Reflections on the World Cup: Africans aren't badly organized; you're just a racist.

Pass the flail Andres.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

That we admit that we are white and that being white is a synonym for being an evil racist after which we will collectively chastise ourselves for our sin?

---

We are such alabastards. :shame:

Is saying that a certain football culture can be described as unorganized racist? Is saying Italy fielded players 'on their way out' or that the Netherlands used anti-football tactics in the finale racist?

Besides I believe that 'disorganised' actually means less effective. African football, as admitted by those players themselves, is more focused on the moves/actions/... than on winning. Hence the reason for lack of concentration at the back or to much dribbling, ... A lot of African teams even hire a European coach to drill in the 'organisation'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peasant Phill

Is saying that a certain football culture can be described as unorganized racist? Is saying Italy fielded players 'on their way out' or that the Netherlands used anti-football tactics in the finale racist?

Besides I believe that 'disorganised' actually means less effective. African football, as admitted by those players themselves, is more focused on the moves/actions/... than on winning. Hence the reason for lack of concentration at the back or to much dribbling, ... A lot of African teams even hire a European coach to drill in the 'organisation'.

---

....If it was actually true, then no, I would have absolutely no problem with it.

The problem is that it isn't true, and this world cup proved it. The african sides all kept tight at the back, in fact Ghana's team was built around a strong, organized defense.

oh, and organized in this context doesn't mean being effective, it means that the defenders are positioned correctly and do not allow opposing attackers to move about unchecked(like Podolski was time and again in the match against England)

England can't play as a team, they are too focused on individual merit. Then a team like Germany, who are not individually as good as our players, can however, play as a team, totally beat England backwards and forwards, while the overpaid wussies cry for mummy, as the Germans smite them.

I think this sums up Anglosaxon culture compared to European culture at large.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

England can't play as a team, they are too focused on individual merit. Then a team like Germany, who are not individually as good as our players, can however, play as a team, totally beat England backwards and forwards, while the overpaid wussies cry for mummy, as the Germans smite them.

I think this sums up Anglosaxon culture compared to European culture at large.

---

England is among the worlds 15 best nations. Qualifiyng for the quarter final is thus a very good achievement, and qualifying from the group stage is good. The problem is that every englishman believes that England is by far the best team on the planet....

Gerrard and Lampard better than Müller and Özil? Hah! Heskey better than Klose? Double hah! Nintendo James? ....no, I won't go there, I wouldn't be able to stop laughing......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Megas Methuselah

.... Pathetic, man. That sounds insulting, I know, but this post is just... nonsense... on so many different levels.

---

Actually, he's correct, in S. Africa especially they have a very odd attitude to roads, and telegraph poles. For a few years no maintainance was done on either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Actually, he's correct, in S. Africa especially they have a very odd attitude to roads, and telegraph poles. For a few years no maintainance was done on either.

---

Sounds like how things are done here.... :clown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Gerrard and Lampard better than Müller and Özil? Hah! Heskey better than Klose? Double hah! Nintendo James? ....no, I won't go there, I wouldn't be able to stop laughing......

---

Gerrard and Lampard are better than Muller and Ozil, they just cannot play together at all. Plus, I notice you never said "Rooney is better than Klose?", because Klose is no where near Rooney.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

Gerrard and Lampard are better than Muller and Ozil, they just cannot play together at all. Plus, I notice you never said "Rooney is better than Klose?", because Klose is no where near Rooney.

---

Hmmm........ Miroslav Klose has 14 goals in the world cup.... Wayne Rooney has..... Oh, that's right, zero. Heck, even Norways old midfield anchorman Kjetil Rekdal have more world cup goals than Rooney. But I have to admit, he is a lot better than most at being a prick.


Just because you englishmen love to hype your players doesn't mean that what you say is actually true, ya know. Özil and Müller rocks Lampard and Gerrards boats, they're fit for the retirement home any day now.

What separates the truly great players from the wannabes is their ability to shine in the most important occasions. Gerrard, Lampard and Rooney all failed that test completely, while Klose, Müller and Özil showed their superiority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

What separates the truly great players from the wannabes is their ability to shine in the most important occasions. Gerrard, Lampard and Rooney all failed that test completely, while Klose, Müller and Özil showed their superiority.

---

A lot of star players failed to shine at this WC, Ronaldo is probably the most obvious example. That doesn't mean they aren't the best in the world when they're playing for their club. Team organisation is what let a lot of the stars down, you can't blame it on them individually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

England can't play as a team, they are too focused on individual merit. Then a team like Germany, who are not individually as good as our players, can however, play as a team, totally beat England backwards and forwards, while the overpaid wussies cry for mummy, as the Germans smite them.

I think this sums up Anglosaxon culture compared to European culture at large.

---

Brazil? Italy? Both done exactly the same thing. Or are they joining us in the same culture? France won a few years ago, but got thrashed this time. Ah yes: they went on strike! Perhaps there is something in linking footie teams with their national mentality.

In any team, big names have a tenancy to be arrogant and more interested in personal glory / money than anything else. It's happened many times in the past and it'll happen again.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

A lot of star players failed to shine at this WC, Ronaldo is probably the most obvious example. That doesn't mean they aren't the best in the world when they're playing for their club. Team organisation is what let a lot of the stars down, you can't blame it on them individually.

---

.....And the ability to quickly adopt from one tactic to another isn't an individual skill...? Being able to switch between Louis van Gaal's total football and Löw's counter-attacking style isn't something that makes someone a better player in your eyes...?

Because that sounds like nonsense to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

.....And the ability to quickly adopt from one tactic to another isn't an individual skill...? Being able to switch between Louis van Gaal's total football and Löw's counter-attacking style isn't something that makes someone a better player in your eyes...?

Because that sounds like nonsense to me.

---

Adaptability isn't the be all and end all, it is just one of many skills a player can have. Even the star players have a certain playing style and specific strengths which will only really show when the team plays a certain way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

....If it was actually true, then no, I would have absolutely no problem with it.

The problem is that it isn't true, and this world cup proved it. The african sides all kept tight at the back, in fact Ghana's team was built around a strong, organized defense.

oh, and organized in this context doesn't mean being effective, it means that the defenders are positioned correctly and do not allow opposing attackers to move about unchecked(like Podolski was time and again in the match against England)

---

Wasn't the coach of Ghana a European?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slyspy

Wasn't the coach of Ghana a European?

---

All African teams coaches are European, except South Africa(Brazilian) and Algerie(Algerian), and it has been that way for decades.

Were the African defenses organised? Sure they were, every defence nowadays is organised. Managers don't leave things to coincidence. However in what way a manager can translate his organisation and football idea's into practice is rather complex. Not only does it depend on the quality of the players but also on the understanding between the players and the manager and the players themselves. Spain, Germany and Holland had a good understanding with their coach, not just personally but in football as well. Spain and Germany had a lot of players who already knew each other well and understood each other well. Also the tactics of Van Gaal compared to Low aren't that different on certain points btw. Van Gaal isn't as attacking as he used to be and due to weak defence he even had to focus on attack more. We also have the fact that ideologies not only need to be understood, they also need to fit the players on their qualities, should have the best players as the essential fundaments and should fit the opponent as well. Not that you have to adapt tactics to the opponent everytime. But tactics do have to be fit to the situation of the team is in as well and have to be constantly adapted to fit it. Adaptability isn't the key factor here, but understanding, the luck of having the right players with the right qualities avaible,... Is rather a complex matter.

Were the africans unorganised? No, they're football at times was though. So was Englands and Argentina's though. Are they incapable no? But often the conditions weren't always right. Missing of keyplayers, coach changes, unfit tactics or wrong players, misfortune (Ghana), situations and opponents that weren't favorable, lack of quality,... Organisation also has multiple meanings in football. It can be how solid a tactic is worked out, how effective it is, how it is structured, often ball possesion is also misnamed as organised, how coherent it plays,...

Also England really isn't that good. There are some good players in the team, true but it has to have a general supportable idea behind it, you have to have your talents spread out and being compatible,... Talented wise they didn't play that bad or had such bad results. Talentwise Spain, Germany, France, The Netherlands, Brazil, Argentina were much better. Some of the African countries like Ivory coast came close. Due to the fact the Premier league is overrated and the English contribution to the large teams are overrated as well, means the English teams are overrated. The only reason the Premier league has the level it has is the money and coaching. Yes it has succesful teams in Europe as well and especially the top are doing really well. But there's also a big gap between the big three (Arsenal, Chelsea and Man U, yes at the moment I don't put Liverpool with them) the subtop and then the rest which is quite close to each other. The comparisons with Gerrard and Müller are rediculous. However what about Gerrard and Sweinsteiger, as they are more a like in the roles they fullfill? Well Sweinsteiger is in my eyes the better player. He has attacking poweress, physical poweress, defensive skills, intelligence and creativity, the mentality and he is an incredibly complete player with the advantage of being underrated. Gerrard can perhaps follow up when it comes to defensice skills and intelligence. Probably beats Sweinsteiger in leardship and experience. But Sweinsteiger is the betterplayer with perhaps even a little bit of growth in him left? The best and most influential players have proven themselves I think, Xavi and iniesta who are almost one and the same mind with an incredible understanding and hence the reason they football the way they do together, Sweinsteiger, Lahm and Sneijder. Who's talent and qualtiy is not only at the top of the world but also determine the football of they're team. Ronaldo is a very good player who can make goals and actions out of nowhere but he can lead a team nor can he influence who has the upperhand in the game footballingwise (not scorewise), yet he was the keyman.

I think what we also saw this tournament that the teams who want to fight for it the most also got through. Germany was passionate, hard working combned with their great physique (which helps that a lot), talent and played make them come this far. It's the same reasons and effects the last three World Cups. Spain didn't have to as much but if you looked you saw the fighting as group as well especially in the final. Uruguay, Ghana, netherlands as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slyspy

Wasn't the coach of Ghana a European?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

All African teams coaches are European, except South Africa(Brazilian) and Algerie(Algerian), and it has been that way for decades.

---

...as has the underperformance of African teams. I also don't know of any first rate coaches (White or Black) who have coached an African side.

As football federations in the west are pretty bad examples of efficient and productive organisations, its actually surprising that African football federations can actually be worse, but they are.

Witness Nigeria's presidential attempt to withdraw the international side from competition so that it can "get its house in order".