The Big Euro 2008 Discussion

[magiconenl]

But you wrote about the diving and asking for yellow cards etc, that is normal in mediterranean countries. In my opinion that aspect is very much present in the German competition too.

Oh, I don't follow the Bundesliga. No idea.

But if I look at the current German crop (or the squad of the 2006 World Cup) I can't find a single player that I find annoying, or a cheating, diving c*nt or anything like that. They're a good bunch, who know their strengths and their limitations. Good boys. As boys they're not really different from the Dutch or Swedish squads, for example.

I absolutely hate Cristiano Ronaldo, though. I think he's a complete wanker. And I can't stand Scolari, either.

K.

Well, Ballack has a dive or two on his name already.

Deserved win for germany in my eyes though. Played liked a solid team who wanted to win against 11 players who happened to wear the same shirt.

Final Germany vs. Holland

[Manneken Pis]

Final Germany vs. Holland

I hope you're right but I think it will be Germany vs. Italy.

[The Purple Cow]

" Happy to see Portugal eliminated but very disappointed at the lack of tears from Ronaldo..."

No tears because Cristiano Ronaldo only cares about Cristiano Ronaldo. He has no other loyalties.

[aveslacker]

" Happy to see Portugal eliminated but very disappointed at the lack of tears from Ronaldo..."

No tears because Cristiano Ronaldo only cares about Cristiano Ronaldo. He has no other loyalties.

It's a shame, because: a) underneath all the wankerness, he's a very good player; and b) it's so damn entertaining to watch him cry like a little bitch.

[The Purple Cow]

Ok here's the problem, you build a counter-attacking team, but then you go a goal down, and suddenly the other team doesn't need to attack any more.

[Tom_]

Shitting hell. I was ready to go back to sleep as well. But I can't see where a goal is going to come from in extra time... hopefully I'm wrong.

[ajaxperu]

holland had a terrible defensive play in this game

[carcajou]

You gotta be shitting me... How does Hidding always manage to pull that shit?
South Korea, somehow Australia and now Russia. Turning crappy teams into potential winners, it is so annoying. Also, always the same thing with Holland goddammit you set your expectations so high after a few amazing games and then you're let down from a 40 story building. I'm so sick of it.

[paladinby]

Hiddink completely outplays Van Basten in this game. I think it's his personal win over MVB. And Arshavin is just great.

[carcajou]

Russia is 2008's Greece. Boring as hell and annoyingly successful.

[Van basten]

For fak sake.. i'm so fu*king angry right now

[peter]

Boring as hell? Have you read War and Piece instead of the football game?

[dws]

The Dutch have has always found it very difficult to counter the very slick and technical football played by Slav teams:

Poland 4:1 Nederland qualifier for Euro 1976;

Nederland 1:3 Czechoslovakia 1976 Euro semifinal;

USSR 1:0 Nederland Euro 1988 group match;

Belarus 1:0 Nederland; Euro 1996 qualifier;

Czech Republic 3:1 Nederland Euro 1996 Qualifier;

Croatia 2:1 Nederland World cup 1998 losers final;

Czech Republic 3:2 Nederland Euro 2004.

[dws]

Russia is 2008's Greece. Boring as hell and annoyingly successful.

Russia made Oranje look like Sweden.

[aveslacker]

Russia is 2008's Greece. Boring as hell and annoyingly successful.

Russia made Oranje look like Sweden.

Holland a bit unlucky, but in the end, Russia probably deserved the win. Also, the difference in conditioning in extra time was shocking.

Let's hope Marco learns a lot from this. I will say that I'm more optimistic about him as our coach than I was.

[Manneken Pis]

Russia is 2008's Greece. Boring as hell and annoyingly successful.

Boring???

They were sublime.
They dominated in every department.
They played fast, co-ordinated, attacking, flowing football.

How can you possibly compare them with Greece in '04????

[Kowalczyk]

The Russians were absolutely not boring. They were great.

Holland were the underdogs against Italy and France, and they played wonderfully well. Today, for the first time, they were the favourites - and the engine jammed. Which proves we're not that great after all. Same thing happened to Portugal and Croatia, and it might happen to Spain too, this evening. If Italy eliminate Spain, not a single group winner will have made it to the semi finals. All the 'impressive' group winners (Portugal, Spain, Croatia, Holland) will then be on their way home.

Euro 2008 appears to be the tournament of the 'slow starters'.

That's how it goes, sometimes.

K.

[dws]

the difference in conditioning in extra time was shocking.

Not when you consider that Dutch players have the effects of a full season in their legs ,whereas the Russians are only part of the way into their football year.

Let's hope Marco learns a lot from this. I will say that I'm more optimistic about him as our coach than I was.

Agreed. I've been feeling better about Marco since Oranje changed their way of playing back in February.

[The Purple Cow]

The Russians were just completely brilliant, the best team performance of the tournament so far, it's going to take a very good team to stop them.

The three teams that rested their first team for game three, all lost game four.

[SPL]

Russia were outstanding and worthy winners. Hope they can stop Germany winning again!

[Van der Vaart]

In someway ,I guess ,Boula´s tragedy affected the group .
Even thought we haven´t passed ,It was a great ,exciting match ,both teams playing foward ,looking for the goal every single moment.

Arshavin sublime
Russia great

Best Euro 2008 match ,until this moment.

[carcajou]

The Russians were absolutely not boring. They were great.
K.

I have EVERY right to have my head stuck under the sand after a huge disappointment like that one.

[Monkey Tonk]

The Russians were as expected and Holland played a poor game. It is enticing to think that the Russians made Holland play a poor game, but that isn't necessarily the case. Some days the ball just doesn't bounce your way. Good teams can overcome that. And champions do.

In that light, I was looking for Holland to win the game, on a bad day, because that would have shown their resilience (which I found to be the secret championship ingredient in a tournament like this). I measure resilience by either turning around a deficit, or by coming back strong after a defeat. Mind you, this is a very different way of looking at the game than judging it by its flow and concluding that Russia deserved the win. I'm specifically looking for resilience; the ability to win ugly when things don't go your way.

Holland fell just short on the resilience meter. They did tie the game, and were halfway there. But they needed a break. And they almost got that too... but then the referee changed his mind about the red card. Do I think it was a red card? No. But I've seen so many bad decisions by referees that I find it incredibly ironic that precisely this one call, at this critical juncture, was overturned. What the f*ck was this ref thinking?

Would it have been different against ten Russians? Of course. At the very least it would have been ten against ten...

Russia looked good, and created a boatload of chances in the second half and in extra time. But if you have a chance to look at the game again, look at Ooijer. Study him closely after the Heitinga substitution. He couldn't run anymore. He's going at half speed! Van Basten later mentioned cramp. Almost every chance the Russians got was a direct result of that, including goals 2 and 3.

At one point it looked like De Jong began to correct for Ooijer, but then they went right back to leaving Ooijer out to dry. The Arshavin cross for the second Russian goal, as well as the throw-in into the penalty box to Arshavin for the third goal couldn't have happened with a fit Ooijer. And I counted many more chances where Ooijer stood around like an absolute zombie.

So in the end Holland didn't get the break, and didn't get to develop the resilience. But Oranje were closer than people think. Quite typically, the public and the media only read the scoreline. From one extreme to the other they go. Russia is good, but not as good as they looked against Holland, and Holland was never as good as they looked against Italy and France. Nor are they as clueless as in their final game. This game was about resilience for Holland, not about showcasing.

The tournaments were Holland did develop this quality were 1978, 1988, and to a lesser degree 1998. In both 78 and 88 Holland lost an early game, and later turned a deficit into a win. The 1978 team, while not as good as the 1974 team, came within four inches of the world championship in the last minute of the final. And the 1988 team won it all. Germany and Italy are other examples of teams that develop resilience along the way to championships. Right now we have Germany (early loss), Turkey (comeback wins), and Russia (early loss) still in the mix. Champions almost always show they can overcome hardship, and they become stronger in doing so. Holland loves to play the beautiful game. And the world loves them for it. But what happens when the beautiful game isn't there? Why can't they then become warriors and fight to the death?

In a way they were. They were very close to winning ugly after tying up the game near the end of regulation. But instead of putting their foot down, the air went out of the balloon. Amazing. Didn't the momentum just swing the Oranje way? Suddenly players looked exhausted. Looks to me like Holland ran out of gas prematurely because of the gaping holes that the midfielders had to correct time and again. And who were they correcting for? Ooijer. They had no choice but to sprint back to their own goal line; and ended up hanging in the f*cking net a couple of times. If van Basten knew that Ooijer was cramping why did he leave him out there? Why not move Ooijer up to midfield and De Jong back to defense?

[Kowalczyk]

Great post, Monkey Tonk. And totally agreed.

I've been thinking about the question: why are Italy and Germany the two most successful national teams in European football? Why did they win the highest number of trophies, and why are they so consistently successful compared to major nations such as Spain, England and France, or a smaller 'dark horse' like Holland (small country, but - with a football community of 1 million registered KNVB players - a relatively large football nation compared to other countries of the same size)?

It's not necessarily because Germany and Italy produce the greatest football players, or a football strategy all the other countries are too stupid to understand, or whatever. It can't be that.

I think the reason for the relatively consistent success of these two countries is of a 'cultural' nature, rather than of a 'football' nature. Essentially, the Germans and the Italians are the only two major football countries in Europe that - as peoples - can approach a whole tournament with genuine modesty and focus. In other words: they're the only two peoples who focus on the power of the opposition, rather than on their own power. And their 'house speciality' is to keep doing that - and not lose focus. No matter how many wins they book, or how convincing those wins are; every game is the same for them and they never start to believe in their own publicity. They never feel they're the 'favourites'; they never feel fundamentally superior to anyone.

That also explains why the French, the English and the Dutch are not nearly as consistent and have a fascinating conjuncture of success and failure. The reason is arrogance. I'm not even talking about blatant, shameless, 'open' arrogance here: the Oranje boys are not arrogant assholes or something, they're very nice and friendly chaps, I'm sure. It's an almost subconscious, deeply rooted form of 'cultural' arrogance. Example: the Dutch at Euro 2008. They were the underdogs against Italy and France and they performed fantastically well. Germans and Italians are capable of carrying on with the same spirit. But the Dutch...? Against the Russians they felt like they were the favourites, and it went wrong. So, why did they feel they were the favourites in the first place? Answer: because they're Dutch. It's the soul of the Dutch people and they can't help themselves.

The French, English and Dutch are simply incapable of being genuinely modest. They don't even know what it is. The standard phrase of a Dutch football player before a game is: "They're a very good side, so we mustn't underestimate them." Which sounds modest, but it is - in fact - arrogant. I mean: by saying you shouldn't underestimate your opponent, you're already underestimating him. Underestimation is only possible if - deep down - you feel superior. And that's what French, English and Dutch do. All the time. Always. They can't help it. And in doing so, they always happily (and naively) accept the role of favourites, and they voluntarily invite everybody to regard them as 'the team to beat'. They just can't shut up, work in silence and sneak to the final. The only way they know is the "we are the boys in orange and we're gonna win the cup" kind of way.

When Holland lose, the players will come up with all kinds of explanations: we didn't play well, we wasted too many chances, we made 'individual mistakes', we walked into their trap, etc. In extreme cases they might admit: "They were the better side... on the day." A Dutch player will never say: "We knew that they have more talent and are essentially a better football team, so we knew we could only win if we'd have an extremely good day, and they'd have a relatively bad one. Well, that wasn't the case. We tried, but it didn't work out."

A Dutchman just can't look at the world that way, neither in football nor in any other field. Dutchies absolutely never think they're the ugly ducklings of the world. Inferiority is not an option. That's why Holland, England and France will always run the risk of accidentally shooting themselves in the foot. More so than Germany and Italy, anyway, and that's why the 'succes rate' of those countries will always be higher: they're major countries, so there's normally enough talent for a proper team. But apart from that (and what really makes the difference) is that Germany and Italy know how to make sure they won't knock themselves out of the tournament. They never seem to play against themselves. The fact that English and Dutch do play against themselves after two or three good results is culturally inevitable, it seems.

K.

[Monkey Tonk]

The spirit you refer to has almost become like a mantra in American sports among championship contenders: "One game at a time." Question to a New England Patriot about going unbeaten. Answer: "We don't think about that. It's just one game at a time." Interview with a San Antonio Spur about a playoff loss. "It's gone. We're taking it one game at a time." And so on. And these teams are the ones that are consistently focused. The Dutch definitely have not mastered this simple, but difficult art.

As to paying compliments to the other guys. The Russians did foul better.

This is a rare thing to admit for a Dutchie. The reason is simple. Holland likes to play the beautiful game. The great Dutch teams attack with flowing one-touch soccer and majestic moves along the wings, while the world cheers them on. If you watch the clouds closely, even the gods are glued to the spectacle.

But... when the ball is lost, and the team is vulnerable to a counter attack, there is, more often than not, a quick foul. Not a hard or dirty foul, but a quick one that could easily pass for unintentional. That's the flip side of 'total soccer'. I'm so used to this that it is almost shocking to realize that the other team is better at fouling. The Russians were better at it. That's one reason why Holland could never catch them by surprise. Not once, in the entire game, did Holland have a numerical advantage on offense. The only Dutch danger came from set plays, with Van Der Vaart dropping balls masterfully between the defense and the goalie, and even there the Russians performed admirably in the small foul department (although this type is practiced by all teams).