Semi Finals :Wales/Portugal, France/Germany, and Finals: France/Portugal

[baxus]

6 minutes ago, Lucailduca said:

I get your point, which is sportsmanship at its best, but honestly I can recall a lot of non deserving champion that "won" their finals...

Unless a team wins because of some huge mistake by the referees or some other factors other than teams' performance on the pitch, they are deserving champions.

The whole point of sport is to have a pre-defined set of rules that are used to determine who is the better team at that moment. I don't think that a team that attacks the whole game, dominates possession and all that but couldn't score if the match went on for three days is better than their opponents that defend the whole match and score from a single counter-attack. Possession, pass completion, shots on and off target... None of that matters, it's only goals that count when determining who is the better team. The best example of that is Croatia vs. Portugal match in this tournament.

[Lucailduca]

13 minutes ago, baxus said:

Unless a team wins because of some huge mistake by the referees or some other factors

Exactly what was on my mind... sometimes "luck" is just a cover up for something else.

I completly agree with your analysis

[mormont]

1 hour ago, baxus said:

And should Portugal win this tournament, they will be considered the same as Greece in 2004 - deserved champions but oh so boring and hard to watch.

Now, that's not fair. Portugal haven't been great, but CRonaldo, Quaresma, Renato Sanches, Joao Mario, Nani, and even William Carvalho have individually played some good stuff at times, certainly easier on the eye than anything the Greece 2004 team served up. 

[baxus]

Just now, Emre Mor-mont said:

Now, that's not fair. Portugal haven't been great, but CRonaldo, Quaresma, Renato Sanches, Joao Mario, Nani, and even William Carvalho have individually played some good stuff at times, certainly easier on the eye than anything the Greece 2004 team served up. 

And exactly because of all those names in their squad, Portugal should be held to a higher standard than Greece whose options were far more limited.

[Jo498]

It was an extremly (un)lucky match. Germany should have led at least 1:0 before the unlucky (but I guess technically justified) penalty, but they did not manage to score. Minutes 15-45 were played almost only in the French half... It was different in the 2nd half but again Germany was fairly unlucky with some shots that narrowly missed and France scored at one of the few clear failures in German defense. Overall they compensated the losses of some key players quite well in the first half.

Germany used to have a tradition of winning despite mediocre performance in a match and/or getting very far in a tournament by luck with weak opponents and one good match among several poor ones. This tradition apparently has ended... But I disagree with what was said above. Losing the semifinals in 06, 10 and 12 was also somewhat unlucky but as far as I remember Germany did not dominate any of these games in the way they dominated the first half last night. E.g. they were fairly clearly controlled (not to say outclassed) by Spain in 2010 world cup semifinal and fully deserved to lose that one.

Right now, some in Germany blame the Italian referee for the pedantic penalty as "revenge" for Italy's loss. Or more generally, that it was not a "fair" win for France.

I think this is stupid, there was no unfairness involved (but if one talks about "deserved" wins by a clearly better team, I agree that France was not the better team, they were more lucky).  The "paths" to the final were also really messed up this time, with Italy having by far the hardest and France having rather weak opponents until last night.

But we should think about reviewing the rules (or their application) for a handball. For me, the point of a penalty is that the offense was gravely unfair (usually denying the opponent an opportunity to score). It feels grossly out of place as a punishment for a handball that was probably not intended and did not thwart a clear scoring opportunity. With the change in pace and strategy that leads to many games with very few goals such a penalty for a trivial offense can really spoil a game for me.

[Iskaral Pust]

I posted earlier in the tournament that Low had failed Germany in the past 2-4 years by failing to develop a post-Klose attack and instead relying on a familiar 6 midfielders who can scrape enough goals from huge amounts of possession, but are no substitute for a real attack.  They became so plodding. 

Portugal were definitely lucky to reach the final, but France had a relatively soft path too.  Wales, Germany and Italy had tougher schedules, with the former two further unlucky with absent players as they went out.  But international tournaments seem to be a competition of maximizing the imperfect.  Unlike top clubs, who can buy all the players they need, national teams each have to manage at least some shortfall in talent or coordination, and luck can play a big role when it's only 6 games to win the trophy.

I hope France takes the prize now.  

[Philokles]

Luck plays a huge role in football, especially in a knockout cup competition when one slip-up can send a side out. Ability determines who will win more often, but on any given day between two relatively even (ie. both made up of professionals) teams there is a great variance of potential outcomes even with the same lineups and tactics. As this is a rather unsatisfactory reason for who won, people like to come up with grand narratives that explain everything when the sample size is simply not large enough to justify it.

It is a little like how some say that because Higuain missed several sitters in major finals, Messi is a worse player for not winning anything with Argentina. Judge him on hundreds of matches across a career rather than three.

[mormont]

1 hour ago, Jo498 said:

Right now, some in Germany blame the Italian referee for the pedantic penalty as "revenge" for Italy's loss. Or more generally, that it was not a "fair" win for France.

I think this is stupid, there was no unfairness involved (but if one talks about "deserved" wins by a clearly better team, I agree that France was not the better team, they were more lucky).  The "paths" to the final were also really messed up this time, with Italy having by far the hardest and France having rather weak opponents until last night.

But we should think about reviewing the rules (or their application) for a handball. For me, the point of a penalty is that the offense was gravely unfair (usually denying the opponent an opportunity to score). It feels grossly out of place as a punishment for a handball that was probably not intended and did not thwart a clear scoring opportunity. With the change in pace and strategy that leads to many games with very few goals such a penalty for a trivial offense can really spoil a game for me.

Sorry, but no. There's no case for reviewing anything on the basis of that penalty last night, which (as a neutral) wasn't pedantic, or unfair, or trivial. That was a clear penalty: the only unusual thing about it was that it was hard to spot. The ref did well and should be praised. 

[Jo498]

You are missing my point. I conceded that it was correct according to the rules. I think the rules are stupid and have either to be changed or to be applied less pedantically. One could probably give 10 penalties in every game if any pushing and grabbing was considered a foul but this is not done. Instead usually only obvious or intended fouls are punished in that fashion. The point of a penalty is that the offender should have seriously disturbed the play of the other team, usually thwarting a good chance to score. I don't know how/why both Schweinsteiger and Boateng were so clumsy but neither obviously killed a scoring chance.

And this really ruined the game for the German team last night. After having had France almost locked up in their own half for almost 30 minutes (without scoring which was of course the main fault!) such a freak thing happens.

This would hardly matter if typical scores today were 6:3 or so like it used to be in the 60s or even later. But with ever fewer goals a penalty becomes a huge game changing thing and should only be for "capital offences".

As always, winning is what counts (and immediately commentators "explain" why it was deserved after all, how could it not be?), but I would feel pretty bad if the roles last night had been exactly reversed. This is just not the way you want to win.

 

[mormont]

No, I get your point. But nothing about that penalty suggests the rules are wrong. You can't allow players to do that in the box. ETA - or elsewhere, either.

[Philokles]

Well, it was neither a deliberate handball, nor was there time to move his hand out the way, nor was Schweinsteiger's arm even in an unnatural position. He was looking for leverage in jumping to contest the header, though he would likely have had to pull back Evra to do so.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

22 hours ago, 3CityApache said:

It was a really horrible tournament for Thomas Mueller. The guy was among the candidates for a top scorer and he didn't score once, not even during the penalties. And it wasn't just bad luck, he really played badly, I was surprised Loew hadn't replaced him after the group stage. It was not a great match, though a good one, and a deserved win for France. Suprisingly my prediction France will win Euro is close to the goal.

Couldn't have happened to a more deserving person. His flopping has angered the Sports Gods!!!

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

So is Antoine Griezmann the new Ham?

[mormont]

59 minutes ago, Horse of Kent said:

Well, it was neither a deliberate handball, nor was there time to move his hand out the way, nor was Schweinsteiger's arm even in an unnatural position. He was looking for leverage in jumping to contest the header, though he would likely have had to pull back Evra to do so.

If your arm is extended out from your body, past your head, towards the ball like that: yes, it is in an unnatural position, which means yes, it is judged to be deliberate and it's a penalty.

Seriously. Identical penalties are given every single week in every league in Europe. People are not judging that decision on the facts, they're judging it on the outcome of the match.

[Corvinus85]

1 hour ago, Jo498 said:

You are missing my point. I conceded that it was correct according to the rules. I think the rules are stupid and have either to be changed or to be applied less pedantically. One could probably give 10 penalties in every game if any pushing and grabbing was considered a foul but this is not done. Instead usually only obvious or intended fouls are punished in that fashion. The point of a penalty is that the offender should have seriously disturbed the play of the other team, usually thwarting a good chance to score. I don't know how/why both Schweinsteiger and Boateng were so clumsy but neither obviously killed a scoring chance.

I agree with Mormont. The replay clearly showed that the ball would have been headed by the French player, I forget who it was, in the direction of the German goal if not for Schweinsteiger's hand.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

So, can we agree that Portugal will suck the life out of another game and will on penalties in the final?

[Lucailduca]

6 hours ago, Iskaral Pust said:

Wales, Germany and Italy had tougher schedules, with the former two further unlucky with absent players as they went out.

LoL? The former two? Italy had literally no midfield: Verratti, Marchisio, De Rossi, Candreva were out (not to mention the useless Montolivo and Motta, but thank god for that!).  Against Germany Parolo played (and I'd say not badly) as playmaker "metodista" for lack of alternatives...

[Criston of House Shapper]

On 8.7.2016 at 2:54 PM, baxus said:

We were definitely watching different games if you say Portugal played better than their opponents in every match of the group stage.

Clearly, we must have. They dominated against Iceland (at least for the first half, after that it was even) and Austria, and played at their very best whenever they were behind against Hungary, showing great character when their backs were against the Wall. They've been defending well, and that's probably boring to watch, but it's by no means bad or ineffective to just suffocate an opponent's attackers. The real problem they've had at times was their lack of efficiency; I've heard somewhere, that they had the most shots on target in the group stage, but obviously didn't score a lot of goals. Whether that's due to bad luck or ineptitude is up to interpretation.

 

On 8.7.2016 at 2:54 PM, baxus said:

Portugal reached the finals and we'll see what they do on Sunday. It's a great result, congratulations to them and may their fans celebrate it as much as they want. But saying getting to the finals proves that Portugal is a great team that outplayed opponents (except Wales) in any single way in this tournament is plain ridiculous.

I didn't say that. I would say Portugal was maybe the 4th-best team at most, behind France, Germany and Italy in whatever order. My point is, that bashing them as the worst team ever to reach the finals or undeserving or some bs is not fair considering their performance. Football is, the way I look at it, 40% luck, 40% mental toughness and 20% actual gameplaying ability. Portugal did pretty well in 80% of that, they did okay in the other 20% and now get bashed because they didn't win 3 group matches that they could've easily won if things went differently, and played a weak match against Poland. France however gets a pass, even though they got lucky to not have 3 draws in their group as well. Their comeback against Ireland is praised, because they showed how they can turn a match around, but Portugal did it 3 times against Hungary and once against Poland and are hated because they played poorly, and everyone forgets that the French were really terrible in that first half against Ireland. I don't think there's a big difference between the two teams, one sucks at scoring goals, the other one has a lack-luster defense. I think the final could be really close and wouldn't be surprised by a Portugal-win. That being said, I give France a better chance.

[Lucailduca]

6 hours ago, Criston of House Shapper said:

They've been defending well, and that's probably boring to watch

That's not why they are boring! You can defend well and have a good transition to the attacking phase like Italy or Germany!

They are awful, and painful to watch becouse most of the time they play horizontally, while football at its best is played vertically.

So far they have met teams that allowed them to keep the ball possesion and play at a slow pace. I was really disappointed by Croatia, they played the Portugal way instead of being aggressive and we have not seen one shoot on target during for 118 minutes.

[Criston of House Shapper]

2 minutes ago, Lucailduca said:

They are awful, and painful to watch becouse most of the time they play horizontally, while football at its best is played vertically.

You're pretty much describing Spain in 2012 and we all know how that turned out.