Diego: Bundesliga >> Serie A

[shayan20]

^
Yeah AcMilan playing at a fast pace but pretty sad that the top of the table team Chievo is so mediocre in attack, so many cheap turnovers even when they're not under any pressure.
oh my bad Chievo is actually 4th now in the table under AcMilan but still.

[P.Nima]

Zlatan Ibrahimovic is such a class-player, waay to underrated. 2 assists from him so far.
Zlatan - Pato - Ronaldinho is a perfect match. Theres no room for Robinho

[shayan20]

Good assists from Ibra but he screwed couple of decent chances.
That was such a fail chip lol

[JaanevarAjeeb]

^ yup!

and there is a big difference with playing GOOD defense rather than playing DEFENSIVELY like new zealand and north korea.

In the course of history, there were many instances (usually when faced with superior opposition) that Italy NT played defensively. Examples: Euro 2000 against Holland, USA 1994 against Brazil, etc. so it's not like Italy never played defensively..

[EKBATAN]

In the course of history, there were many instances (usually when faced with superior opposition) that Italy NT played defensively. Examples: Euro 2000 against Holland, USA 1994 against Brazil, etc. so it's not like Italy never played defensively..

u mean when ur down 2 men and playing in a stadium full of orange fans ur supposed to play attacking football?


94 final they still had 3 great chances and baggio playing with knee injury against one of the best brazilian sides ever, brazil didnt do much better that game either.


still they never play 11 man defense, they play GOOD defense

[EKBATAN]

here's the italy - holland game you LOVE to bring up every time, i dont see many attacks from the dutch, only one time they hit the post, 2 penalties they didnt convert and still best chance of game came from italy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLM1tglkb1M

[JaanevarAjeeb]

here's the italy - holland game you LOVE to bring up every time, i dont see many attacks from the dutch, only one time they hit the post, 2 penalties they didnt convert and still best chance of game came from italy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLM1tglkb1M

Usually, when a team puts that amount of pressure on another team (Italy), it leads to yellow and red cards. That's usually a sign that the other team is pressing hard. If you remember, Holland thrashed a fairly strong Yugo side (the one we lost to in the WC with some changes) 6-1 in the group. This wasn't just a fluke.

I don't know in which planet a hit against the bar and two penalties during regulation, do not constitute big chances, while Italy's does... Also, you don't need to repeatedly show me the highlight reels- I've seen the game and highlights many, many times. Maybe, we can ask an unbiased fan what they think. If it wasn't for Toldo, who is arguably one of the greatest ever GKs, Italy would have gone down in flames- it's not everyday that a GK saves 3 PK's. Almost always, both teams usually have their chances in a football match, with one converting on its chances, while the other rues its misses. Having clear-cut chances doesn't mean the two teams have the same strength. We had big chances against Mexico and Portugal, as well as against Germany and Yugoslavia in the prior WC. Does this mean we were equal or as strong???

As for the Brazil-Italy match, Italy played on their side of the field for 85% of the time, with occasional counter-attacks initiated by Franco Baresi, who did his best in that game. Not many players ran up to support him, however, because they were more worried about their own goal. Also, remember Pagliuca kissing the bar- the Romario strike was the best chance of that game.

Also, I don't think you can blame New Zealand and North Korea for playing the way they did.. You're excusing Italy for one injured player- what about these teams who have no one known in their roster- is it fair to call them out for how they play? New Zealand still scored on Italy, and North Korea almost pulled off a 2-2 against Brazil in the WC, so I'm not sure if the criticism against them is even justified.. You can't do those things playing 11 man defense..

[EKBATAN]

Usually, when a team puts that amount of pressure on another team (Italy), it leads to yellow and red cards. That's usually a sign that the other team is pressing hard. If you remember, Holland thrashed a fairly strong Yugo side (the one we lost to in the WC with some changes) 6-1 in the group. This wasn't just a fluke.

I don't know in which planet a hit against the bar and two penalties during regulation, do not constitute big chances, while Italy's does... Also, you don't need to repeatedly show me the highlight reels- I've seen the game and highlights many, many times. Maybe, we can ask an unbiased fan what they think. If it wasn't for Toldo, who is arguably one of the greatest ever GKs, Italy would have gone down in flames- it's not everyday that a GK saves 3 PK's. Almost always, both teams usually have their chances in a football match, with one converting on its chances, while the other rues its misses. Having clear-cut chances doesn't mean the two teams have the same strength. We had big chances against Mexico and Portugal, as well as against Germany and Yugoslavia in the prior WC. Does this mean we were equal or as strong???

As for the Brazil-Italy match, Italy played on their side of the field for 85% of the time, with occasional counter-attacks initiated by Franco Baresi, who did his best in that game. Not many players ran up to support him, however, because they were more worried about their own goal. Also, remember Pagliuca kissing the bar- the Romario strike was the best chance of that game.

Also, I don't think you can blame New Zealand and North Korea for playing the way they did.. You're excusing Italy for one injured player- what about these teams who have no one known in their roster- is it fair to call them out for how they play? New Zealand still scored on Italy, and North Korea almost pulled off a 2-2 against Brazil in the WC, so I'm not sure if the criticism against them is even justified.. You can't do those things playing 11 man defense..

im responding according to your claims, then u come back and explain something more which goes back to what we were saying in the first place, so i dont know why u keep going in circles

italy got red carded and they did what they had to do in that game giving the circumstances. u cant tell me holland or brazil would've played all out attacking football if they went down 2 men. When ur in sensitive matches against a football giant u dont do stupid shit like that. Sure in some league games or once in a while there are teams who win with a man down but thats rare AND there isnt high stakes like a world cup or euro competition knock out round.


italy doesnt play 11 man defense, they play GOOD defense which is not what teams like new zealand or n. korea do, thats the point im trying to make. But u like to make it sound like italy plays like those teams, they dont and these highlights speak for itself.


if u watch the highlights u can tell me how many real chances holland had? only one really, the red cards and penalties were correct but they were defensive mistakes, its not like they were clear cut chances, again watch the highlights and not just ignore what i said. If there were more dangerous chances, the highlights would've shown it so obviously beside the one time they hit the post there werent any other chances.


THERE SHOULDN'T BE A PENALTY FOR SUCCESS....thats the bottom line many soccer fans dont understand. Toldo saving penalties should be praised not used as an excuse against his team.

[JaanevarAjeeb]

italy doesnt play 11 man defense, they play GOOD defense which is not what teams like new zealand or n. korea do, thats the point im trying to make. But u like to make it sound like italy plays like those teams, they dont and these highlights speak for itself.

[/QUOTE]

Circular reasoning is your favorite method of defense, not mine. I thought you were about watching THE WHOLE GAME vs. HIGHLIGHTS..., weren't u?? Isn't that the argument you bring up almost all the time- people don't watch the full game and judge??? If you watched the Full match of those games, Holland was pressing most of the match, with Italy relying on counters. Which is exactly what teams like NZ, NK, and Bahrain need to do, to have a shot at winning.. You can't measure a team by it's chances ALONE or by possession ALONE or even by goals ALONE, it's a cumulative effect. Aside from the lack of goals, PK save, and PK miss by Kluivert, Holland was pressing most of the match, which resulted in the yellow and red cards that you mentioned- Italy's defensive play led to them locking down even more because of fewer players.. Holland looked more dangerous in offense. Just because Italy had one chance doesn't refute the argument that Italy played defensively for most of the match, whatsoever..

Again, how can New Zealand and North Korea have achieved what they did, with an 11 man defense...?? You never defended your claim. Again, New Zealand finished 3rd ahead of Italy in the Group Stage. Also, North Korea played a very close match against Brazil (something we couldn't do) in the WC, achieving 2-1 and almost equalizing at the end. You CANNOT achieve this by playing 11 man defense, it's not possible.

[EKBATAN]

Circular reasoning is your favorite method of defense, not mine. I thought you were about watching THE WHOLE GAME vs. HIGHLIGHTS..., weren't u?? Isn't that the argument you bring up almost all the time- people don't watch the full game and judge??? If you watched the Full match of those games, Holland was pressing most of the match, with Italy relying on counters. Which is exactly what teams like NZ, NK, and Bahrain need to do, to have a shot at winning.. You can't measure a team by it's chances ALONE or by possession ALONE or even by goals ALONE, it's a cumulative effect. Aside from the lack of goals, PK save, and PK miss by Kluivert, Holland was pressing most of the match, which resulted in the yellow and red cards that you mentioned- Italy's defensive play led to them locking down even more because of fewer players.. Holland looked more dangerous in offense. Just because Italy had one chance doesn't refute the argument that Italy played defensively for most of the match, whatsoever..

i never said italy wasnt under pressure, holland was at home and u can see how much orange was in the stadium. They had the upper hand, if that game was on neutral ground then it'll be different. The red cards also came in first half so it forced them to play like that for the rest of the match. so i dont know how things would've turned out if they werent red carded. And quite honestly they were really dumb red cards too like zambrotta trippin someone for passing him, he coulda let it slide cuz there was another defender behind him so it wasnt like the last man. all in all i dont know why its hard for u to agree to a simple fact that when a team goes down a man or two they are forced to play a different game than what they're used to. Especially when there's something huge on the line.


and i like how u pick certain games, like one in each decade to talk about history
how bout euro 08 where italy kept pressing holland and they scored all their goals off of counter attacks? not to mention how the first goal italy had an injured player outside the field and instead of the dutch players kicking the ball out like FAIR PLAY suggests and wait for him to recover or the ref to tell him to leave the field, they continued the attack which resulted in van nisterlooy being all alone in off side position, but it didnt count as off side cuz a player was out. So technically that was ok but as u suggest with your FAIR PLAY stuff then holland should've been fair enough not to take advantage like that. Obviously italy's defense was confused on that play cuz they had a player out. For some reason its ok when its done to italy but if italy does it to other teams its cheating.

Again, how can New Zealand and North Korea have achieved what they did, with an 11 man defense...?? You never defended your claim. Again, New Zealand finished 3rd ahead of Italy in the Group Stage. Also, North Korea played a very close match against Brazil (something we couldn't do) in the WC, achieving 2-1 and almost equalizing at the end. You CANNOT achieve this by playing 11 man defense, it's not possible.

and what did they achieve? results? ok sure but did ANY of their players catch the eyes of scouts? i dont think so. I personally wouldnt be happy if our team got those results in that fashion. i dont like it when any team plays like that, i wouldnt be a fan of italy if they played like that and obviously they wouldnt achieve all the records that they have if they just played 11 man defense, everything is not black and white.

[JaanevarAjeeb]

i never said italy wasnt under pressure, holland was at home and u can see how much orange was in the stadium. They had the upper hand, if that game was on neutral ground then it'll be different. The red cards also came in first half so it forced them to play like that for the rest of the match. so i dont know how things would've turned out if they werent red carded. And quite honestly they were really dumb red cards too like zambrotta trippin someone for passing him, he coulda let it slide cuz there was another defender behind him so it wasnt like the last man. all in all i dont know why its hard for u to agree to a simple fact that when a team goes down a man or two they are forced to play a different game than what they're used to. Especially when there's something huge on the line.
and i like how u pick certain games, like one in each decade to talk about history
how bout euro 08 where italy kept pressing holland and they scored all their goals off of counter attacks? not to mention how the first goal italy had an injured player outside the field and instead of the dutch players kicking the ball out like FAIR PLAY suggests and wait for him to recover or the ref to tell him to leave the field, they continued the attack which resulted in van nisterlooy being all alone in off side position, but it didnt count as off side cuz a player was out. So technically that was ok but as u suggest with your FAIR PLAY stuff then holland should've been fair enough not to take advantage like that. Obviously italy's defense was confused on that play cuz they had a player out. For some reason its ok when its done to italy but if italy does it to other teams its cheating.
and what did they achieve? results? ok sure but did ANY of their players catch the eyes of scouts? i dont think so. I personally wouldnt be happy if our team got those results in that fashion. i dont like it when any team plays like that, i wouldnt be a fan of italy if they played like that and obviously they wouldnt achieve all the records that they have if they just played 11 man defense, everything is not black and white.

LOOOL, you're using a game in which Italy got shut-out 3-0 as an argument against Holland? You've got to be kidding me. The funniest part is assuming that the Dutch players attacking clearly saw the player outside the field, and intentionally (because as we all know the Italians are ANGELS) resumed play.. That's pure bs. How can you tell me that Italy was about fair play, and with certainty would have kicked the ball out (if the tables were turned)??? That was a LEGAL goal, no if's and but's about it, it's a goal according to the FIFA rule book. Also, what about the 2nd and 3rd goals?

So, now a counter-attack goal is not legit (but a PK win is)?? Because that's how the Dutch scored against Italy in '08?? First of all, the athleticism, speed, stamina, passing ability, positioning, strength, and killer instinct that is required of that type of counter-attack (from literally the goal mouth of the Dutch goal all the way to the Italian goal) is a display of Dutch Total Football- just like how Barcelona scores half of the time against a locked down opposition. But, that's Barcelona so it's ok??? Unlike you, I gave credit to Toldo and Franco Baresi- it's not like I'm painting a black and white picture. I gave credit to Toldo for those incredible saves.... but, you're not willing to give Holland credit for the way they played and won. Just call ME biased

[EKBATAN]

LOOOL, you're using a game in which Italy got shut-out 3-0 as an argument against Holland? You've got to be kidding me. The funniest part is assuming that the Dutch players attacking clearly saw the player outside the field, and intentionally (because as we all know the Italians are ANGELS) resumed play.. That's pure bs. How can you tell me that Italy was about fair play, and with certainty would have kicked the ball out (if the tables were turned)??? That was a LEGAL goal, no if's and but's about it, it's a goal according to the FIFA rule book. Also, what about the 2nd and 3rd goals?

So, now a counter-attack goal is not legit (but a PK win is)?? Because that's how the Dutch scored against Italy in '08?? First of all, the athleticism, speed, stamina, passing ability, positioning, strength, and killer instinct that is required of that type of counter-attack (from literally the goal mouth of the Dutch goal all the way to the Italian goal) is a display of Dutch Total Football- just like how Barcelona scores half of the time against a locked down opposition. But, that's Barcelona so it's ok??? Unlike you, I gave credit to Toldo and Franco Baresi- it's not like I'm painting a black and white picture. I gave credit to Toldo for those incredible saves.... but, you're not willing to give Holland credit for the way they played and won. Just call ME biased

lol u just showed how u go in circles in arguments, theres no sense in reasoning with u logically

u complained about italy counter attack and i gave u example of holland counter attack. u complained about italy defense and i showed u the difference between 11 man defense and GOOD defense. again u dont seem to read posts and comprehend cuz ur so worried about writting your own response that u forget to read what i wrote. I NEVER took away from holland and what a great team they are, i was just proving u wrong about how u judge italy. i showed u that ur arguments can go both ways, u cant use them to ur advantage whenever its convenient.

[JaanevarAjeeb]

lol u just showed how u go in circles in arguments, theres no sense in reasoning with u logically
u complained about italy counter attack and i gave u example of holland counter attack. u complained about italy defense and i showed u the difference between 11 man defense and GOOD defense. again u dont seem to read posts and comprehend cuz ur so worried about writting your own response that u forget to read what i wrote. I NEVER took away from holland and what a great team they are, i was just proving u wrong about how u judge italy. i showed u that ur arguments can go both ways, u cant use them to ur advantage whenever its convenient.

But Holland doesn't play defensively... I think you are mixing up different posts/subjects.. When talking about Inter, I broke down their play- also their counter-attack usually begins in the mid-field, not all the way from the back. Inter is a club team, with mostly foreigners and foreign management. Also, notice that Sneijder plays for both Inter and Holland, and he usually initiates the counter..

I was giving examples of Italian defensive play- you simply justified the Holland game because of the red cards and because the game was in Holland.
As far as Italy NT, I never used the fact that they play counter-attacks against them- just like I never used it against NZ or NK. I just said that they play defensively. In my definition DEFENSIVELY does not necessarily equate to 11 MAN DEFENSE. My point is, most teams that you even mentioned DON'T play 11 man defense, because doing so will not lead to any favorable results. Whether players from the team got scouted has NOTHING to do with their overall performance or achievement. Like you said, we would jump for the moon if we achieved the 2-1 against Brazil or 3rd place finish ahead of the former champions. Defensive means emphasizing defense over offense in priority...it's not necessarily an insult or a bad thing..

[EKBATAN]

But Holland doesn't play defensively... I think you are mixing up different posts/subjects.. When talking about Inter, I broke down their play- also their counter-attack usually begins in the mid-field, not all the way from the back. Inter is a club team, with mostly foreigners and foreign management. Also, notice that Sneijder plays for both Inter and Holland, and he usually initiates the counter..

I was giving examples of Italian defensive play- you simply justified the Holland game because of the red cards and because the game was in Holland.
As far as Italy NT, I never used the fact that they play counter-attacks against them- just like I never used it against NZ or NK. I just said that they play defensively. In my definition DEFENSIVELY does not necessarily equate to 11 MAN DEFENSE. My point is, most teams that you even mentioned DON'T play 11 man defense, because doing so will not lead to any favorable results. Whether players from the team got scouted has NOTHING to do with their overall performance or achievement. Like you said, we would jump for the moon if we achieved the 2-1 against Brazil or 3rd place finish ahead of the former champions. Defensive means emphasizing defense over offense in priority...it's not necessarily an insult or a bad thing..

ok i can respect your opinion, i guess we got mixed up in different arguments. No pun intended.

All in all, like i said earlier in the thread, its a matter of perspective and which team or players u like to follow. When watching football u have to be somewhat of a fan of the team you're watching otherwise yes it can get very boring. No game in the world is 90 min of back and forth, players get tired and there is only a half time for breaks...so a team must prepare for a 90 min game unlike our team melli who gives it their all in first half and run out of gas in 2nd half. and sometimes certain teams just dont gel quick enough to play the way they want to. I use italy NT as an example because they havent been able to gel since after 2006 WC, first donadoni completely changed the team around and was stubborn on using different formation and line up every single game, hence the failure of 2008 euro...then they fired him and brought old lippi who had favoritism and was stubborn to use old players instead of bringing new younger blood, hence the failure of WC. So thats why i say things arent always black and white, just cuz a team or league goes thru tough times it doesnt mean they've lost it or its over for them, no it means they are in recovery period and a country like italy always bounces back to the top. What i dont like is when people use certain games or instances in history where they failed or didnt live up to expectation and that becomes their measuring stick every single time italy comes up. when they fail to praise and give respect when its due and when they do bounce back to the top. same goes for any other country, i can respect dutch and german football cuz of their history and even if they do bad.