After a World Cup that has sparkled in patches but been mediocre overall, Sunday's final turned out to be one of poorest games of the knockout stages. The warning came as soon as the teams were announced: 4-5-1 vs. 4-5-1. Those formations can result in free-flowing, attacking football, particularly when the wingers push up. However if the wing-men stay around the middle of the pitch and are forced to continually track back, the result is two ten-men defensive walls facing off against each other. That was the case Sunday.
Nonetheless, after a dull first period, chances did come in the second half. Unfortunately, both teams showed a shocking lack of finishing ability in front of goal when they got there. Arjen Robben was particularly wasteful for the Dutch, while Andres Iniesta and David Villa also failed to convert opportunities.
To make matters worse, starting in the second minute when Robin Van Persie clipped a Spanish defender, the game became very chippy, with countless fouls and the referee receiving an earful every time he raised his whistle to his lips. By the game's end, a record number of yellow cards for a World Cup final had been dished out, and in all honesty, there could have been more (Nigel De Jong in particular was lucky to stay on the field after planting his studs in Xabi Alonso's chest).
In the end, probably the best national team (both in the tournament and over the past two years) won, courtesy of an Iniesta goal four minutes before a penalty shoot-out was due.
It still wasn't enough to save a game that surely won't last long in the memory, apart from Spanish and Dutch fans, of course.
I don't know that Spain was the best team in the tournament, look at the lack of goal scoring, and their boring style of play. The main reason they won is because of Iker Casillas.
ReplyDeleteHolland definitely did not deserve to win with all of their reckless fouling. It reminded me of how they played portugal in 2006 very dirty, even to the point when giving the ball back to spain after an injury they kicked it out by the corner flag and then pressed, when Spain kicked the ball out at midfield.
I still can not help to wonder if Diego Lugano of Uruguay or if Mueller of Germany had been able to play in their respective semifinals if there would have been a different champion. That third place game was very exciting i don't know if you saw it.
The best national team?! Pffft. It should have been Algeria...
ReplyDeleteMichael (since when do you go by Michael by the way): Don't get me wrong, I was by no means bowled over by Spain's performance in this World Cup. With the offensive firepower they have, they should have scored far more goals in the knock-out rounds (not to mention the fact they lost to Switzerland and could have been knocked out by Paraguay).
ReplyDeleteHowever I don't know who else (apart from Algeria obviously...thanks oospiralstaticoo) you could crown as the best team in the competition.
Here are the contenders:
Holland: Terrible in the final. Good performance against Brazil, but a little lucky against Uruguay. Solid but unspectacular.
Germany: Had some of the best performances of the tourney, but bottom line they were completely shut down by Spain and lost to them (They did miss Mueller in that game, but I'm not sure he would have changed the outcome that much)
Bottom line: In my books, like the college football top 25, you can't finish above a team you lost too.
Uruguay: Like Germany, missed a big player in the semis. Probably wouldn't have conceded 3 with Lugano back there. However we are talking about a team that in fairness should have been knocked out by Ghana. Even if they had made the final, can you really see them beating Spain?
Brazil: Looked great till the second half against Holland where they just lost it.
England: Only joking
Also bear in mind that third placed matches are ALWAYS more entertaining than finals, because there's so much less on the line for the teams. They play relaxed, easy and don't care about defending too much. I guarantee if those two were playing for the final you would have seen different tactics and a completely different game.
"the only reason they were there is iker casillas"
ReplyDeletedon't be stupid michael.
Sam I'm not being stupid but when you score one goal a game it is up to the goal keeper to keep the team in the game. Spain played a 4-5-1 formation in the last two matches. Tactically they wanted to wear the opposing teams down and that only works with when they have the best keeper in the world. For example if Robben scored the 1 on 1 chance against Casillas there could have been a different champion. Anyway its obvious he wasn't the "ONLY REASON" because it's a team sport, I was just giving credit to their best player and captain.
ReplyDeleteSaul: My friends call me Mike but my given name is Michael so that the name I use when I sign up for accounts such as gmail. For the record I hate the college football ranking system and I won't watch that sport on a large basis until there are playoffs. I can't argue you are right that Spain is the best because they won it but I they were one of the most boring teams that I watched. And if they would have played England.... only joking.
on a lighter note fellas, speaking of Casillas, I hope you have all seen this classic TV moment:
ReplyDeletehttp://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/38205941/ns/sports-world_cup/