The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Phonicsdude
This surprises me from you. They are a poor side and Id be surprised to see them past the QFs. In 2006 they fortuitously got past Australia with a last minute penalty, beat the winner of the most boring game in WC history (Ukraine v Switzerland, 0-0 then 3-0 on pens.....I was working that night and it was quiet...I desperately found things to do to avoid having to watch that dross), and then beat Germany after AET. Poor.

Last tournament, terrible.

Now they are full of old has-beens and have no flair. Their defence is a joke. cannavarro is experienced but poor. Chiellini is decent. Everyone else, average.
Pirlo, Gatusso and Camaronesi are ageing and have had poor seasons. Who else inspires in that midfield? Montolivo? DeRossi is alright though.
Up front they'll have Gilardino and Iaquinto?

Terrible.

In 2/4 years theyll have a really good side. Lippi the clown will have gone and players like Bonucci, Rannochia, Chiellini, Santon, De Rossi, Marchisio, Candreva, Balotelli, Cassano, Rossi, Macheda in the team. Then it will be competitive. Aquilani might even have strung together a few games.

If they make it past the QF it would be a MASSIVE surprise. They wouldnt beat Spain, England, Brazil or Holland and wouldnt be strong favourites against jokes like Argentina, Ivory coast or France either.

I'd be surprised if Italy didn't at least make it to the Quarter Finals, if nothing else, because they've got a fairly standard route there - after that the knockout stages will favour them because they can just grind out the results, so you never know. There's been a fair few times when people have said, for example, that Germany aren't a great side anymore (notably before WC 2002 after their terrible Euro 2000), but they made it to the final.

In Euro 2008, they might not have been great, but no team came closer to beating Spain. In the WC 2006 they were exceptional defensively, and that won them the title.

The side itself looks strong still, ageing, but strong. There's not many teams that would beat Spain or Brazil (the latter being my pick to win the whole thing) - although England and Holland are debatable because they've both flattered to deceive for years while teams like Germany and Italy seem to do well despite having a (relatively) poor team.

I'd expect them to play well defensively and just grind out results - I mean this when I say it, but as long as they have Chiellini and Buffon, I'd never write them off.

(meskell, I'll try and sort that out for you now).
All the provisional squads are in the first two posts :smile:
Reply 42
Thanks Stu :biggrin:
Reply 43
Italy were always exeptional defensively. That's not what won it for them. Pirlo was the difference.

Don't agree with Phonics that Italy were terrible in 2006, far from it. Sure they had some close games, but it's very rare that a team will ever cruise to a WC winning each game comfortably.

Lippi could rely on some of the best players in the world at the time - Nesta, Cannavaro, Zambrotta, Gattuso, Pirlo, Totti etc. Now these guys ahve either retired or are past their best. Lippi hasn't done a good job of blooding in the younger generation and he's also gone for a very workman like team, devoid of any creativity in the final third.
ba_ba1
Italy were always exeptional defensively. That's not what won it for them. Pirlo was the difference.

Don't agree with Phonics that Italy were terrible in 2006, far from it. Sure they had some close games, but it's very rare that a team will ever cruise to a WC winning each game comfortably.

Lippi could rely on some of the best players in the world at the time - Nesta, Cannavaro, Zambrotta, Gattuso, Pirlo, Totti etc. Now these guys ahve either retired or are past their best. Lippi hasn't done a good job of blooding in the younger generation and he's also gone for a very workman like team, devoid of any creativity in the final third.

They had an easy 2nd and QF round. Whilst they were playing Australia and the Ukraine, France were playing Spain (with ostensibly the same time that raped Europe 2 years later) and Brazil. Outclassing both.

France had a harder run, looked more impressive against more difficult opposition and played better football. France should have won that tournament no doubt.
In 1998 Zidane's head won it twice. Here his header pushed onto the bar and headbutt of Materazzi put them at a severe disadvantage.
Reply 45
Is Maradona ******* crazy? no Milito, Zanetti, Gaga, Lucho Gonzalez, Gago nor Cambiasso.:rant: What the ****?:confused:

But there is room in the Argentina squad for 2 Newcastle players, Veron and other **** players from south America which we've never heard of.:confused:
Reply 46
jo62
Is Maradona ******* crazy? no Milito, Zanetti, Gaga, Lucho Gonzalez, Gago nor Cambiasso.:rant: What the ****?:confused:

But there is room in the Argentina squad for 2 Newcastle players, Veron and other **** players from south America which we've never heard of.:confused:


Agree on everything except Veron. He's been playing brilliantly. The only worry with him is that he won't be able to last 90 minutes, hence it would've been useful to take Banega along.
Reply 47
Phonicsdude
They had an easy 2nd and QF round. Whilst they were playing Australia and the Ukraine, France were playing Spain (with ostensibly the same time that raped Europe 2 years later) and Brazil. Outclassing both.

France had a harder run, looked more impressive against more difficult opposition and played better football. France should have won that tournament no doubt.
In 1998 Zidane's head won it twice. Here his header pushed onto the bar and headbutt of Materazzi put them at a severe disadvantage.


Italy had the 2nd hardest group. France had a relatively easy group. The reason France had a harder run in the KOs and Italy had an easier run was because France failed to top their group. FYI Italy were one of the few teams that Spain did not rape 2 years later.

You forgot to mention that France look dreadful in the group stages and their performance against Portugal was hardly spectacular. But anyway, we are getting side tracked. The claim you made was that Italy were terrible in 2006. They were unbeaten the whole tournament and only conceded 2 goals (an own goal and a penalty). That alone makes them better than "terrible".

As for Zidane's headbutt, you overrate it's importance. There was not long left to go in the ET and Trezeguet would have still taken a penalty, hence France would have still lost.
Phonicsdude
They had an easy 2nd and QF round. Whilst they were playing Australia and the Ukraine, France were playing Spain (with ostensibly the same time that raped Europe 2 years later) and Brazil. Outclassing both.

France had a harder run, looked more impressive against more difficult opposition and played better football. France should have won that tournament no doubt.
In 1998 Zidane's head won it twice. Here his header pushed onto the bar and headbutt of Materazzi put them at a severe disadvantage.


Please do try and belittle Italy's World Cup win some more.

Please. I asked twice, therefore you have to do so. :facepalm2:
Maradona being an idiot at managing should be no surprise after Argentinas struggle in qualifying, especially that 6-0 defeat by Bolivia.
We'll disagree but for me a team that knocked out Spain, Brazil and Portugal is worth more than a team that knocked out Australia, Ukraine and Germany. France played the best football in the tournament. They conceded one goal against three of the best attacking sides in the world. They scored 5.

Clearly ITaly did good things or they wouldn't have won but when you see the kind of anti football they played in the final to subdue France it leaves a bitter taste in the mouth. Good for Italy though. They like it like that.
Phonicsdude
We'll disagree but for me a team that knocked out Spain, Brazil and Portugal is worth more than a team that knocked out Australia, Ukraine and Germany. France played the best football in the tournament. They conceded one goal against three of the best attacking sides in the world. They scored 5.

Clearly ITaly did good things or they wouldn't have won but when you see the kind of anti football they played in the final to subdue France it leaves a bitter taste in the mouth. Good for Italy though. They like it like that.

This isn't me having a go, but didn't Inter Milan play like that to subdue Barcelona?

You'd be silly for a team not to play to your strengths, and with all those players near their best (Nesta, Cannavaro, Buffon, Zambrotta, Grosso), then you would play to that strength and there's nothing wrong with it. It's not pretty though, definitely.
Reply 52
I hate the phrase 'anti-football' so much. What are they playing? Basketball or something ffs. Football is as good as it is because it is so flexible and has such a variety of ways to play.
Reply 53
Stoke City's tactics can be comparable to rugby tactics tbh!
Stu Laverty
This isn't me having a go, but didn't Inter Milan play like that to subdue Barcelona?

You'd be silly for a team not to play to your strengths, and with all those players near their best (Nesta, Cannavaro, Buffon, Zambrotta, Grosso), then you would play to that strength and there's nothing wrong with it. It's not pretty though, definitely.

Im a half French Inter Milan supporter. What do you want me to say?
Reply 55
From those squads, it becomes quite clear how much stronger Spain are than any other team...apart from backups to Torres/Villa I guess - but when you've got Xavi, Iniesta and Silva running from midfield it all becomes quite scary there.

Argentina look quite weak apart from up front, Brazil look strong (as expected), Holland's defence seems a little shaky (as expected), Italians are old (expected), Germans will be efficient (expected) and England....well....it all depends on Wayne doesn't it, although if Frankie Lampard can continue his form of this season into the world cup - we should have more than enough of a goal threat.
Reply 56
Phonicsdude
We'll disagree but for me a team that knocked out Spain, Brazil and Portugal is worth more than a team that knocked out Australia, Ukraine and Germany. France played the best football in the tournament. They conceded one goal against three of the best attacking sides in the world. They scored 5.

Clearly ITaly did good things or they wouldn't have won but when you see the kind of anti football they played in the final to subdue France it leaves a bitter taste in the mouth. Good for Italy though. They like it like that.


Again you ignore what happened in the group stages.

Fair enough if you think France were better, but clearly your original claim that Italy were "terrible" was ridiculous and i'm glad to see that you've taken that back.

As for the final, Italy were better in the first half and played more attacking football. Fatigue set in during the 2nd half thanks to the extra half hour played against Germany. Italy played possesion football throughout the tournament, not exatly "anti football".
Worst selection of the lot is Tottenham's 5th choice left back from last season (Gilberto) being picked ahead of Barca's first choice (Maxwell)
Reply 58
Abidal is the first choice for Barcelona.
from rush hour with love
Worst selection of the lot is Tottenham's 5th choice left back from last season (Gilberto) being picked ahead of Barca's first choice (Maxwell)


Why does last season matter? He's been playing regular first team football this season, and Dunga would have seen a lot more of him than Maxwell, who, as meskell said, is not Barca's first choice.

Latest