FIFA World Cup 2014 - Round of 16 [28th June - 1st July] **spoilers**
- Thread starter Robbo
- Start date
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Not really likely to get the final, not least because his last run at the final was shocking. He also let for me far far too many tackles go in the first half, couple earlier yellows were warranted.
Find it odd people saying Chile deserved it or that it was a cracking game, it had a total lack of quality. 26 shots for Brazil of which only 6 were on target, Chile had 13 shots with only 2 on target. Chile created almost nothing, started kicking it long crazy early with absolutely zero success. They deviated from how they played in the three previous games and kept hitting it long with a tiny front line up against a big back line, it was completely unsuccessful and throughout the game they favoured an utterly failing tactic more and more.
Vidal was poor, Sanchez was abysmal, one shot was his entire contribution, zero quality in the rest of the game. Did a right "messi", dropped deep, tried to be involved in everything, like Neymar held on to it rather than making the simple pass to keep possession.
Chile had put in 2-3 fantastic performances but were pretty dire today. Made dozens of very poor mistakes at the back as well, let Neymar walk past them all too easily in the first half.
Brazil absolutely nothing special at all, enough with the home crowd advantage to beat a Chile side playing poorly. THe occasion got to Chile and they forgot how to play their way, on the floor, quick thinking, quick breaking, simple passing. Disappointed in Chile completely.
That number 20 I think it was though, his penalty was brilliant, shame the rest weren't.
Find it odd people saying Chile deserved it or that it was a cracking game, it had a total lack of quality. 26 shots for Brazil of which only 6 were on target, Chile had 13 shots with only 2 on target. Chile created almost nothing, started kicking it long crazy early with absolutely zero success. They deviated from how they played in the three previous games and kept hitting it long with a tiny front line up against a big back line, it was completely unsuccessful and throughout the game they favoured an utterly failing tactic more and more.
Vidal was poor, Sanchez was abysmal, one shot was his entire contribution, zero quality in the rest of the game. Did a right "messi", dropped deep, tried to be involved in everything, like Neymar held on to it rather than making the simple pass to keep possession.
Chile had put in 2-3 fantastic performances but were pretty dire today. Made dozens of very poor mistakes at the back as well, let Neymar walk past them all too easily in the first half.
Brazil absolutely nothing special at all, enough with the home crowd advantage to beat a Chile side playing poorly. THe occasion got to Chile and they forgot how to play their way, on the floor, quick thinking, quick breaking, simple passing. Disappointed in Chile completely.
That number 20 I think it was though, his penalty was brilliant, shame the rest weren't.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 41,323
- Location
- Cornwall
Along with the keeper Vidal and Sanchez were their two best players 
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,064
- Location
- Surrey
Lol, DM knows nothing. Vidal was absolutely immense and Sanchez just never stopped (unlike Neymar) At some points it was like the ball was glued to his feet, he just kept it when by all right you thought he'd lost it.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 41,323
- Location
- Cornwall
If a midfielder has a good game but isn't Fabregas DM seems to completely lose any sense of judgement.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 10,113
- Location
- Gibraltar
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
You do realise after turning around in circles for ages he lost it almost every time, but each and every time he had the chance to pass and instead chose to hold on to it and lost it in the majority of situations? each time basically killing an attack? It was usually 30-40 yards from goal, and simply ended up wasting a chance to break fast. He was completely terrible throughout. Having the ball stuck to your foot CAN be useful, but not 40 yards from goal, when after you stop spinning you give it to the other team and you ignore better options every single time.
AS for Vidal, defensively he wasn't that helpful, offensively he consistently got the crucial passes wrong in the final third, their attacks broke down over and over again because Vidal got very very little right. He didn't show anything near the energy or speed in his running, he wasn't first to every single ball like he was against Spain.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Complete rubbish, I said Vidal was god damned phenomenal against Spain, and he was pretty good though looked a little more timid and a little less match fit in the first game, he was truly brilliant in the Spain game, today he was poor.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Yeah, he also took a crap penalty despite being easily the most talented attacking player Chile had. he had more of the ball than almost anyone and yet created almost nothing for anyone throughout the game. He played deeper than usual, had the ball 30-40 yards out and did absolutely nothing with it.
SCoring doesn't mean you had a great game, Luiz scored, was he brilliant today? Fred scored, was he brilliant in that game?
It's amazing how a goal and turning around in circles makes people assume someone had a great game. Chile managed two shots on target in the entire game, the Sanchez shot was about the only time he had the ball in the box in the entire game.
I never said they had great games because they scored. Though I would argue that if it is your job to score goals and you score one, then barring something out of the ordinary, you have automatically had at least a good game. I just think it is remarkable how little people seem to value goals around here. If someone scores in a game he seems to attract far more criticism than anyone else more often than not.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
You don't automatically have at least a good game if you score. He scored, he played as a playmaker, he conceded possession, held it up poorly, created almost nothing in 120 minutes and fluffed his penalty. Holding possession by passing to people completely open then offering yourself for the return pass will "hold" the ball up far longer than turning around in circles for 10 seconds then giving it away.
He played as a striker mostly after Vidal went off, till then he played mostly deeper than him. I would even potentially guess that Vidal was carrying a knock or his knee was bothering him so they played him in closer to Sanchez's role and Sanchez dropped into his role to do more running.
You win based off 90 minute(or 120) performances, getting a goal in an attack that lasted 15 seconds, if that, and being useless for the rest means he was good for that 15 seconds, nothing more or less. If he was playing right up top and had very little of the ball because his team mates couldn't get it to him would be one thing, but he played much deeper, had LOADS of the ball and did almost nothing with it.
He played as a striker mostly after Vidal went off, till then he played mostly deeper than him. I would even potentially guess that Vidal was carrying a knock or his knee was bothering him so they played him in closer to Sanchez's role and Sanchez dropped into his role to do more running.
You win based off 90 minute(or 120) performances, getting a goal in an attack that lasted 15 seconds, if that, and being useless for the rest means he was good for that 15 seconds, nothing more or less. If he was playing right up top and had very little of the ball because his team mates couldn't get it to him would be one thing, but he played much deeper, had LOADS of the ball and did almost nothing with it.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
THat was ******* amazing..................