Of course Cruz didn’t do shit, but that’s par for the course. It was expected.
What wasn’t expected was Germany suddenly having the temerity to score with 10′ to go (two headers inside the box it’s always a goal, they say), and suddenly you find yourself in a position where the two subs you chose to make are worth less than one of Graham Poll’s yellow cards. Yeah. Not good. So now you gotta go forward, theoretically, and get the result again and… you have just substituted your playmaker for a defensive midfielder, and a world class striker for a world class stinker. Not good. And you don’t have anymore subs because your keeper had to bite it and you had to replace him with a guy that had seen, so far, zero minutes of play in this world cup.
In spite of these fuckups from Pekerman, Argentina not only managed to stand the German onslaught, but slowly tried to do the best they could with what they had, balancing things again all through the extra time. But by that point there wasn’t enough time or energy left to do anything of note.
The PKs? Germany showed good resolve and skill in taking them. Argentina didn’t. You could see the players walking up to the spot and you knew they were flakier. Ayala’s PK was a disaster, and Cambiasso’s, although well taken, it was even better contained. End of story.
A word on the referee: Far be it from me to complain about the ref. I think he was mostly correct through the game, getting all the important calls right. That said, I think he favored Germany a bit too much, always on the small little fouls and calls, the ones that are so muddied that they could go either way? Well, those were always for Germany. Whether that influences the game in a palpable way or not, you be the judge. But I did notice that. The notion that Germany always seemed to get the benefit of the doubt, and Argentina rarely ever did. But that’s all really. Compared to other ref performances, this one was stellar.
Of the brouhaha at the end, while always fun to watch, I can’t say anything other than I’d like to see how and who started it before I say anything else. The players all seemed to go against Bierhoff in particular, so who knows what happened. I’ll look around and see if anyone captured the incident in its entirety (and you know someone always does).
Man of the Match: Mascherano (ARG) for Argentina. Nothing spectacular, but he was correct most of the time and he was the most solid in a midfield that gradually lost cohesion, despite his efforts. Ballack (GER) for Germany. Always trying. Not his best game, but Germany’s football passed always through his feet.
The good: Knowing that even playing not well and with a couple of subs straight out of The Twilight Zone, we still managed to hold out the German football machine to PKs, and played them at an equal level for most of the game.
The bad: Riquelme, missing and/or contained. It doesn’t matter in the end. He didn’t do much at all. Lucho Gonzalez? Ridiculously absent all the game. Heinze insecure a few times again, like vs. Mexico.
.
Italy 3 – Ukraine 0
I couldn’t pay much attention to this one, honestly. Not that it was very attractive to begin with, but I was already talking and emailing back and forth with friends about the ARG match, so I watched what I could.
It was no contest, and despite the close calls and the balls on the post from Ukraine, those seemed more accidental than anything. Italy had it under control, and they played much more relaxed than Ukraine… of course the early goal helped them on that. They were never in any danger, because Ukraine played flat and badly, with Sheva unable to do much at all, and his company not willing to anything good with him. That’s about it, really. A bit of a defensive collapse by Ukraine on the second half, but not much else.
Italy passes through, predictably, having lucked out on the weakest quarter finals rival. Now it’s Germany – Italy, and all bets are off. It’s gonna be intense, to say the least, and despite my little bit of despise for Italy, I can see them pulling the upset and reaching the final. We’ll see what happens. If Argentina could have Germany in disarray for a little more than a half game, Italy can do so too.
Man of the Match: Gattuso (ITA) no doubt. The little engine pushing Italy along.
The good: Ukraine’s reaching quarters in their first WC showing. Playing decidedly average, but they reached the quarters. And that’s history on the record now.
The bad: Ukraine, so flat. Sheva is the only decent one of that lot, and if he’s having an off day… mmmm…
(*) Debatable, but mostly a right appreciation I think.
June 28, 2006
A nice and feathery Brazilian cutie for your viewing pleasure. Just that. What, disappointed? Well, as soon as Brazil shows more, I’ll show more of my cuties. That’s the ransom.
Día 18. A promising day that thankfully delivered. Sure, my eyes were not really set on Brazil’s game. It was a given they were going to rout Ghana. No siree. It was Spain and France, neighbors and iconic football powers that were going to meet, astonishingly, for the first time in a World Cup. They had always come close to each other, but never met.
Did it pay off? Was the anticipation worth it? Read on.
.
Brazil 3 – Ghana 0
Not much to write about here. No, really. Sometimes there really isn’t a need to go to all the trouble of reading into things when there’s not much to read into.
Brazil played at half speed through most of the game, and thanks to their usual standard of finishing, made the most of their chances. Ghana, despite having more, and at times better possession, just didn’t know what to do with it once they reached the 3/4ths of the field. Simple as that.
The early goal, however, did a lot to quell whatever anxiety the Brazilians might have had. Which was very little really, since they looked comfortable, never pressured and never rushed. They looked as if this match was only a necessary appointment for them. One more form to fill out as they go because, honestly, they have yet to meet opposition that approaches their level. That’s why next game is going to be very interesting.
Ghana tried, and did what they could, but they lost because of two key factors: One, the godawful idea that somehow playing the offside trap against Brazil is going to work, and it will always, always catch Ronaldo and Adriano — obviously amateur, inexperienced players that are not used to dirty tricks like these at all. That was suicide from the bench, particulary considering the quality of Ghana’s back line.
Two, defensive screwups. All of Brazil’s goals came from gifts given by the lacking defense of Ghana. First one: Ronaldo breaking through that ridiculous offside trap they were throwing. Second one: Adriano coming in from behind, alone and unmarked, to tap it in point-blank. Third one: Ze Roberto breaking their offside trap again, past the keeper, and there you go.
Now, Ghana tried. And their had their moments. There was one close, close header in front of goal in the first half that Dida managed to find with his shoe. Some other close shots. But, really… would that have changed things? I don’t think so. Ghana fought all the time, not only against Brazil, but also against their lack of quality finishing and that vice they had of always trying to do just one more touch than it’s needed up front.
Brazil keeps going, and everyone knew it was gonna happen.
Man of the Match: I’d give it to Ze Roberto (BRA) just to be different, because none of the usual suspects really, really shone.
The good: Ronaldo becomes the top striker in WC history with 14 goals.
The bad: Not much really. Would’ve been nice to see Brazil playing at full speed, but then again there was never a need for them to do so during the game. Save energy, conserve your players. Smart.
.
Spain 1 – France 3
And what’s all this then? What the hell happened here? This is what happened:
The first half I’ll give it squarely to Spain. They had possession, and when they didn’t have it, they were keen and able to recover the ball quick, be that from their own virtues or from French passing imprecisions (which were many in the first half). Spain was the faster team, the team with the ball that leaned on offense, counting on catching Henry in offside thanks to their back four playing way up the field. It worked. It worked great. Spain generated football and tried to penetrate France from everywhere. France? They were slower and more imprecise. But worse, they were giving Spain the necessary room for them to use it and create their own game.
Yet… you can’t throw the offside trap over and over and over again against an experienced team like France and think they’ll never catch on. At some point they’ll realize what you’re trying to do. That happened as the first half was dying. I imagine the French were “Aha. So… you wanna catch Henry all the time with the little trap? Fine. We’ll get someone else you’re not looking at”. And sure enough. Through ball, Rivery coming like a bat out of hell from 10 meters behind. No one was covering him. Clean ball in front of the keeper. Regate y gol. 1-1.
That goal must have hurt the Spanish and emboldened the French, because the second half was much different. France came out of the lockers not looking like that timid, slow team that was content with trying with imprecision and playing like crap. They tightened up, and started pressing the Spanish midfield. They started to get the ball much more often, and to create some football much more often. Zidane started to get the ball more. As for Spain, they stuck to their guns. They kept trying the way they know how. Offensively, looking forward. Just like the first half. But now the spaces were not there. Now the French were more solid. Now the French were not playing so far apart from each other. Now France, slowly, slowly, were starting to become the team that was surely taking control of the game away from Spain.
And the goals were not coming for Spain so, double trouble. It suddenly became a really, really even game, where anything could happen. And it did.
I’m not gonna stop a lot in the ‘foul’ from Puyol to Henry. To me, it wasn’t a foul. But depending on the ref’s position, he could’ve seen it in some other way. The important things here are: One, that is was a foul done in an irrelevant and completely predictable position. And by that I mean, too far to shoot straight to goal. Predictable? Hello? Was there anyone in the stadium that didn’t know that shot was going to be an open cross into the box?
So knowing and thinking of all this, it doesn’t really matter if it was a foul or not. It was called a foul. Puyol’s yellow, yeah, I disagree with that more, because I didn’t see anything going on there that would merit a yellow. But it was called a foul. It doesn’t matter. What matters is that if everyone knew it was going to be a high cross, looking for a header, then why on earth did Vieira just waltz in from the back, like Adriano, alone and unmarked, having all the time in the world to measure the header and nail it? Where was the marking? Everyone looking at the ball, no one at the guy that’s making the run in. Bad.
The nail in the coffin? France coming out to put pressure on a Spain that was decidedly leaning forward to get a goal. All of a sudden Spain’s last man finds himself with the ball and 3 French biting his ankles. Ball lost, quick counter and a really nice goal from Zizou, showing some good finishing. 3-1. No time to come back. No time for Spain to do anything.
Now, I give them a lot of shit, but credit must be give where it’s due. I think France played a very smart game on the second half. Stepping up their perfomances, tightening up and doing what needed to be done to crack open the problem of an offensive Spain. It was truly a midfield contest all through the game, but France stepped up to the plate for the second half, and they did it in a better way than Spain. Spain just kept trying their same formula that gave them good results. This time, it just didn’t work.
Some names, quick: Zidane, missing in the first half, getting better as minutes went by. Henry, irrelevant. Caught way too many times in offside. Rivery and Vieira, instrumental. Gumption through the first half, added skill and presence for the second. France’s best those two.
Torres? A threat, never realized. Raul, missing. Villa, trying, never got a clean one on goal.
Brazil – France now, and this is getting good because a) Brazil all of a sudden is put in front of a team worth a damn, after having played fun against four nobodies. And b) the team worth a damn shows they’re stepping up their game. We saw it against Togo, and now we saw it against a much better rival. Maybe France woke up? Is it too late for Brazil, and they’re heading to bed out of boredom because they didn’t really play anyone?
Interesting prospect whatever the case.
Man of the Match: Can’t pick one, really. Shared between Vieira and Rivery (FRA). I liked them both.
The good: Intense last minutes after France’s second goal. Zidane showing he still has some left in him, scoring the important goals.
The bad: Raul. Came, did nothing, left with nothing. I think it’s time to finally go ahead and put the Raul legend to rest, once and for all. As far as I’m concerned, he’s officially a has-been. Barthez is blind. We all know he has the footwork of a fish, but does he have to get out of the box and show it so much?
———
And now, two straight days without football, until the quarter finals. And what quarter finals!
Friday 30th:
Germany – Argentina
Italy – Ukraine
Saturday 1st:
England – Portugal
Brazil – France
June 27, 2006
It’s just the cutie next door. Assuming you live in Venice, Florence or a place like that. She’s fingerlickin’ good, in a sort of subdued mediterranean way. Like a good sauce. No one has sauce alone but… I dare you to have pasta without sauce all the time. You can’t.
Day 17. The day the Earth stood still in anticipation of… well, nothing happened. Not even proper goals. Yeah, there were “goals”, but all came from PKs, and I stand by Oxford’s definition, which states that PKs are not kosher goals.
I really, really hope SPA – FRA tomorrow leaves us with something. Something other than grit, clenched teeth, hard tackling and boredom, which is mostly what we’ve had so far in this second round. It’s a promising game, but then again… well, hell… France is playing. You never know.
This second round needs to end with a bang, and SPA – FRA looks like it could be it. I have to admit I wouldn’t mind at all seeing France eliminated. However, the idea of Spain losing to one of the most underwhelming teams in this cup has a certain appeal. A painful appeal, since I’m fond of Spain, but it might serve as a reminder that in football you should take nothing for granted. A reminder we all need sometimes, no matter who we are.
Before I get too philosophical, let’s do this.
.
Australia 0 – Italy 1
That penalty was dodgy!
Right. It was. But what about the rest of t…
It was dodgy I tell you! It shouldn’t have been called!
Agreed. But had Australia been leading by a few goals it shouldn’t have mat…
Dodgy! Dodgy ref! He’s on the take! FIFA wants to destroy usssssss!!!
Yes, pretty clear. But what about the fact you couldn’t score to save your life against a team in numeric inferiority that was pretty much defending and betting on counters for 45 minu…
Oh sweet merciful Jesus! Please let’s have video review of the calls! This is by far the worst refereeing in any world cup ever! Ever!(*)
Okay, settle down now.
OMFGWTFBBQ!!!!111 If you’re not with us you’re against us! You’re condoning the Italian Olympic Diving team! You’re a wanker just like them! Burn him! Burn him with fireeeee!!!
No. I actually despise the Italians a bit. I’m simply saying that instead of focusing on one crappy ref decision, why not also focus on the slew of crappy decisions your team made all through the g…
LIKE WHAT?!?! GUUS IS GOD! It’s just like in ‘Socceroos’, but with u’s instead of o’s! That’s doubleplusgood, mate!
Well, a few things. First of all, drop the Socceroos already. That nickname commands even less fear and respect than the El Paso Cocksuckers FC. I mean, really. Second, you’re basically expecting the world to like you because, basically, you try. Because that’s all you did, didn’t you? You tried. That’s no basis for football love or respect. Everyone tries. So let me get this straight… when you try, and succeed, then it’s “Oh, what a heroic performance, overcoming the odds, yadda yadda”. And when you try and you don’t succeed, it’s “Oh, what a plucky little team! Never giving up against adversity! Ah, cruel fate! It was just luck! We’re the moral victors!”. Right. So you just can’t lose, right?
You hate Australia! That’s what it is! Yeah!
No. You mistake ‘hating Australia’ with ‘not really giving a damn about Australia’. I don’t hate Australia. I just don’t buy all the self-spun hype from a limited team with very loud ‘net fans.
Oh, that’s it! That’s IT! We’re taking the team out of FIFA! You’ll never see us again in a World Cup! Ever!
I think you’ve been managing that quite well all the time. Since 1974, I believe. That was the last one, right? And before that… none. So… keep at it, I suppose.
Man of the Match: Are you joking?
The good: Finally they’ll shut the hell up. Too bad it had to be against Italy, but in a weird way, it makes a lot of sense.
The bad: Unfortunately, they’ll start talking again about the PK.
.
Ukraine 0 – Switzerland 0 (3-0 on PKs)
Fun at times. Boring at times. Well played and badly played. Two shots on the posts, then minute after minute of midfield mediocrity. Precise long range passing, and crappy delivery after two or three touches. But hey, at least no one was sent off, which is a bleedin’ miracle in this cup.
It’s not that they did things wrong. It’s just that, well, they were not really very good at it. Both of them. Sure, there was a lot of good intentions, but this game was like an old screw. A screw that won’t come out because it’s all rusted, and no matter how hard you turn the ‘driver, it’s just not moving.
They both tried to search for the opponent’s goal, but never with clarity. They were both playing a good defensive game, and also dealing with their own issue up front. In the case of Ukraine, a Shevchenko that not only is showing he’s not the Sheva of 2-3 years ago in AC Milan, where everything went right for him and he was scoring even from rebounds off his ass, but to compound that, the fact that he never got steady, decent service from his midfield all through the cup. His only friend in attack is Voronin, but when his lights are also low, their encounters are minimal.
Switzerland? Well, betting most things on Frei, whom has good movement, knows how to unmark himself and win some backs, but is not the lethal finisher in front of goal that Sheva is. Plus, he also has to deal with the general lack of clarity and effectivenes of his own midfield feeders.
They both do what they can with what they are given. Which is little, since Ukraine != AC Milan, and Switzerland is… well, Switzerland.
And so, predictably , we reached the penalty kicks. First one, Sheva walks up and you just knew he was gonna choke it. It’s one of those things. You don’t know what it is. One of those je ne sais qua of football, where you can look at the guy walking up to the spot, and you just know it instantly. His PK wasn’t badly taken. It had placement and power… problem is it was too announced, and the Swiss keeper read it well.
Then Switzerland… my god. Do they kick PKs at all in Switzerland? First one, horribly taken. Second one, unlucky to the crossbar. Third one, even worst than the first one. And the Swiss are out. Better luck next time. Ukraine are through, and really unconvincing all through this cup. They’ll be eaten raw in quarters.
Man of the Match: Shovkovskyi (UKR). Made the most of two badly-taken PKs. Good eye to read them, and good reflexes to parry one and grab the other.
The good: The faint thought that Sheva will pick up his game against the Italians. We can only hope.
The bad: The Swiss are out, choking on PKs. Always a very crappy place to go out.
(*) Sorry, I just had to use that highly original comment that has never been heard before.
————————
A little thing for the fans, from my NSFW vault. Argentina keeps on winning.
June 26, 2006
Ah… an Ecuatorian cutie and an English cutie, ready to embrace and make out during the game. Isn't it beautiful? Football truly is a celebration of life and love. "French-kissing Without Borders", that should be the slogan for 2010. FIFA, take note.
Day 16. I mostly missed the ENG – ECU game due to me doing some things around the house. Still, from what little I saw, I don't think I missed a whole lot. However, the second game of the day delivered in spades. But hey, we'll talk about it in a bit.
So, England meeting Portugal in Quarter Finals. Nice game. England arrives at it in better shape, because now Scolari has to see how the hell he'll rearrange a team with a few injuries and a lot of yellow/red carded players. Patchwork team? We'll see. Not all are roses on the other end, because England wins, but is not convincing at it. Common football wisdow says such a thing can only carry you so far. Sooner or later you'll run into a luckier team.
We are truly getting into decisive stages, and you can definitely feel it in the matches themselves — the intensity is there, and the feel is different.
.
England 1 – Ecuador 0
Didn't see much, but I didn't particularly like what I saw, other than that beautiful Becks Free Kick(tm) to seal the 1-0. I saw England playing… like England plays, more or less, while on the other end, I saw a distinctively timid Ecuador, that seemed to be respecting England a bit too much. There wasn't enough fire in the Ecuatorian offense. Certainly not what you expect from a team that needs a goal or they go out.
I mean, am I alone here? Am I just a lonely, deluded fool in thinking that if you're 0-1 down and 5 minutes to go, well, you have to go forward and try to get that goal no matter what? With all you have? I mean, really. If you're going out anyway, what does it matter to lose 0-1 or 0-2? What does it matter if you get hit from a counter because you opened up to go get a result.
England must have wanted it more, I suppose. I didn't see that on the field, but that's what I have to assume.
.
Portugal 1 – Netherlands 0
Wow. Intense game from 1' to 96'. Not only intense, but at least I saw both teams with the will to play the ball nicely and not turtle back for the hell of it, counting on je ne sais qua to solve a game.
This, however, doesn't mean they didn't kill each other all the time. Full crappy marks to Portugal for the kind of game they were proposing. I imagine the initial idea from the Portuguese camp was a simple, classical one: Against a team that's younger and more skilled, use physical play to disrupt their game and their morale. And, yeah, it works. But one thing is physical play and another quite different is nasty play. Portugal just played nasty, and this doesn't mean I'm defending Holland here, because although they also had their share of crappiness inflicted, it was by far less than Portugal's.
Time wasting, faking injuries, nasty, untimely challenges, brawls… the game had it all for the discerning connoisseur. Particularly irritating, to me, was Figo's rather Shakespearean performance of a minor, unintentional arm flail while running for a ball. The one that got a NED player sent off. Way to go Figo, baby. Lovely.
As for the ref? Our friend Ivanov? I'm already seeing he's getting a lot of crap for the amount of yellows and some calls, but I'll say this: It's not his fault that the players don't give a shit. Yellows are also called 'cautions'. I can show you a caution, but it's up to you to tone it down and not get another one. Well, no one cared, therefore he continued to book players for what they deserved, according to his interpretation. And I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Yes, he made some mistakes, but all refs do. This hasn't been a bad ref showing by far, because although he did have a few wrong calls, he got most right. And what's more important perhaps, he got the ones that matter right.
So lay off Ivanov, please. He did the best he could trying to deal with two unruly teams that didn't give a damn and were out to kill each other. Or was it his fault that Costinha became a Terminator in the last 15' of the first half and won 2 yellows? Or was it his fault that Deco just went ahead, grabbed a FK ball and hid it so NED couldn't take the shot? Or was it his fault that some challenges by both teams were just nasty?
What's the option? Not to show yellow cards? Right, and then we'll bitch that he's not showing enough. Blame the players for ruining the game on this one, not the ref.
Man of the Match: I liked Van Persie in NED and Maniche in POR.
The good: Intense game, with both teams going at it and never really turtling back.
The bad: Too rough, way too much bad blood during some passages. Figo is an asshole. Smart asshole, but still an asshole.
– Fine, alright, if you feel cheated by today's "cuties", okay… here's a bonafide Dutch cutie for you to look out. Grab your dick and double-click.
June 25, 2006
Why so serious, hon? You're looking great there. Like a German papagayo. In any case, here's today's cutie in all her stoic glory. I wanted to try for a Swedish cutie, but they left early.
Anyway, what did I say when I started with all this? You always suffer with this lot. And sure enough. Turns out the titles I've been giving to these entries were not so wrong after all.
Lots of football today. Good football, bad football. Flowery football, gritty football. We had a little bit of everything. It's fun for the whole family, assuming your family is eclectic enough in their tastes.
Germany – Argentina in quarter finals… Jeesee Chrissy. What a game.
.
Germany 2 – Sweden 0
Yeah, it was rough for Sweden. They came into this match not being favorites at all. Their prior performances, although effective in the end, were never as convincing as they should have been, with the exception of their game against England. Top this off with your biggest stars going through a dry spell of goals and quality and, yeah. It was rough.
Germany on the other hand, was the polar opposite. They had all the confidence in the world, plus the fans, their previous performances and their momentum to back them up. Sometimes teams are just in tune, and Germany sounded like a well-tempered clavier since day one, despite their defensive earthquakes against Costa Rica that cost them two goals.
So what happened? What was expected. Germany simply outplayed Sweden. They took control of the ball early, and never really gave it back. They were strong, relentless in their recovery and attack, and incisive where and when it counted, with Podolski stepping up and capitalizing on the darkest initial minutes of the scandinavian defense. Germany then became the team that proposed the game all through the 90', while Sweden was the team that was caught constantly reacting to that German idea of football. With that set up, the result sometimes simply becomes a matter of time.
Germany worked as a team. It wasn't a walk in the park for them, but they were vastly more cohesive and tight in all their lines. Sweden never really got any momentum going, and Lucic's early sending off certainly didn't help. Could anything else go wrong for the Swedes? Well, yes, in a way. Ibrahimovic? Fine, thank you. Larsson? Not his cup. What he could show in those very few opportunities his team gave him something decent to work with, was far from his usual self, and the kind of production he delivered through his career. He was always a potential threat, but it never realized. Oh, and he missed a penalty too.
Germany. Good teamwork. And that gives confidence to an already confident side. They played well, and when you play well, things happen for you. They were strong, relentless and incisive, Sweden was not. The scorelines could have been much more ample had it not been for Isaksson at the goal, doing his best to pilot the ship through the German storm.
Germany predictably reaches the quarter finals, and no one can take anything from them. They are quite possibly the strongest team in this competition, not only because their performances are based on a solid teamwork idea, but because they do seem to be playing better with each game, learning their mistakes and adapting for the next one.
They are the threat.
Man of the Match: I'm torn between Podolski (GER) and Isaksson (SWE). I liked both performances.
The good: A solid showing by Germany all over the field, which showed a team that's in tune with themselves and with Klinsmann's idea.
The bad: A Swedish team that never really took off the ground in the way many of us expected them to do. Very opaque performances from Larsson and Ibrahimovic all through the cup. See you in 2010, and keep bringing the cuties.
.
Argentina 2 – Mexico 1
Intense. Fought over. Scraped. Rough. Yes, you can have all that and still not end up with a total stinker of a game.
Now this was a game that can be read in many different ways. Some of them closer to reality than others. Let's start with the most clear.
Mexico owned the ball from the get go. Why? Because they pressed further and harder than Argentina ever did throughout the game. When you press, you force your opponents to make mistakes, or take riskier passing options. Pressing is a simple concept, really, and when your team is committed to that pressing and knows how to place themselves on the field, it usually works very well.
Sure, Argentina was able to recover the ball at some points, one way or another, but what happened? I mentioned this back when they beat Serbia & MontyPython: We'll see what happens when they don't have the ball. And what happened was that Argentina's players did not have good positioning, and through most of the game were playing too far apart from each other. There was a certain idea of a disconnect between Argentina's lines, and this idea made itself evident in the lack of precision on the ball's delivery from feet to feet. That is, if you're too far apart on the field, and your opponent is pressing you hard, well, that's a risky proposition, because eventually your opponent can and will recover the ball much faster than you.
And that's exactly what happened. Argentina was forced to play rather coarsely all through the game, simply because Mexico was pressing them hard, getting the ball from them before the play could evolve into something more serious. Peachy for the aztecs. Problem is…
… pressing like that is hard work. Even if your team is at their very best physical condition, pressing will still take a lot of you. You'll eventually get tired. And when you get tired, you make more mistakes. You start leaving more room to your opponent. Even when you have the ball, it all becomes slower. You lack surprise. You become predictable and your intent choked. After 90' your body just doesn't answer like it did at 10'.
So eventually Argentina tried to keep their cool, against the overwhelming mexican pressure and their own mistakes. And sure enough, as time passed and the Mexicans were getting tired, Argentina started to find a little of the room that they had missed all through the game. Pekerman's subs were crucial, and came at the right point:
Cambiasso out, Aimar in: Less ball recovery, because at the time Mexico was getting tired and already not pressing so hard. More and faster transitions from midfield to attack, because Aimar can give you that, being a faster type of enganche than Riquelme.(*)
Crespo out, Tevez in – Saviola out, Messi in: A breath of fresh air up front, to capitalize on the mexican defense getting tired.
Even if Tevez and Messi didn't shine individually, they were instrumental to force the mexicans to fall back a little, since no one wants to have a tired defense *and* keep pressing to leave room for players like Tevez and Messi, coming in fresh from the bench.
In the end, Mexico ran out of gas and their pressing had to give. Still, Argentina was not clear and kept playing farther apart than I would have liked. Hence the score remaining 1-1 at full time. The extra periods were more of the same, but this time Argentina managed to find Maxi Rodriguez and he scored a goal from another game. 2-1 by now, during extra time. Mexico burned out after going at it 100% all through the game, Argentina much more fresh. It was time to keep the ball, and so it happened.
Germany will be a much different proposition, because although they will press Argentina as hard as Mexico did, well, as everyone knows Germans do not get tired. At all. So that little plan of waiting until they get tired can leave Argentina waiting a very long time. Also, Germany will also try to get the ball and keep it to themselves. It's not that they'll just happily go ahead and let Argentina get the ball just so everyone can enjoy the Super Happy Tango Short Passing Show. No sir. They'll get the ball, they'll try to kill you with it, and they have all the guns to do it.
Argentina will have to improve their positioning on the field, because that's crucial against a team like Germany who can find spaces fast. Also, their delivery and passing needs to improve. Argentina, passing the ball like they just did vs. Mexico is nothing by an invitation to disaster, because the Germans will get it, and they're not gonna screw around with it like Mexico did. Germany has the players and the quality to risk a lot more in possession of the ball than Mexico did, and any defensive mishaps will be paid dearly. 10-15 minutes of defensive madness will cost you the game against Germany.
And if you don't believe me, ask Sweden.
Man of the Match: I'd have to coincide with FIFA and say Maxi Rodriguez (ARG). Not just that shocking stunner of a goal, but also because he was there for the team all over the field. Lots of love.
The good: Maxi Rodriguez's goal was as unrepeatable as Joe Cole's vs. Sweden. Magnificent strike. Seeing Argentina kick Mexico out of the cup was truly a double joy.
The bad: Seeing Argentina in distress for long periods of the game, simply because they couldn't get the ball. Imprecise passing, bad positioning. Heinze having a terrible game back there.
(*) My great grandmother, rest in peace, even if raised from the grave right now would be a faster type of enganche than Riquelme. But that's grain from another sack. He's gonna have a terrible, terrible time against Germany. Mark my words.
