World Cup?

[xer0h0ur]

The last world cup final blowout was 98 with France/Brazil. France's coach played on that team.

Well he is about to win the cup as a player and as a coach.

 

[bearmick]

#calledit

 

[remydat]

Thought the better team lost today in part due to some poor decisions by the referee particularly the penalty and AG falling over himself but being awarded a free kick that led to the OG.

At the end of the day though, all that matters is you win and France won. There is something to be said about taking the cup without playing your best.

 

[bamainatlanta]

Thought the better team lost today in part due to some poor decisions by the referee particularly the penalty.

At the end of the day though, all that matters is you win and France won. There is something to be said about taking the cup without playing your best.

I thought it was a legit penalty. Was it intentionally done? No, not at all but rules are rules.
Croatia just ran out of gas. Not a deep team and certainly not as talented but 3 extra time games in a row will tire you out.
France makes up for Zindene's folly in 2006.

 

[remydat]

I thought it was a legit penalty. Was it intentionally done? No, not at all but rules are rules.
Croatia just ran out of gas. Not a deep team and certainly not as talented but 3 extra time games in a row will tire you out.
France makes up for Zindene's folly in 2006.

The rule is that it is supposed to be deliberate so by rule it is not a penalty which you just admitted when you said it was not intentional.

Rules are rules after all.

 

[xer0h0ur]

I don't know what you guys were seeing because to me he's staring the ball down and his arm shoots down fast to me showing intention of knocking the ball down. That was not a natural arm movement.

Doesn't matter anyways. Even if you take that goal away France still outclassed Croatia in every aspect.

 

[remydat]

I don't know what you guys were seeing because to me he's staring the ball down and his arm shoots down fast to me showing intention of knocking the ball down. That was not a natural arm movement.

Doesn't matter anyways. Even if you take that goal away France still outclassed Croatia in every aspect.

He did not look down at all. He turned his head behind him to see where the ball went. Further Croatia dominated possession and completed twice as many passes as France who only had 1 shot on goal in the first half. France scored on the break as Croatia was chasing the game due to 2 goals that shouldn't have been.

http://www.espn.com/video/clip?id=24104832

 

[xer0h0ur]

He did not look down at all. He turned his head behind him to see where the ball went. Further Croatia dominated possession and completed twice as many passes as France who only had 1 shot on goal in the first half. France scored on the break as Croatia was chasing the game due to 2 goals that shouldn't have been.

http://www.espn.com/video/clip?id=24104832

Since when is soccer a game of one half? Even if you take away the penalty goal and the goal Croatia's defender deflected into the net that still leaves two goals for France and of course if you're playing this bullshit takeaway game then Croatia's 2nd goal from the goalie mistake is worthless too. Leaving a score of 2-1 for France anyways. The simple fact is that Croatia had far too much wear and tear from three consecutive OT games and before it was even halftime you could already visibly see it which is why they dominated the 2nd half.

 

[remydat]

Since when is soccer a game of one half? Even if you take away the penalty goal and the goal Croatia's defender deflected into the net that still leaves two goals for France and of course if you're playing this bullshit takeaway game then Croatia's 2nd goal from the goalie mistake is worthless too. Leaving a score of 2-1 for France anyways. The simple fact is that Croatia had far too much wear and tear from three consecutive OT games and before it was even halftime you could already visibly see it which is why they dominated the 2nd half.

You seem confused. I never said Croatia should have won. I said they were the better team.

Part of the reason they wore down is they were chasing a game they should have gone into the half leading.

AG fell down himself but got a FK that led to the first goal. The handball was not deliberate. Are you pretending there isn't a difference between being up 1-0 at the half vs down 2-1?

Overall Croatia was the better team. Better teams lose all the time so no one is claiming they would have won. However in soccer when you outshoot your opponent 2 to 1, have 61% possession, 3 times as many corners 6 to 2 and complete over twice as many passes you are considered to have been the better team.

France converted their chances more efficiently but they were not outclassing Croatia as you claimed. Croatia were not outclassed. They were pressing for a goal because they were down due in large part because of the ref and so France caught them on the counter. If they were not down then it is likely they wouldn't have left themselves as exposed for the counter particularly if they were up 1-0 instead.

Soccer is not a game of one half hence why I am referring to stats for the whole game to say Croatia was better. Not just the first half. And not just the 2nd half. The whole game.

http://www.espn.com/soccer/matchstats?gameId=498139

 

[xer0h0ur]

You seem confused. I never said Croatia should have won. I said they were the better team.

Part of the reason they wore down is they were chasing a game they should have gone into the half leading.

AG fell down himself but got a FK that led to the first goal. The handball was not deliberate. Are you pretending there isn't a difference between being up 1-0 at the half vs down 2-1?

Overall Croatia was the better team. Better teams lose all the time so no one is claiming they would have won. However in soccer when you outshoot your opponent, have 61% possession and complete over twice as many passes you are considered to have been the better team.

Soccer is not a game of one half hence why I am referring to stats for the whole game to say Croatia was better. Not just the first half. And not just the 2nd half. The whole game.

Possession is one of the most worthless stats to me in soccer. Merely having the ball doesn't mean dick when you're not threatening with it. Passing accuracy is something else entirely. I still believe France played better overall. More importantly they never let off the gas. Something that drives me insane in all sports. Offense is the best defense. Had Croatia not been forced into three consecutive overtime matches prior to this game then this would have certainly been a different game altogether.

 

[remydat]

Possession is one of the most worthless stats to me in soccer. Merely having the ball doesn't mean dick when you're not threatening with it. Passing accuracy is something else entirely. I still believe France played better overall. More importantly they never let off the gas. Something that drives me insane in all sports. Offense is the best defense. Had Croatia not been forced into three consecutive overtime matches prior to this game then this would have certainly been a different game altogether.

Except it is not just possession. They had more possession, more shots, more corners, more passing.

And you seem confused. France soaked up pressure and countered when they could. That is how most teams have played with a lead in this WC. The difference is they converted on the counter. France were playing back and then when they won the ball they just had Mbappe who is so fast that he can break on the counter and create chances.

Playing counterattacking football isn't outclassing someone particularly when they are creating more chances than you.

 

[xer0h0ur]

IMO France was smart enough to know that they had fresher legs in the 2nd half so instead of trying to baby a lead they kept attacking and converted off of it. If they had not then Croatia could very well have tied it or won. Sheer number of shots on goal don't matter so much as their quality.

 

[remydat]

IMO France was smart enough to know that they had fresher legs in the 2nd half so instead of trying to baby a lead they kept attacking and converted off of it. If they had not then Croatia could very well have tied it or won. Sheer number of shots on goal don't matter so much as their quality.

You are arguing something else entirely now. I said they were better because that is what the stats for the whole game suggest. You said they were outclassed but waiting for an opponent to tire isn't outclassing them. It is having greater endurance than them.

Finally, France did baby a lead as they hung back and Croatia dominated possession, shots, corners and passes. But every single team counters when playing ahead. You act like they were pressing when ahead when all they did is allow Croatia to dominate possession but simply broke on the counter because they have probably the 2 fastest players on the field in Mbappe and AG.

This was the most possession, most shots, most corners, and most passes France has given up in any game the entire world cup. So not sure how they weren't babying a lead or how Croatia was supposedly tired when they literally did more against France than any other team. Think you are confusing scoring goals on the counter with being better. France did an amazing job with the few opportunities they had but they were not out there outclassing anyone. They were able to baby a lead they didn't deserve and scored two great goals on counters.

But as I said all that matters is they will be remembered as WC Champions.

 

[xer0h0ur]

I think we have different definitions of what being outclassed is. You say they didn't outclass Croatia while at the same time saying France had likely the two fastest players on the field exploiting that speed on the counter. Ugh...K.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Exhibit A in how you ruin CCS threads.

 

[bamainatlanta]

Exhibit A in how you ruin CCS threads.

Hoping you would make bank on the Belgium bet.

 

[xer0h0ur]

Remy and I are clearly talking about the WC finals match...you're just being you.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Hoping you would make bank on the Belgium bet.

My dreams were shattered.

 

[remydat]

I think we have different definitions of what being outclassed is. You say they didn't outclass Croatia while at the same time saying France had likely the two fastest players on the field exploiting that speed on the counter. Ugh...K.

No one in the soccer world claims one team outclassed the other simply because they counter attacked. Playing counter attacking football is generally what the weaker team does or what teams do to nurse a lead.

Hence why they dominated possession against weaker teams but had to play the counter against stronger attacking teams.

That is why the pundit I linked too said they still hadn't played their best. It is just a credit to their talent that they don't need to play their best to win particularly when the ref helps them out.

 

[xer0h0ur]

No one in the soccer world claims one team outclassed the other simply because they counter attacked. Playing counter attacking football is generally what the weaker team does or what teams do to nurse a lead.

Hence why they dominated possession against weaker teams but had to play the counter against stronger attacking teams.

That is why the pundit I linked too said they still hadn't played their best. It is just a credit to their talent that they don't need to play their best to win particularly when the ref helps them out.

I'm sure that was more of a reference to the fact they are the youngest team to ever win a WC. Of course they haven't played their best soccer yet. That is obvious. What I fail to believe however is that when a manager and the team intentionally changes their approach to how they play an opponent to ultimately come out with the win...its not interpreted as outclassing the opponent. If that wasn't true then every team would play using the same approach and there wouldn't be different alignments. Strategy is just as important as your talent.