WC #18 - How does it Compare?

[NC]

Could this be considered one of the worst World Cups ever, when compared to some of the previous compeitions.  Looking back and comparing individual ability ... is it true that quality of the individual talent in this WC has been substandard.  The shooting for example seems to have been at a very low standard, when compared to WC that featured Pele, Garrincha, Cubillas, Kempes, Maradona and others over the past 17WCups.  Should England and Argentina, for example, rely more on their young talent (e.g. Walcott & Messi)  The WC normally is the place when young talent would annunce their arrival, that did not seem to be the case during this WC?

[saga pinto]

Somewhat in agreement,but look closely and you'll see that fifas suttle changes have altered the games flow for e.g. the refereeing up for debate,offside rules up for debate,and every world cup they complain about the ball,but this time I think they've a ligit reason,more than ever have I seen balls going over the bar than in any other world cup,so there's more to it that meets the eye..............   

[Observer]

WC 1990 and 1994 were two poor WC as well, the overall standard was low and the quality of good games limited to a couple. The 1990 WC ended with one team in the final after scoring only 3 goals all tournament, men sent off and won on a penalty. 1994 was the first final to go the PK's and what a boring final it was.

The extreme heat in 94 ment that games were played at walking pace. And 1990 was a WC I remember clearly many fans complained about the lack of excitement. Thank God for Cameroon and in particular Roger Milla.

[jr sams]

Still a good showing for the World Cup:
- 5 first time teams including the one and only soca warriors
- The supposed "big" teams make it to the Knock Stage
- Fast paced exciting teams like Ghana and Ivory Coast
- Underdogs that neutrals favour (TnT)
- Exciting clashes like Germany vs. Italy
- Classis ecounters rekindled - France vs. Brazil, Germany vs. Argentina
- 6 of the 7 previous winners in the quarters
- Brilliant goals both indivudually and team build up
- Controversy (france disallowed goal against South Korea)

I say it had everything that previous cups had and maybe some new things.

[grskywalker]

I thoroughly enjoyed the World Cup and looking forward to the final Sunday. I wish it was not every 4 years though. So many great players and teams ah well

[NC]

While most of the points are vlid generally, we have seen a WC where unfit players participate, something unheard of in the day of Pele.  Who by the way did not participate in the 74 WC because he was not up to doing the work required to get fit ... which id fair.  Football is an outdoor game and the weather conditions have been similar over the past 17 Worl Cups ... why is it an excuse for players not performing?  In past cups Individual talent has been exceptional, especially in free kicks etc ... today we have players such as Ballck, Lampard, Ronaldinho, Henry, to name a few having to effect on big games ... unheard of during the times of Maradona, Garrincha, Falcao.  Pele came on the scene at 17, why did we not see Leo Messi and others have a bigger influence?

[Blue]

WC 1990 and 1994 were two poor WC as well, the overall standard was low and the quality of good games limited to a couple. The 1990 WC ended with one team in the final after scoring only 3 goals all tournament, men sent off and won on a penalty. 1994 was the first final to go the PK's and what a boring final it was.

The extreme heat in 94 ment that games were played at walking pace. And 1990 was a WC I remember clearly many fans complained about the lack of excitement. Thank God for Cameroon and in particular Roger Milla.

Sorry, which team was that?

As I recall (and I was only 8 at the time, so u should know dis better dan me) Germany scored 10 goals in the first round alone, and Argentina scored 5 en route to the finals. I'm guessing you meant the Argies, but no need to make up stats.  

[andre samuel]

Nothing was wrong with this world cup.

I think the days for fast and free flowing football between footballing powers are gone because the stakes are just too high to take that chance.

Defences are just too strong now, and the emphasis on not conceeding a goal rather than scoring one is making games appear to be boring.

The only team in the second round that played free flowing football was ghana, and they only did this because they had nothing to lose!!

to hear of a big team like England, playing against a soccer minow like Ecuador with one striker says enough.

Also, to see france play Henry up front by himself and play both makelele and vierra makes it worse.  It worked for France, only because of the brilliance of Zidane.  But in the early rounds, they were outplayed by switzerland and were held by South Korea.

Another factor is the amount of football being played these days, and the whole brazilian team can atest to that!!

The standard of play was not bad, but probably the hype leading up to the world cup was a bit too much!!

ah love it!!

[kicker]

T&T was in it....so it's the best WC so far !!!!

[AB.Trini]

NC,
Barring everything else isn't this world cup a classic and most memorable for the sheer fact that TNT was on the World Stage?

Need you say anything more!!!!!

[ANC2]

WC 1990 and 1994 were two poor WC as well, the overall standard was low and the quality of good games limited to a couple. The 1990 WC ended with one team in the final after scoring only 3 goals all tournament, men sent off and won on a penalty. 1994 was the first final to go the PK's and what a boring final it was.

The extreme heat in 94 ment that games were played at walking pace. And 1990 was a WC I remember clearly many fans complained about the lack of excitement. Thank God for Cameroon and in particular Roger Milla.

Sorry, which team was that?



As I recall (and I was only 8 at the time, so u should know dis better dan me) Germany scored 10 goals in the first round alone, and Argentina scored 5 en route to the finals. I'm guessing you meant the Argies, but no need to make up stats.  

I don't think the man laying out stats and googling the dam WC. But as a person who went to that WC in 1990. It was a sleeper. I remember Argentina advancing in the group stage, since I saw two of their games.  I think on 3 goals to the next round. Then beating Brazil 1-0, then Penalties vs I believe Yugo, then they scored 1 tied and they won on penalties again (Italy). So you right ok you read up  on the stats the score 5. the point is they went to a WC final on the back of scoring a wopping 5 goals. Then germany start hot like pepper scoring 7 first rounds, beat Holland 2-1 in  great game, then boil down.  For me the worst WC in history

[NC]

Nothing was wrong with this world cup.

I think the days for fast and free flowing football between footballing powers are gone because the stakes are just too high to take that chance.

Defences are just too strong now, and the emphasis on not conceeding a goal rather than scoring one is making games appear to be boring.

The only team in the second round that played free flowing football was ghana, and they only did this because they had nothing to lose!!

to hear of a big team like England, playing against a soccer minow like Ecuador with one striker says enough.

Also, to see france play Henry up front by himself and play both makelele and vierra makes it worse. It worked for France, only because of the brilliance of Zidane. But in the early rounds, they were outplayed by switzerland and were held by South Korea.

Another factor is the amount of football being played these days, and the whole brazilian team can atest to that!!

The standard of play was not bad, but probably the hype leading up to the world cup was a bit too much!!

ah love it!!

I would agree that a lot more football is being played ... but no one is complaining when they receive 28Million a year for playing the game.  Balls are being re-engineered to benefit attacking players, yet the ball is constantly sent into the stand ... three penalties missed by players being discussed as being among the best in the world (not saying that they aren't).  Maybe FIFA need to consider cancelling some tournaments and working with leagues to shorten leagues during the WC year?  That means less money though.

I agree that our prticipation in this WC makes it memorable ... not sure that makes it a classic though!

[capodetutticapi]

de 1986 wc in mexico is my all time favorite.

[Lower St. John]

The defensive style of football and playing for the counter does take away a little from the World Cup experience.  Not to mention hearing a referees name being called more than Big Name players like Ronaldinho or Lampard sucks big time.  But as Kicker say this was the best World Cup for me having seen the Red, White & Black grace the World Football Stage in a respectable manner.

Blessings

[palos]

Well.....me eh see WC's de fuss 9 World Cups as I start watchin WC in 74.  De others is jes highlights and yuh cyah tell nutting from highlights.

So to say is one a de worst ever is kinda misleadin in my opinion.

If yuh say one a de worst in de past 5 WC's...maybe yuh might have a point.

But even den...what constitutes a "good world cup"?

Because it defensive mean it eh good?  Suppose dey roll out stats to say dat dis was one a de highest scoring world cups ever?  Dat go change people mind?  De more goals de better de World Cup?

I doh necessarily agree.

[weary1969]

First WC of memory 78. I luv 94 only because Brazil won although it was on PK's

I enjoyed 02 because Brazil won and after the Ronaldo mystery of 98.

2006 I was there because of the soca warriors so 2006 will forever be my best WC. If I go to every WC that TNT qualifies after this it will neva compare to when I sang the anthem although it was the shortened one.

[Grande]

this is a good thread to guess men age

[football king]

this been a good cup some exciting players, good performances from the so called weak teams tt angola, ghana.
90 wc was the absolute worst i have ever seen.
the officiating in this 1 is downright horrible though. portugal vs holland sum it up.

[palos]

this is a good thread to guess men age

You callin weary1969 a man?

[weary1969]

If he did he would be soooooooo wrong.

[takenoprisoners]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_FIFA_World_Cup
To refresh some memories checkout the link.
1970 World cup was the best for me. Bekenbauer strutting around like a peacock with his broken arm in a sling and making all his passes with one foot. He was sweet to watch he carried a depleted German side on his back.
Jaizinho streaking down the right side to the corner flag,crossing to Pele on the six yard box, Gordon Banks caught at first post by the speed of the cross, somehow manages to dive and punch Pele's perfectly placed header at the last post, inches off the ground , up and over the bar.
Where WC #18 ranks? Creativity suffering. In 1970 they played 4-2-4.

[NC]

http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/06/en/060707/1/8mu1.html ... it is always good to hear what the "experts have to say"

[Observer]

yes Boss I was not trying to be accurate, just get a point over. Its like say "de man make a ton ah bad passes" Anyway?


WC's from boyhood are usually rememberd as exciting. WC 70 was special because so many greats were involved. Brazil were an unbelievable team but they had some close calls especially their opening games (mainly the Checz'z), the game against Uruguay and England, but dam that team had style. Plus pele did things people neve thought of in a WC. Trying to beat the Checz keeper from half line with a lob, the return volley on the Uruguay keeper from his kick out and of course the dummy around the keeper.
Germany were deadly and so were Italy and defending champions England. But here I can cheat because I saw the games in full a number of times recently

WC 78 was very exciting in my memory full of controversy, good football, upsets and new players we had heard of but seldom saw play. I think it was the first WC we got almost every game. Many memorable games especially, France vs Argentina, imagine in dem days is only one ball and that game the ball stayed in play for something like 72 minutes. When one considers the average is somewhere around 56 min. that was incredible. I think later broken by the France vs Brazil game in 86 (76 min)

Overall most touranments  have their duds and depend on what you like in football. Anticipation and the build up usually adds to the game itself and WC has no rival in this. More recently a friend of mine said he had an unbelievable memory of Brazil vs Russia 1982. I said the game was not a good one but had great goals. Obviously in true Trini styl we argue. then I sent him the game. Ah well!

[Latent]

I do not think this World Cup was the worst ever when compared to others. However, compared to the 2002 World Cup, I think I enjoyed that more. This World Cup saw the pendulum swinging back to the traditional football powers.

Yes Ukraine, Ghana and Trinidad and Tobago provided a few upsets but it does not compare to 2002 when USA, South Korea, Japan and Senegal provided the rather huge upsets in that tournamnet. By the quarterfinals of this tournament, there were the majority of European traditional powers and only the two South American powers left.

This World Cup represented a move back to the old guard, at least for now.