World Cup 2018 thread

[Andicis]

Just now, McLovin said:

They were poor tonight but they will get better now that their mental block has gone. This will give them so much confidence.

Don't know why you're saying they have a mental block? How do we know that? They could just be quite average. They had one good game against Argentina, they didn't look too special apart from that, and lack quality in both the final third, and the defense. 

[Sexydadbod]

I don’t think it’s a case of Croatia being overrated. I think it’s more a case of Denmark being underrated. Let’s not forget that they kept a clean sheet against France and were unbeaten in 18 games before tonight.

Denmark ran so much and cut off all the passing spaces, which meant modric and Rakitic had to get deeper and deeper.

[Sexydadbod]

1 minute ago, Andicis said:

Don't know why you're saying they have a mental block? How do we know that? They could just be quite average. They had one good game against Argentina, they didn't look too special apart from that, and lack quality in both the final third, and the defense. 

Bilic said they have a mental block, I think it’s fair to say that he knows a lot more than any of us to be honest. To be honest I believe him, remember in the euros they gave Spain a footballing lesson in the group stage but lost their heads mentally against Portugal in the next round. 

[Andicis]

1 minute ago, McLovin said:

I don’t think it’s a case of Croatia being overrated. I think it’s more a case of Denmark being underrated. Let’s not forget that they kept a clean sheet against France and were unbeaten in 18 games before tonight.

Denmark ran so much and cut off all the passing spaces, which meant modric and Rakitic had to get deeper and deeper.

How can you cite the Denmark France game that was a total farce, that game proves exactly zilch. Both teams didn't care at all about winning. 

Denmark are just your bog standard, workmanlike international team!

[Bris Vegas]

1 minute ago, Anon said:

Good. It should destroy their chances. This rule change is one of the most ridiculous I've ever seen in the game. If you're the last man ('keeper or outfield player), stay on your feet, or accept the risk of going to ground. This change is entirely sponsor driven because they've found that people tune out if there's an early red card.

I think it's a good idea. It promotes the idea that you can make a last-ditch challenge and attempt to get the ball without being sent off for it. Tackling is very muuch a part of the game as scoring.

Having said that, I think if the contact is made outside the area, the player should be sent off.

A penalty, red card and suspension is a triple whammy and unfair on somebody attempting to play the ball. But if the challenge occurs outside the box, I don't see much of an advantage for the attacking team if the player stays on.

It's a tricky one to get the right balance. Anything that's cynical, like a shirt tug or handball or swipe from behind deserves a red card. But a geniune attempt for the ball, it's extremely harsh.

[Andicis]

Just now, McLovin said:

Bilic said they have a mental block, I think it’s fair to say that he knows a lot more than any of us to be honest. To be honest I believe him, remember in the euros they gave Spain a footballing lesson in the group stage but lost their heads mentally against Portugal in the next round. 

I think Bilic is bias and overrated Croatia. They have very few quality players, and work as a team, but Denmark were better than they for large portions tonight. I wouldn't be hugely surprised to see Russia poo house them out, because I don't see them scoring goals. 

[Sexydadbod]

Just now, Andicis said:

How can you cite the Denmark France game that was a total farce, that game proves exactly zilch. Both teams didn't care at all about winning. 

Denmark are just your bog standard, workmanlike international team!

I think you’re doing them disservice personally.A bog standard international side doesn’t go 18 games unbeaten. Erikson’s and delaney’s running stats were off the scales tonight. I don’t care who you are, if you face a team who never stops running then it will always be difficult. Their manager made a subtle tactical change at half time which gave Denmark more of a foot hold within the game.

[Sexydadbod]

1 minute ago, Andicis said:

I think Bilic is bias and overrated Croatia. They have very few quality players, and work as a team, but Denmark were better than they for large portions tonight. I wouldn't be hugely surprised to see Russia poo house them out, because I don't see them scoring goals. 

Very few quality players? Rakitic, Kovacic, Modric, Perisic, Subasic, Kramaric, Mandzukic and Vrsaljko are all very good players.

Performances in the group stage don’t matter, it’s about peaking at the right time. 

People said the same thing about Real Madrid in the champions league, that they were finished, they were lucky,  that they had no desire and looked poor. The rest is history, it’s all about peaking in the later stages of the knockout rounds.

[Andicis]

1 minute ago, McLovin said:

I think you’re doing them disservice personally.A bog standard international side doesn’t go 18 games unbeaten. Erikson’s and delaney’s running stats were off the scales tonight. I don’t care who you are, if you face a team who never stops running then it will always be difficult. Their manager made a subtle tactical change at half time which gave Denmark more of a foot hold within the game.

England go long unbeaten games between international tournaments, but does anyone really care? International friendlies prove little, and half the qualification groups are a complete joke. I'm more than happy to agree with you, they run around a lot. They chase everything. But that's the bare minimum I expect from an international side. Apart from Eriksen and Poulsen Denmark had 0 quality on the ball, and it showed! If Croatia were so good, I'd expect them to break down and comfortably beat Denmark.

[Andicis]

Just now, McLovin said:

Very few quality players? Rakitic, Kovacic, Modric, Perisic, Subasic, Kramaric, Mandzukic and Vrsaljko are all very good players.

Performances in the group stage don’t matter, it’s about peaking at the right time. 

People said the same thing about Real Madrid in the champions league, that they were finished, they were lucky,  that they had no desire and looked poor. The rest is history, it’s all about peaking in the later stages of the knockout rounds.

Modric and Rakitic I'll give you, Kramaric certainly isn't quality. Mandzukic was poor tonight, and in general I struggle to be impressed with. He seems to miss his chances when he gets them, and seems to be quite an average striker to me. Played at top teams sure, but never impressed me at any of them. Kovacic isn't even starting. Perisic seemed to run around a lot, and offer quite little. I was more impressed with Rebic. 

Except you're comparing Real Madrid, a squad packed full of world class, experienced talent and the Croatia squad, with two world class players. 

[Sexydadbod]

Just now, Andicis said:

England go long unbeaten games between international tournaments, but does anyone really care? International friendlies prove little, and half the qualification groups are a complete joke. I'm more than happy to agree with you, they run around a lot. They chase everything. But that's the bare minimum I expect from an international side. Apart from Eriksen and Poulsen Denmark had 0 quality on the ball, and it showed! If Croatia were so good, I'd expect them to break down and comfortably beat Denmark.

But can’t that be said for other sides? If Germany were good why didn’t they beat South Korea? If Brazil were good why didn’t they beat Switzerland? If France were good why didn’t they beat Denmark? If England were good then why did they only scrape a win against a poor Tunisia side and lose to a side that didn’t want to win? If Mexico were good why did they get hammered by Sweden?

Football isn’t always black and white, especially knockout football. Man City are a better team than Liverpool , as seen in the final table of the premier league but they lost to them in the champions league .

 

[Andicis]

Just now, McLovin said:

But can’t that be said for other sides? If Germany were good why didn’t they beat South Korea? If Brazil were good why didn’t they beat Switzerland? If France were good why didn’t they beat Denmark? If England were good then why did they only scrape a win against a poor Tunisia side and lose to a side that didn’t want to win? If Mexico were good why did they get hammered by Sweden?

Football isn’t always black and white, especially knockout football. Man City are a better team than Liverpool , as seen in the final table of the premier league but they lost to them in the champions league .

 

Because those sides aren't that good. You need to stop using the France Denmark example. It was more like a friendly, it had 0 desire or tempo involved in that game. It's a poor point to use for tournament football. 

But City proved it by smashing Liverpool in points. I don't see what is special about Denmark at all. What makes them better than the average world cup side? I can't see anything. They labour in possession, they lack any kind of pace or tempo going forward. They can defend, as the typical international side does.

[Sexydadbod]

3 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Modric and Rakitic I'll give you, Kramaric certainly isn't quality. Mandzukic was poor tonight, and in general I struggle to be impressed with. He seems to miss his chances when he gets them, and seems to be quite an average striker to me. Played at top teams sure, but never impressed me at any of them. Kovacic isn't even starting. Perisic seemed to run around a lot, and offer quite little. I was more impressed with Rebic. 

Except you're comparing Real Madrid, a squad packed full of world class, experienced talent and the Croatia squad, with two world class players. 

The same principle applies though. It’s bad to peak too early in a tournament. Past Croatian teams would have crumbled tonight so it’s a positive for them. It can’t possibly be a negative can it? If anything it will give them so much confidence that they can through even when they don’t play as well.

[Andicis]

Just now, McLovin said:

The same principle applies though. It’s bad to peak too early in a tournament. Past Croatian teams would have crumbled tonight so it’s a positive for them. It can’t possibly be a negative can it? If anything it will give them so much confidence that they can through even when they don’t play as well.

I agree. I also think they're yet to be tested, same as a lot of other teams. I can't decide who I think is the best in this tournament yet, because none of the performing teams have faced off yet. I can't make up my mind if Croatia are as good as they have been, or their opposition have been shocking. Same as England.

[Sexydadbod]

2 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Because those sides aren't that good. You need to stop using the France Denmark example. It was more like a friendly, it had 0 desire or tempo involved in that game. It's a poor point to use for tournament football. 

But City proved it by smashing Liverpool in points. I don't see what is special about Denmark at all. What makes them better than the average world cup side? I can't see anything. They labour in possession, they lack any kind of pace or tempo going forward. They can defend, as the typical international side does.

So if those international teams aren’t that good then it doesn’t matter that Croatian aren’t Brazil 1970 quality then surely? 

It doesn’t matter if Denmark aren’t the best team in the world but any side that never stops running, closes all the spaces and has a tactically astute manager is always going to be a nightmare to play against. 

[AndyinLiverpool]

46 minutes ago, SaintRam said:

It astounds me that so many of you were unaware of that change tbh - we've seen lots of last man fouls not result in red cards over the past two seasons. 

It is strange, isn't it. 

People on here watch a lot of football.

[TigerTedd]

2 minutes ago, McLovin said:

The same principle applies though. It’s bad to peak too early in a tournament. Past Croatian teams would have crumbled tonight so it’s a positive for them. It can’t possibly be a negative can it? If anything it will give them so much confidence that they can through even when they don’t play as well.

They did crumble. They missed three penalties. They were just bloody lucky that Denmark crumbled worse. Schmiecel must be absolutely gutted. What more does he have to do. You don’t save a peno in real time, and another 2 in the shoot out, and expect to be on the losing side. 

I feel for him, I’ve got a soft spot for the Scheicel’s ever since my ill informed time as a Man Utd fan when I was 10. 

They’ve got a very good keeper, but the rest of Denmark are poo. They’ve got several players from the second tier of English football. A ducking Ipswich player as a starter. The top teams are lucky enough to be able to pick their players from the top leagues. Denmark is not a top team. They’re like an Iceland, but a little bit better, they’re well organised, they work hard, and they’ve got one star outfield player, and a really good keeper. Sometimes that’s all you need to get so far, but not beyond the last 16.

(and yes, I may still be a bit bitter that they beat Peru). 

[Sexydadbod]

1 minute ago, TigerTedd said:

They did crumble. They missed three penalties. They were just bloody lucky that Denmark crumbled worse. Schmiecel must be absolutely gutted. What more does he have to do. You don’t save a peno in real time, and another 2 in the shoot out, and expect to be on the losing side. 

I feel for him, I’ve got a soft spot for the Scheicel’s ever since my ill informed time as a Man Utd fan when I was 10. 

They’ve got a very good keeper, but the rest of Denmark are poo. They’ve got several players from the second tier of English football. A ducking Ipswich player as a starter. The top teams are lucky enough to be able to pick their players from the top leagues. Denmark is not a top team. They’re like an Iceland, but a little bit better, they’re well organised, they work hard, and they’ve got one star outfield player, and a really good keeper. Sometimes that’s all you need to get so far, but not beyond the last 16.

(and yes, I may still be a bit bitter that they beat Peru). 

The only two players that are in the second tier are the right back and left back. The rest of them are no slouches, the players play for the likes of Chelsea, Leipzig, Spurs, Sevilla, Feyenoord, Leicester, borussia Dortmund to give some context.

[Alph]

6 minutes ago, Andicis said:

I agree. I also think they're yet to be tested, same as a lot of other teams. I can't decide who I think is the best in this tournament yet, because none of the performing teams have faced off yet. I can't make up my mind if Croatia are as good as they have been, or their opposition have been shocking. Same as England.

I think France have looked good in a way. I mean the worst of them hasn't been that bad. They are still solid enough. They can go long and physical. They aren't arsed about having to go through sustained periods defending or long periods of breaking teams down. They can counter. 

4 games in I think we've seen them be ugly and effective and pretty and devastating.

They just look like they are equipped for anyone. 

It's hard to tell with England and Belgium. Would be able to tell more if the game between them wasn't a friendly. England's first 11 haven't had to go through any period of pressure. They've not won ugly. Think they might have uncomfortable periods v Colombia and then we'll see?

[SaintRam]

34 minutes ago, Anon said:

Good. It should destroy their chances. This rule change is one of the most ridiculous I've ever seen in the game. If you're the last man ('keeper or outfield player), stay on your feet, or accept the risk of going to ground. This change is entirely sponsor driven because they've found that people tune out if there's an early red card.

Gks have to dive for the ball if its on the ground. Blame the players who would knock the ball away from the goal and then fall over the keeper. Theyre the ones that forced the rule change.