World Cup: Group C: Peru vs. Denmark, 6/16/2018

[Bon Esprit]

Blame the Canadian in me

But in seriousness, 3pts are huge, play leaves much to be desired..

Man, enjoy the win. Danish football is mediocre. Your goal must be to get out of the group.

 

[cgf]

Witch is nonsense and we all know you are joking. Let's see what Germny and Brazil can do. South American teams weren't expressive at all so far.

They've failed to impress so far, but I still think Argentina-Spain will be a toss up in the QFs; ditto Uruguay-Portugal/France/Croatia. So I won't be shocked if we are the only euros to make the SF...even if SA's chances would have been better if Colombia weren't in the same bracket as us or Brazil; and Uruguay didn't have quite so much european talent in their bracket.

 

[QuietContrarian]

I wasn't too impressed with Kjaer either...though I am biased in favor of Veste lol

he had a few bad passes, id much rather Jannik aswell

 

[Moncherry]

If France plays like they did against Australia, Peru has a good chance.

 

[QuietContrarian]

Man, enjoy the win. Danish football is mediocre. Your goal must be to get out of the group.

Danish football is more than mediocre to me.

doubt it would help to explain why.

But I think I am going to close this convo.

I am not too comfortable with the way you converse.

 

[Evilo]

If France plays like they did against Australia, Peru has a good chance.

Totally, but I don't expect Peru to defend with 10 men behind the ball.
France usually has trouble against regrouped teams.
OTOH, Peru will be more of a threat to score as well.

 

[N o o d l e s]

Eriksen was awful

 

[Bon Esprit]

Danish football is more than mediocre to me.

doubt it would help to explain why.

But I think I am going to close this convo.

I am not too comfortable with the way you converse.

Well, okay, did't want to be offensive. But that's the way I see the Danish team.They are not good enough to do much damage.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

Denmark reminds me a bit of the Czechs. They've had some good teams but the pool to pick players from just isn't big enough to avoid bad stretches if some of your talents just don't develop as well as expected.

 

[Live in the Now]

Denmark reminds me a bit of the Czechs. They've had some good teams but the pool to pick players from just isn't big enough to avoid bad stretches if some of your talents just don't develop as well as expected.

The weird thing about Denmark is that similar to the Czechs in 2006, their players actually developed properly. Their manager just simply doesn't pick the best team or implement a system that suits their players. Eriksen should have the ball to be the playmaker 99% of the time. Instead they for some reason played through Sisto and other wide players who weren't good.

Overall though, yeah, their player pool is too small.

 

[QuietContrarian]

Well, okay, did't want to be offensive. But that's the way I see the Danish team.They are not good enough to do much damage.

I believe they have the individual talent, but not the team if that makes sense.

But I do believe that can change. Thid was Peru being good, but also Denmark being ill prepared and not playing up to their standards.

But we can agree to disagree.

 

[QuietContrarian]

The weird thing about Denmark is that similar to the Czechs in 2006, their players actually developed properly. Their manager just simply doesn't pick the best team or implement a system that suits their players. Eriksen should have the ball to be the playmaker 99% of the time. Instead they for some reason played through Sisto and other wide players who weren't good.

Overall though, yeah, their player pool is too small.

Agreed!

But people forget Denmark only has 5.5m people, so depth will never not be a problem.

That they manage to qualify for the wc and ec regularly is big in it self.
Especially considering they do well in other sports aswell.

 

[cgf]

Denmark reminds me a bit of the Czechs. They've had some good teams but the pool to pick players from just isn't big enough to avoid bad stretches if some of your talents just don't develop as well as expected.

I might rate Christensen & Vestegaard more than any non-Dane, but the Nedved & Rosicky Czechs they ain't.

 

[cgf]

The weird thing about Denmark is that similar to the Czechs in 2006, their players actually developed properly. Their manager just simply doesn't pick the best team or implement a system that suits their players. Eriksen should have the ball to be the playmaker 99% of the time. Instead they for some reason played through Sisto and other wide players who weren't good.

Overall though, yeah, their player pool is too small.

Playing Kvist over Wass, Hojberg not developing as hoped, and Dolberg's underwhelming season, don't help.

 

[PanniniClaus]

Peru had many many chances but could not seize the day ...entertaining though

 

[Bures Elbow]

Peru were so unlucky and deserved at the very least a draw. Schmeical was fantastic, his father would be proud.

 

[Name Nameless]

That's why FIFA has to change format to allow some 3rd place teams to advance.

This is why we need big groups, so we can enjoy good group-matches. We cannot expect teams who lose to advance for long anyways. Personally, I would love bigger groups of 6, so we can have a good, long group-stage, where draws are bad for you. But if you lose in the group-stage, you cannot expect to be a lucky loser and keep on going.

 

[robertmac43]

This is why we need big groups, so we can enjoy good group-matches. We cannot expect teams who lose to advance for long anyways. Personally, I would love bigger groups of 6, so we can have a good, long group-stage, where draws are bad for you. But if you lose in the group-stage, you cannot expect to be a lucky loser and keep on going.

2026 World Cup with 16 groups of 3 should help this. Only one team from each would be left out from the knock out rounds

 

[Firsov99]

This is why we need big groups, so we can enjoy good group-matches. We cannot expect teams who lose to advance for long anyways. Personally, I would love bigger groups of 6, so we can have a good, long group-stage, where draws are bad for you. But if you lose in the group-stage, you cannot expect to be a lucky loser and keep on going.

I think that five games in a group would be way too much. This isn't hockey. The total number of games (the entire tournament) shouldn't be more than 7-8. FIFA used to have a format where best 3rd place teams would qualify as well, and I believe that FIFA should bring it back. This format makes 3rd round group matches much more meaningful, and "groups of death" - less deadly. For example, Portugal qualified for the EURO-2016 playoffs finishing third (three points from three ties) and then won the tournament. A lot of good teams might go home too early in the FIFA World Cup.

 

[Firsov99]

2026 World Cup with 16 groups of 3 should help this. Only one team from each would be left out from the knock out rounds

Just two games per group? Too little for warmup. Plus some groups could have two good teams, where one would get knocked out only after two games.

 

[Name Nameless]

2026 World Cup with 16 groups of 3 should help this. Only one team from each would be left out from the knock out rounds

16 groups of 3 is exactly horrible and awful.

You need a draw in your first game. If you get a draw, you are happy. We don't want teams to play for a draw, do we? Especially where both teams wants a draw.

If you lose your first match, you know you will be the team the two other teams agrees should go, and they will play accordingly.

This plan of three-team-groups are a nightmare.

 

[cgf]

16 groups of 3 is exactly horrible and awful.

You need a draw in your first game. If you get a draw, you are happy. We don't want teams to play for a draw, do we? Especially where both teams wants a draw.

If you lose your first match, you know you will be the team the two other teams agrees should go, and they will play accordingly.

This plan of three-team-groups are a nightmare.

How would that work, exactly?

 

[robertmac43]

Just two games per group? Too little for warmup. Plus some groups could have two good teams, where one would get knocked out only after two games.

Luckily for the groups with two good teams both teams will make it through to the knock out round. They will also be introducing a round of 32 following the group stage.

 

[Firsov99]

Luckily for the groups with two good teams both teams will make it through to the knock out round. They will also be introducing a round of 32 following the group stage.

I see two problems with this: 48 teams - way too many participants for the World Cup, and two games - just isn't enough for the group stage.

 

[robertmac43]

16 groups of 3 is exactly horrible and awful.

You need a draw in your first game. If you get a draw, you are happy. We don't want teams to play for a draw, do we? Especially where both teams wants a draw.

If you lose your first match, you know you will be the team the two other teams agrees should go, and they will play accordingly.

This plan of three-team-groups are a nightmare.

There are cons to it. Something on the positive side however is that we would get 16 more knock out games through the introduction of the round of 32