World Cup View

Netherlands, and England

I remember before the start of the world cup i fancy netherlands to reach at least the quarters. And I always thought they were good enough. My prediction was that they will only crash out in the Semis if they meet Brazil (and if Brazil to top its group). Why will they go out to Brazil? Because Brazil are the more efficient team. And if they beat Brazil, the chances of them reaching finals is extremely strong. But they would most likely crash out on penalties (Although they're team has an abundance of penalty takers, Netherlands don't do well in penalties - for penalty-shoot outs history plays a part).
And another reason why they would go far in the world cup, is that the chances of them meeting Germany is very weak unless one of these teams come second in their respective groups. I still do not doubt Germany will top the group. The Dutch never win the Germans.

Why Netherlands? The doubts most people have is that they have a lack of quality in their defenders. I never rated their defence too highly, but I never thought they're the worst. Before the world cup I can easily come up with teams with worse defenders than the Dutch - England, Argentina, Mexico, African teams, Asian teams. And better defences - Brazil, USA, Greece, Italy, Germany. But now the teams with better defences - Uruguay, Brazil, Italy, Switzerland (provided Senderos doesn't play), USA.

I never rated Spain's defence highly. People normally ask me who does the Dutch have? who does the Spanish have? But for national teams, it's not the name that counts but the team. Spain have Pique, Puyol, Ramos and Capdevilla. Individually they are among the best in the world. And so does the Englsih. But as national teams, I never rated them both highly. The English have conceded A LOT during qualifying. And the Spanish almost never kept a clean sheet regardless of who the opposition is.

But to be honest, I never thought the Dutch team are better than the Spanish. And I still don't.

One reason for this Dutch team's success is their 4-2-3-1 formation. And I rate them highly because Van Persie is their striker. On direct comparison Van Persie loses out to Messi, Rooney, Robinho, Villa, Torres, Forlan etc. But the reason why Van Persie is so important is because he fits in the system well. He is a more 'complete' footballer than the rest. No, he can't defend for shit. But he slots into midfield or the wings perfectly, holds up the ball, and allows the midfield trio to come in to support. It's the fluidity of Netherland's front 3 or front 4 that makes it work. Van persie can drift to the either side of the flanks, and is particular effective when cutting inside from the right.

My suggestion earlier that England play 4-2-3-1 is sort of modelled on the Brazil formation and Dutch formation. But more on the Dutch, because arguably Rooney can play the van persie role very well, and the interchangeability of the front 4 (Sneijder, Van der vaart, Van Persie, Kuyt - compared to - Joe Cole, Milner / Glen Johnson, Rooney, Gerrard) is more direct substitute than the Brazil which is arguably more rigid - in terms of position. The difference between the Brazil 4-2-3-1 and the Dutch 4-2-3-1 is the Brazil uses this formation to attack on the counter. But the Dutch 4-2-3-1 's strength is in the interchangeability of the front 4. Sneijder ,VDV, Kuyt can easily become second strikers or drift to the wing, the same can be said for the English.

The Spanish

I will say that from the start, I have never written off the Spanish chances. I still don't actually. But in my initial predictions in the progress chart (twice - the first one wrong). For my wrongly positioned world cup chart I predicted that the Spanish wouldn't reach the finals because they would meet Brazil in the KO stages. The reason why they will go out to Brazil is because Brazil is more efficient and the Spanish do not do well against efficient / defensive teams. And especially that the Brazilians hit teams on the counter very very quick. When I revised my chart and do it the right way, I predicted that the Finals would be Spain vs Brazil. The reason why the Spanish would reach the finals is because they will not meet Brazil or Germany in the KO stages.

The Spanish play the 4-2-3-1 which is effective in its own right. The 4-2-3-1 is supposed to be a fluid formation. It has proved effective for the Spanish, and I believed that this is a formation to be used by the Spanish, but we see from this world cup that the 4-2-3-1 is actually Spain's weakness. Because the lone-striker up front D Villa or Torres. Unlike Rooney or RVP, Villa and Torres are predictable and they only lead the line. Whereas Rooney / RVP can come in deeper, or drift to the wings. The rigidity of Spain's 4-2-3-1 Results in less movement / interchangeability in the final third. And Torres / Villa 's position are fixed in the front. So arguably the interchangeability is between the front 3 of Xavi, Iniesta and Silva. Unlike Netherlands it will be the front 4 of RVP, Kuyt, VDV and Sneijder - and my proposed England formation where the front 4 will be J Cole, Gerrard, Rooney and Milner / Johnson.

Arguably to have the lone striker up front and 3 attacking midfielders supporting him, I think the Spanish will be better off playing Llorente as the lone striker in the Heskey role. Too many crosses in the Switzerland game. By playing Llorente he can head the crosses back to the midfield or hold up play. The rigidity of the lone-striker role in the Spain formation suits Llorente more when they play against far more defensive opposition.

For the first time in my life, and I never thought I'd say this - Spain need fabregas. I always rated Xabi, Xavi, Iniesta as better midfielders than Fabregas. But right now, they need him more. I do not recommend him in the starting 11, but perhaps an impact sub. Their plan B. Its risky starting fabregas because the ones in the starting 11 are better than him. But what fabgregas offers that is different from anyone else is that he plays in the English Premier League. Its ridicilous to say that the EPL is better than any league in this world. And I'm not saying that. The reason why he should come out as a sub is the way teams are playing against Spain (and see Japan against Netherlands)- this is the way lesser EPL teams have been playing against Arsenal - they don't play to win, they play to not lose, because they acknowledge the better team. Teams in EPL play against Arsenal diferently than they would to any other team. They pack their own half, they close down Arsenal's midfield, offering them very little space, and they play very physically and defensively against them . When Barcelona vs Getafe / Real Sociedad its end to end and attacking from both sides. When Arsenal play against Stoke / Bolton / Hull and many other teams - contrary to what everyone think that the English game is fast paced and end-to-end, in these games they don't bother to even attack. I must say Arsenal don't do particularly well in these games, and neither does Fabregas. But at least, Fabregas is not alien to these tactics and at least has played more regularly in these type of games and have every now and then come up on top. Xavi and Inieista's exposure to these games is only in Champions League against Inter / Chelsea. And they fail horribly. The spanish game offers them more space and people don't roughen up the opposition. Fabregas is used to working with very very tight spaces and have 3 of 4 midfielders / defenders closing him down. And on the physical side of things, Fabregas is more used to having opposition players roughening him up compared to the rest of the Spanish team. Against very defensive opponents - Spain's secret weapon is Torres and Fabregas. They are not to be used against everyone, but when the opposition is playing too defensively, these 2 players do well. Note that Aragones actually used Fabgregas in this way in Euro 2008, he came on for Villa in the Italy game I think, and started against Germany in the Final (but he didn't play well and got subbed ).

And Spain - Llorente is your Plan B / Plan C

Brazil

We witnessed something very intersting in Round 1. Brazil faced against a opposition that plays almost the same as them or very defensively.

Brazil's strength lies in their counter. In the South American Qualifying, they're happy to let other teams attack, and hit them on the counter. If you watch highlights of their South American Qualifying goals, its always a retreating opposition from an attack / corner / free kick, and 3 or 4 brazilian players marauding towards goal from the half-way line. For Brazils goals in qualifying, the kind of goals scored are usually 3 or 4 Brazillian players vs 3 Opposition defenders. And no midfield in sight. Brazil soak up pressure and hit on the counter. And that's why Robinho plays so well for Brazil because he is so quick, and Brazil relies VERY HEAVILY on Robinho (and Kaka), but Robinho arguably the more important player. If Robinho's injured Brazil's chances of winning the WC is actually gone.

Against North Korea, Brazil were playing against themselves, with the otherside less gifted technically. And it frustrated them.

But the difference between Brazil and Spain, Argentina is that Brazil are more efficient.

What would be interesting in the world cup is when Brazil play against teams that soak up pressure and concentrate on defending. Brazil's difficulty in facing North Korea is different from that faced by Spain when they play against Switzerland. Brazil RELIES on the other team attacking them, and are expecting to DEFEND against any team. IE. Brazil doesn't make the first move. They defend and wait. And its interesting when they face another team that 'waits' before making the first move, which is what you saw in Brazil vs North Korea. Unlike Spain or Argentina which attacks from the start.

So I can confidently predict that Brazil will win comfortably against the following teams: Spain, Argentina, Mexico and maybe Germany. And African teams because of their lack of discipline (save for the Ivory Coast)

But will Brazil face a similar opposition like the North Koreans or themselves further in the world cup ? Portugal and Ivory Coast are VERY ORGANISED teams like the Brazilians, but you can't call them 'counter-attacking' or 'defensive' or 'attacking'. They're organised just like the Dutch. But I rate the Portugese lower than Ivory Coast, the Dutch and Brazil. The main reason is indiscipline and ridiculous behaviour in one player which I don't think I need to name. In the 4-2-3-1 when one of your '3' decides not to play or does his own thing - you're fucked.

Who can stop the Brazilians? A team of similar defensive qualities of their own: Uruguay, Italy, Netherlands, Paraguay. But what is interesting about these teams is none of them play like Brazil, attacking on the counter. In fact I can't think of any team in this world cup that attacks on the counter. And maybe that would be Brazil's ultimate advantage against any other team. Thats why I still think the Brazilians are favourites because of their effiency. If there's a team that can just kill you off in one move / have one chance in the game and take it - I rate Brazil as the best. That's why their my favourites.


Italy

Do not underestimate them. that's it. Italy changed formations I think 3 or 4 times in the Paraguay game. They won the last world cup because of this. They'll go far.

Group A (it's more interesting than you would think)

Last game Uruguay v Mexico; France vs South Africa.
France and South Africa are mathematically not out yet. People are not rating their chances because so far, no one has been talking about them and everybody is saying its all over for France.
But I say, watch South Africa VERY CLOSELY. Its a high chance they win that game because France are in shambles, and they don't look like a team that will at least give a performance to their fans (maybe because their fans don't love them in the first place) as their final bow in the world cup, whereas South Africa WOULD MOST LIKELY TO SO, and if they were to exit the world cup now, they would like to do so the way the started it - BANG !. Ie. France loses, South Africa wins : 4 points.
And I find it strange that no one rates either France or South Africa's chances highly to progress from the group, they all assume that Uruguay v Mexico is so evenly matched that it will be a draw.

Now here's the truth: A draw wouldn't hurt Uruguay, they'll still be top on Goal Difference. A draw would HURT MEXICO BADLY - they face Argentina in the next round because they'll end up second in the group.

Here's the scenario: Uruguay doesn't want to lose the last game, draw is ok. Draw wouldn't be ok for Mexico. Uruguay would probably know Mexico would prefer to win this game, Uruguay knows that if Mexico wins Uruguay is fucked unless France draws with South Africa (which is unlikely because France are such a shit team).

So Uruguay, like Mexico, will be playing for a win. Both teams desperate to play for a win means : one team will lose. One team will lose means, if South Africa wins, the losing team will be on level points with South Africa and it will come down to goal difference.

So the Uruguay v Mexico game is much more interesting than one would expect (or what has been expected of it so far). My thinking is, Uruguay would kill-off Mexico with 1 goal or 2 goals first / as soon as possible, and just sit back and defend the lead, even if Mexico pops in a goal or 2, (2-2) Uruguay still ends up the ultimate winner.

A draw is a win for Uruguay, a draw is a lose for Mexico.

Think of it this way: This game is a Champions League 2nd leg, where the first leg being played at Uruguay's home ground ends up in a 0-0 draw. This is the 2nd leg, now being played at Mexico's home ground, Uruguay is playing away. A 1-1 / 2-2 draw means Uruguay wins (on goal difference).

And here's the thing, what if, what if, Mexico fails to come back from a goal deficit ? Uruguay wins. Mexico is level on points with South Africa, if Mexico loses by 2 goals (goal diff:0), and South Africa wins on a 3 goal margin (goal diff: 0). Interesting ? If the goal margins changes just a little bit more, South Africa could potentially make it to the next round. Its not impossible.

But note, if Uruguay somehow comes second in this group. I see their encounter with Argentina in the next round as a Uruguay win.

Group B: watch out for Nigeria

Nothing intersting about Argentina vs Greece. Just how many Argentina will score that's all. Argentina guarantee to rest players.

Interesting bit: Korea (3 points; goal diff - 1) vs Nigeria (0 points; goal difference -2). How many will Argentina score against Greece (currently 3 points, goal diff: -1) ? at least 2 ? So let's say Argentina wins greece by a 2 goal margin.

Now, Nigeria with 0 points. it seems like there's no way out for them ? Wrong. Is it impossible for Nigeria to win South Korea? No.

IF, Nigeria wins South Korea just 1-0 / by a one goal margin, and Argentina wins Greece by at least 2 goals it now looks like this : South Korea (3 points, goal diff: -2), Greece (3 points, goal diff: -3), Nigeria (3 points, goal diff: -1).

Now, guess who's in second place after goal difference? A team could potentially go through to next round with just 3 points, and it's not impossible. Amazing. Nigeria who lost their first 2 games, goes through to the next round with a 1-0 win against Korea with just 3 points!

(Very interesting Stat here (Betters take note !!! ): WC 2002 Group Stages: Nigeria lost game one 1:0; loss game two 2:1; draw game three 0:0; WC 2006 failed to qualify; WC 2010 Nigeria lost game one 1:0; loss game two 2:1; game three...... ?)

Massive advantage for South Korea is, that a draw would be enough to take them through.

Group C

England : boring. next

Group D: Australia dares to dream

I'll talk about this group with Australia being the reference point because their last placed. And because Serbia has a tendency to handball in their own penalty area.
And all scenarios assuming Australia beats Serbia (not impossible).

(note: another interesting fact - did anyone realise that EVERY SINGLE group game from this group has a red card? (Australia leads with 2, Germany tied with Serbia with 1, Ghana 0) If your betting options includes betting for a red card in a game - this stat might be useful)

Ok, Australia beats Serbia - Australia goes through on 2 possibilities:

1. Ghana beat Germany. Ghana (5 points), Australia 4 points. Germany and Serbia 3 points.

2. Germany beats Ghana. Australia beats Serbia. Germany 6 points. Australia and Ghana level on points (4 points). Ghana current goal diff : +1 ; Australia goal difference currently : -4.
If Germany wins ghana by a 3 goal margin, Ghana's goal diff: -2 and if Australia beats Serbia by 2 goal margin; Australia goal diff: -2. AND if the Germany result is 3:0 and Australian result is 2:0. Guess who goes through? Australia, on number of goal scored.
But for Germany to beat Ghana by 3 clear goals? And Australia to beat Serbia by 2 goals ? It's the most remote of all possibilities regarding the bottom placed team chances that I have explored so far.


Despite the extreme coincidental circumstances required for Scenario 2 to happen, I like that scenario more. Maybe because it's so crazy. And also because I don't want Germany to exit the tournament (and also, Ghana is starting to annoy me, see below).

And despite the fact that this Ghana team are one of the more stronger African teams in this tournament. Is it just me or they seem like a bunch of cocky little bastards? They seem so full of themselves (they're almost as bad as England - ok, not quite there, England are far worse)

And ok, if I don't use Australia as a ref point.

A. Serbia vs Australia: draw (Serbia goal diff: 0)
A 1) And Germany draws against ghana. Ghana 1st placed, Germany 2nd (goal diff)
A 2) If Germany wins, Germany 1st placed, Ghana and Serbia will fight it out on goal diff, with Ghana being the loser if they lose by more than a 1 goal margin.
A 3) Ghana wins. Ghana 1st placed, Serbia 2nd.

B Serbia wins Australia
B 1) Germany draws against Ghana. Serbia 1st placed, Ghana 2nd
B 2) Germany wins. Germany 1, Serbia 2 (unless Serbia thrashes Australia)
B 3) Ghana wins. Ghana 1, Serbia 2

This group is getting interesting as well.
Australia's only chance of going through is by winning Serbia (whereas Serbia and Germany might still be able to afford to draw). And leaving the rest to the Gods of Goal Difference.