Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: WORLD CUP 2018 (LİVE İT UP)
people who are blind, it don't help to discuss.
wake up, or not... it's yor life.
look at the statistics, in all statistics Croatia was better than France, but Croatia scored less goals.
(2 goals the referee helped for France)
If you not want look the truth... ok, no problem, then be blind. Your decision.
"Ridiculous decisions from referee "Nestor Pitana" help France to the title."
That is the most part opinion of the world think the same. Read the reactions of humans and critics of professionals from the world.
if you not want, ok. Then stay stupid.
We only conceded 3 in 8 games this 2018... to bad for us it was the last 2. :S :(
Hey, it is just a forum and about football, calm down.
Football is also about being decisive in the last 15 metres. We were, croatia were not.
Ball possession is not the only tactic allowed in order to win and fortunately.
We played defensive foorball ? YES
We played boring football ? YES
We were sometimes lucky ? YES
We deserves to win the world cup ? YES
We lost in 82 and 86 playing a nice to watch football against some more realistic team (Germany ?....). You respected it ?
Well today we won playing à l'italienne, respect it also.
Thanks
Football is also about being decisive in the last 15 metres. We were, croatia were not.
Ball possession is not the only tactic allowed in order to win and fortunately.
We played defensive foorball ? YES
We played boring football ? YES
We were sometimes lucky ? YES
We deserves to win the world cup ? YES
We lost in 82 and 86 playing a nice to watch football against some more realistic team (Germany ?....). You respected it ?
Well today we won playing à l'italienne, respect it also.
Thanks
First French team that efficient EVER by the way.
We nearly converted every attempt we had ! it was like looking at Italia 1990s/2000s... so easy to hate but so efficient football (soccer.. I mean sokker ^^).
We nearly converted every attempt we had ! it was like looking at Italia 1990s/2000s... so easy to hate but so efficient football (soccer.. I mean sokker ^^).
I think that france wasn't so good at defending.
They denfended in 11, short and low, but still conceded a lot of chances.
This is why I think the luck played a great role on the result. Not because only of the tactic choices of deschamps, but because of, imho, this tactic failed. But football is the beloved sport it is because of this, you can be better and lose for details (a penalty, a defensive header in your own goal) and win the same way... just taking the luck when it comes.
They denfended in 11, short and low, but still conceded a lot of chances.
This is why I think the luck played a great role on the result. Not because only of the tactic choices of deschamps, but because of, imho, this tactic failed. But football is the beloved sport it is because of this, you can be better and lose for details (a penalty, a defensive header in your own goal) and win the same way... just taking the luck when it comes.
Good point but we are talking, even in France, about the luck of Deschamps, for many years with Monaco, Marseille and now France... By repeating these kind of performances with all teams he trained I am not sure luck is the main factor.
We play very disciplined and tactical, with a collective spirit. This is the football he learned in italia in the 90' and the one he used to play as a player.
About luck, as all the focus is on France, what about Croatia qualified twice after prolongations and Bresil domination over Belgium (27 shots vs 9, 9 on taget vs 3, 60% possession vs 40%, ...)
(edited)
We play very disciplined and tactical, with a collective spirit. This is the football he learned in italia in the 90' and the one he used to play as a player.
About luck, as all the focus is on France, what about Croatia qualified twice after prolongations and Bresil domination over Belgium (27 shots vs 9, 9 on taget vs 3, 60% possession vs 40%, ...)
(edited)
First of all... Brazil did NOT dominated over Belgium!
We were ahead 2-0 with samba football against Brazil and we sat back in the 2nd time trying not to consede a goal cause our way of football was attractive but risky and we are fragile in the back. So we adjusted our tactics and mindset to keep Brazil from scoring. We weren't familiar with this way of football so we had a rough time keeping them away from our half, but in the end we won.
Now France won the cup with counter football. It's ok, they deserved it, cause if you win all matches in the knock-out stage, you are the well deserved champion. They had a fairly easy group stage with Australia, Peru and Denmark, though all 3 teams gave France a rough time...
In the knock-out stage they won against Argentina (the one team in the WC that played even less attractive football than France!), Then against Uruguay (lucky cause of the injury of Cavani), then Belgium, since we were unable to score against a team with 10 defenders, but that's a choice... And finally against Croatia.
So in the knock-out stage they defeated 4 teams that are at least equally strong (in skill) and thus they deserve the Cup!
Now fact!
If all teams should play like this, football itself wouldn't be the Nr 1 most popular sport in the world, it wouldn't inspire youth to play it and players themselves wouldn't earn as much money as they do now (cause football IS a popular sport), sheiks and other Billionaires wouldn't buy up teams and competitions wouldn't be as corrupt as they are now.
So in one way, football should be boring to make it less attractive, less money-related and more sports-related in order to change it back to an attractive sport to watch.
In an ideal world, the fifa is a non-profit organisation and clubs are too, and every tournament is a prestige in order to find better sponsors for Players - who try to sell their "brand" as they are popular within their sport, not for how they look, or what car they drive. And clubs should pay realistic wages, like 15k for their top-players.
But that's an utopian way of thinking, and so, if the more attractive playing teams don't find a solution against a boring playing team like France, maybe it's time for the real tacticians to stand up and prove that there IS a way of playing attractive football and STILL win against "park-the-bus-teams". Football has evolved enormous over the years. So we have to be hopefull that it will change again, for the neutral supporters, like Holland or Italy :-p
We were ahead 2-0 with samba football against Brazil and we sat back in the 2nd time trying not to consede a goal cause our way of football was attractive but risky and we are fragile in the back. So we adjusted our tactics and mindset to keep Brazil from scoring. We weren't familiar with this way of football so we had a rough time keeping them away from our half, but in the end we won.
Now France won the cup with counter football. It's ok, they deserved it, cause if you win all matches in the knock-out stage, you are the well deserved champion. They had a fairly easy group stage with Australia, Peru and Denmark, though all 3 teams gave France a rough time...
In the knock-out stage they won against Argentina (the one team in the WC that played even less attractive football than France!), Then against Uruguay (lucky cause of the injury of Cavani), then Belgium, since we were unable to score against a team with 10 defenders, but that's a choice... And finally against Croatia.
So in the knock-out stage they defeated 4 teams that are at least equally strong (in skill) and thus they deserve the Cup!
Now fact!
If all teams should play like this, football itself wouldn't be the Nr 1 most popular sport in the world, it wouldn't inspire youth to play it and players themselves wouldn't earn as much money as they do now (cause football IS a popular sport), sheiks and other Billionaires wouldn't buy up teams and competitions wouldn't be as corrupt as they are now.
So in one way, football should be boring to make it less attractive, less money-related and more sports-related in order to change it back to an attractive sport to watch.
In an ideal world, the fifa is a non-profit organisation and clubs are too, and every tournament is a prestige in order to find better sponsors for Players - who try to sell their "brand" as they are popular within their sport, not for how they look, or what car they drive. And clubs should pay realistic wages, like 15k for their top-players.
But that's an utopian way of thinking, and so, if the more attractive playing teams don't find a solution against a boring playing team like France, maybe it's time for the real tacticians to stand up and prove that there IS a way of playing attractive football and STILL win against "park-the-bus-teams". Football has evolved enormous over the years. So we have to be hopefull that it will change again, for the neutral supporters, like Holland or Italy :-p
Nice post, I appreciate to not be insulted like in the Sandro Berlin one even if we don't share the same opinions.
I got your point regarding the game with Brazil.
But not the fact we had an easies group and knock out stage than the others.
What about Germany which was lucky to play south korea or Croatia opponents after group stage, etc... ?
It is clear Croatia and Belgium played much more attractive football.
But Deschamps was here to win the cup, no matter if he had to play ugly or nice football.
His teams always played pragmatically with only one focus : winning.
About tactic and tacticians, you seem to think Deschamps is not a good one... But opponents also need to adapt. This is crazy to attack and leave some spaces against this team, we saw it with Argentina and a bit less with Croatia. Don't worry, if teams start to play differently, Deschamps will also change the way France is playing.
This team is young, it can progress and play nicer in the future. But during this WC this ugly football was the most adapted to this team and the opponents she played.
We can all regret it but this is like this. This is pragmatism.
Concerning the attractivity of football, look at Atletico and all the hype around it despite not playing a very nice football. So it is not only about it, even if I admit the context is different for atletico.
Funny is Griezmann who said he had the feeling to play like atletico team during some games, especially the one with Belgium, so they is really something similar in the way they played.
Anyway, I respect your opinion.
I reacted in this forum to balance a little the discussion.
Was tired to see some insults of some people or the word LUCK LUCK each 3 posts.
I got your point regarding the game with Brazil.
But not the fact we had an easies group and knock out stage than the others.
What about Germany which was lucky to play south korea or Croatia opponents after group stage, etc... ?
It is clear Croatia and Belgium played much more attractive football.
But Deschamps was here to win the cup, no matter if he had to play ugly or nice football.
His teams always played pragmatically with only one focus : winning.
About tactic and tacticians, you seem to think Deschamps is not a good one... But opponents also need to adapt. This is crazy to attack and leave some spaces against this team, we saw it with Argentina and a bit less with Croatia. Don't worry, if teams start to play differently, Deschamps will also change the way France is playing.
This team is young, it can progress and play nicer in the future. But during this WC this ugly football was the most adapted to this team and the opponents she played.
We can all regret it but this is like this. This is pragmatism.
Concerning the attractivity of football, look at Atletico and all the hype around it despite not playing a very nice football. So it is not only about it, even if I admit the context is different for atletico.
Funny is Griezmann who said he had the feeling to play like atletico team during some games, especially the one with Belgium, so they is really something similar in the way they played.
Anyway, I respect your opinion.
I reacted in this forum to balance a little the discussion.
Was tired to see some insults of some people or the word LUCK LUCK each 3 posts.
Do we were lucky ? Absolutely YES
Do we were Boooooring? Absolutely YES
Do we loved that ? Absolutely NO
Could we play in an another way to hope to win the World Cup ? Absolutely NO
Attractive teams like Belgium or Croatia only wanted to play nice games or wanted to win title ? It is a tactical choice... France wanted to win whatever they play, it was their goal, whatever they would be looked at.... 2 years ago, France was more attractive but lost in final... Not this time... Maybe in 2 years, they could try to win with a more attractive team if they think they are able to, otherwiqe, if their goal is still to win whatever the price, we will see another booooring games :-D
Do we were Boooooring? Absolutely YES
Do we loved that ? Absolutely NO
Could we play in an another way to hope to win the World Cup ? Absolutely NO
Attractive teams like Belgium or Croatia only wanted to play nice games or wanted to win title ? It is a tactical choice... France wanted to win whatever they play, it was their goal, whatever they would be looked at.... 2 years ago, France was more attractive but lost in final... Not this time... Maybe in 2 years, they could try to win with a more attractive team if they think they are able to, otherwiqe, if their goal is still to win whatever the price, we will see another booooring games :-D
I'm not the one who'll say it's not deserved. If you win, you win.
But To say it's a good tactic... I'm against.
It worked out well, this time, but you've got to see it as war before the invention of gunpowder...
You guys fought like a fortress, waiting for the enemy to come by and slaughter them medievel style.
It's now up to the other teams to find the recepy for gunpowder to blow up your fortress...
I see this tactic as a complete lack of creativity. Sniperkill with 1 shot. It worked and it did before... like Greece EC in 2004...
Never once a team won the EC with only 4 points in the group stage, 7 goals for and 4 against, had less than an average 30% ball possession and won all matches with only 1 goal difference and in the knock out stage always with 1-0 or 0-1...
THE ugliest playing team all times by far that time...
Appearance doesn't matter, only results... But luckily only once every so many years a team like that also actually win, cause you've got to admit... If you missed out on a match of France, you never had a feeling you've missed something, do you? ;-)
But To say it's a good tactic... I'm against.
It worked out well, this time, but you've got to see it as war before the invention of gunpowder...
You guys fought like a fortress, waiting for the enemy to come by and slaughter them medievel style.
It's now up to the other teams to find the recepy for gunpowder to blow up your fortress...
I see this tactic as a complete lack of creativity. Sniperkill with 1 shot. It worked and it did before... like Greece EC in 2004...
Never once a team won the EC with only 4 points in the group stage, 7 goals for and 4 against, had less than an average 30% ball possession and won all matches with only 1 goal difference and in the knock out stage always with 1-0 or 0-1...
THE ugliest playing team all times by far that time...
Appearance doesn't matter, only results... But luckily only once every so many years a team like that also actually win, cause you've got to admit... If you missed out on a match of France, you never had a feeling you've missed something, do you? ;-)
If all teams should play like this, football itself wouldn't be the Nr 1 most popular sport in the world, it wouldn't inspire youth to play it and players themselves wouldn't earn as much money as they do now
Yes, that's what I mean. This can make win a cup, and it is a legal way to play football, it is allowded,
but nice football is that NOT.
Easy:
- Train 1 sprinter (100m in 9,9 seconds) (teach the Sprinter how to shoot/pass a ball)
- Train 9 defense oriented player (DEF's+DEF-MID's)
- Train 1 GK
Finish. That's it.
And now win World Cup's.
Ok, that is really sarcastic, but it has a touch of truth.
---
most part of french-success at the world cup is from AFRICA. My respect to africa.
Africa deserve a win. But France get the medal and the cup.
If exists a good african talent from ex-colonie (former colony), then France try to integrate the player in his team to play for France. It is robbed talent from african country, but at media nobody try to say that.
in the foto still missing "Varane" his Father is from caribic (Martinique), Djibril SIDIBE (Mali).
"Griezmann" His past-Line, lineage is from Germany and Portugal.
imagine Football of France... if...
no Kylian Mbappé
no Paul Pogba
no Griezmann
no N'Golo Kanté
no Samuel Umtiti
no Ousmane Dembélé
and... and... and...
no World Cup...
1998 the same:
Zidane would play for Algeria, no Thierry Henry, no Marcel Dessaily, no Lilian Thuram, no David Trezeguet,
no Patrick Vieira, no Robert Pires, no Youri Djorkaeff, ...
and, and and...
---
I am calm, France have a good team, have young team, and is one of strong teams which deserve the cup.
I only try that people begin to think . . . about development in football.
(edited)
Yes, that's what I mean. This can make win a cup, and it is a legal way to play football, it is allowded,
but nice football is that NOT.
Easy:
- Train 1 sprinter (100m in 9,9 seconds) (teach the Sprinter how to shoot/pass a ball)
- Train 9 defense oriented player (DEF's+DEF-MID's)
- Train 1 GK
Finish. That's it.
And now win World Cup's.
Ok, that is really sarcastic, but it has a touch of truth.
---
most part of french-success at the world cup is from AFRICA. My respect to africa.
Africa deserve a win. But France get the medal and the cup.
If exists a good african talent from ex-colonie (former colony), then France try to integrate the player in his team to play for France. It is robbed talent from african country, but at media nobody try to say that.
in the foto still missing "Varane" his Father is from caribic (Martinique), Djibril SIDIBE (Mali).
"Griezmann" His past-Line, lineage is from Germany and Portugal.
imagine Football of France... if...
no Kylian Mbappé
no Paul Pogba
no Griezmann
no N'Golo Kanté
no Samuel Umtiti
no Ousmane Dembélé
and... and... and...
no World Cup...
1998 the same:
Zidane would play for Algeria, no Thierry Henry, no Marcel Dessaily, no Lilian Thuram, no David Trezeguet,
no Patrick Vieira, no Robert Pires, no Youri Djorkaeff, ...
and, and and...
---
I am calm, France have a good team, have young team, and is one of strong teams which deserve the cup.
I only try that people begin to think . . . about development in football.
(edited)
At least we scored 14 goals which is not so bad if u compare with Greece. France used to play nice football and will again in the future hopefully.
And yes, I missed peru and denmark games and absolutely didnt lose my time ;)
And yes, I missed peru and denmark games and absolutely didnt lose my time ;)
Hej man,
Most of them were born in France. Martinique, guadeloupe, reunion ARE PART OF FRANCE.
I am from Corsica which doesnt share the same history than France and I AM french.
You start to understand ?
Most of them were born in France. Martinique, guadeloupe, reunion ARE PART OF FRANCE.
I am from Corsica which doesnt share the same history than France and I AM french.
You start to understand ?
Origins... that's like disqualifying USA for not being native (or any colony for that matter)
That's not the right way of thinking...
Every team has it's "foreigners"
For me, it's more the fact that there's too much money in circulation in the football market.
Players don't have a normal life anymore as they did 30 years ago!
Then maradona was "a child of god", now he wouldn't pass the fitness tests anymore even as he was back then!
The players are treated as a picasso painting. Nurture them 24/7 and keep the dust away...
They even have their personal matrasses to do their powernaps, taken to Russia!! I mean... can they even prepare their own club sandwich anymore? No, they can't... But they can run 35 km/h with the ball on the foot and kick an 80 metres pass into your feet, standing still (both)... It has become a lifestyle in stead of a sport. It's not about the fun anymore, and for a neutral spectatre, it's even more boring as a game of darts...
What I certainly regret about france becoming world champions... the riots the night after in Paris...
If your own people can't appreciate your style anymore.... :-s
That's not the right way of thinking...
Every team has it's "foreigners"
For me, it's more the fact that there's too much money in circulation in the football market.
Players don't have a normal life anymore as they did 30 years ago!
Then maradona was "a child of god", now he wouldn't pass the fitness tests anymore even as he was back then!
The players are treated as a picasso painting. Nurture them 24/7 and keep the dust away...
They even have their personal matrasses to do their powernaps, taken to Russia!! I mean... can they even prepare their own club sandwich anymore? No, they can't... But they can run 35 km/h with the ball on the foot and kick an 80 metres pass into your feet, standing still (both)... It has become a lifestyle in stead of a sport. It's not about the fun anymore, and for a neutral spectatre, it's even more boring as a game of darts...
What I certainly regret about france becoming world champions... the riots the night after in Paris...
If your own people can't appreciate your style anymore.... :-s
Two years ago, France played some nice football and lost the final. In ten years, noone remembers the runner-up, they will remember Portugal winning the Euro. Now they wont the WC, boring or not, in ten years noone cares, all they'll know is that France won it in '18. Ohh, and everyone played a boring football at this WC, everyone.