World Cup: Group F: Germany vs. Mexico, 6/17/2018

[Disclose]

Chicharito cant finish. Fun game with unexpected result.
Feel so little with this German only talk, but was fun to read through the thread.

Biggest test for Mexico is done and they succeeded. but better keep pushing. it wasnt easy.

Chucky Lozano is love.

 

[Nalens Oga]

And another thing, why the f*** are you even bothering to start Timo Werner if you're just gonna use a slow build-up and then cross it in. Low is still stuck on a Gomez/Klose gameplan.

 

[Eisen]

I'm still sort of angry. Slow as a snail and no cohesion. It's not that they lost, it's how they lost.

 

[Eisen]

Well ****, that didn't go as planned. Granted the moment I saw the lineup I said that 'at least Draxler & Khedira would get to prove why they can't be relied upon against better opponents'...and that did happen...

Such a bummer that Werner couldn't finish either of those nice chances he burst through for in the first 7 minutes...but if he had taken those chances then maybe we'd have poured it on before Julian & Sami got to prove without a shadow of a doubt that they weren't up to snuff. [he says, trying to convince himself that he believes it]

*sigh* This was a kick in the balls though, Mats had a weak game even with how poorly set up we were, and Kimmich can't bomb forward that recklessly with how poorly the structure was. And the boys need to just accept that sometimes the ref is just going to let **** go, they can't keep *****ing about it when the ref clearly doesn't not give a ****.


On the plus side: Brandt showed why he & Sane should have both made the team. Penetrating balls into Werner, produced a handful of nice chances that we just weren't clinical enough with. Reus looked lively & didn't get hurt. They started to flow in the second half, at least until running out of ideas in the final third because Mesut was too deep to come up with that moment of genius since we didn't have Ilkay or Leon out there to help Toni in the deeper areas.

Thankfully Jogi has a history of making big changes during tourneys & adapting...so hopefully, he doesn't give me more ammunition to gripe about him & does that again. Cause I do still think this team can win the cup if the changes that we need happen...aka Sami & Julian take on the Podolski role of a human victory cigar that never sees the field except late in blowouts; and we use a 4-3-1-2 or 3-4-1-2 to give Boa, Mats & Toni more support in that part of the pitch that the mexicans tore through time & again...and the team starts to play with more urgency.

Was nice to see Manu get tested & continue to look like himself. He can still get better...as he didn't seem to have his intimidation set to 11 yet...but hopefully any concerns about him are now put to rest.

I'd like the 4-4-2 variety better than the 3-5-2 (but do we have the players to play that properly?). It leaves the defense less exposed. In addition, there is a better change that one of Khedira or Draxler won't be on the pitch. And I want to point out that Kroos wasn't good either. In one scene when he fumbled a ball, he lost 10 meters on the ball carrying Mexican player. That's inexcusable.

 

[Eisen]

I've watched football long enough to know that if there's that many players putting in a bad shift, the fault is with the coach not the players.

One like is not enough for this post.

 

[Corto]

Eh. Germany played with 10 men, they simply ignored the left side, it was weird to watch.
Their fullbacks didn't play defense, they were so high up the pitch that bringing in Brandt would've been fine from minute 10, and he might have made a difference offensively.

Werner (who I think just might be overrated) looked lost, Müller was never even close to getting a look at goal.
The only Germans who played on a decent level were Kroos and Kimmich (though Kimmich forgot to play defense). Can't fault Boateng and Hummels much if they're gonna leave them on a massive open area like that against 2 or 3 counterattackers.

Özil... I'm really not a Mesut hater, I think he gets a lot of stick undeservedly at Arsenal... But I do think he's sort of becoming a player who'll make you win more when things are going good, rather than help turn it around when things are going bad.
If anyone was gonna turn that game around yesterday, it was gonna be Kroos.

Or Sane. lol...

I still understand why he was left out. I realize he wasn't great in the NT, but he's got so much quality you HAVE TO have him in there and maybe he wins you a game or two if called upon.
Draxler was just awful.

...

Mexico... Very structured, very compact, almost perfect execution of counter attacks.
With games at 0-0 or in the lead, they'll be fine. It'll be interested to see what happens if they fall behind and need a goal.

 

[Eisen]

Its always a Problem if a Coach stays to Long. He has to much love for some Players (Müller for example)
The first squad should look different. But now its to late.

------------------------------Neuer

Kimmich---------Boateng-------Hummels--------Max

-----------------------Khedira---Kroos

----------Reus------------Gündogan-----------Sane

-----------------------------Werner

Löw always treated the team like a club. He always relying on players that he has played more often. With Klose, that was a good thing, but not everyone is like him.

 

[Eisen]

Like I've been saying since 2012

Though if Tuchel had wanted the job, I was willing to let him have first crack at it

Not slick enough, although they did consider Daum at one point. But he was considered an intellectual.

 

[Eisen]

Müller is a great support player, but he will not carry a team. Hes not gonna take the ball and dribble at goal. There seems to be zero chemistry between Germany's attacking players and that hurts Müller a lot as he relies on service and on players making the right runs. Werner and Draxler felt like alien objects at times.

I mean, we could write a few paragraphs about pretty much every German player's performance in this match. If they all look out of sorts, assuming they haven't lost their ability to play overnight, then the problem is the team's setup and/or their attitude - both of which go back to the manager. And yes it's fair to talk about attitude. Mexico played with great passion and intensity from the 1st minute, Germany was tentative and seemed surprised that Mexico was giving it a go. If you had watched the way Mexico talked the last week, you would not have been surprised to see them do that..yet I think Bierhoff after the match conceded that Mexico surprised them in their approach.

I don't think that the Germans were surpised by the tactic of Mexico. They did play similar in the Confed Cup last year.

 

[Eisen]

I woudn't label you as hater. TBH I didn't even recognize you as a critic. Critics are okay, I'm one of them, but man, it's the first game. As pointed out no top side did good as of now.
As for your second question. You are smarter than that.
If I wanted to I could rip apart the performance of France, Brazil or Argentina. I don't do it, because it's no my cup of tea.
Let's wait and see what Belgium, England and others do in their first games. I won't comment unless it' spectacular good.

First opening match Germany lost since 82, though. Not that this is saying anything but it not surprising that expectations were higher.

 

[Drivesaitl]

LOL at all the haters. What favourite has done well? France? Argentina? Brazl (tie vs. Switzerland right now? Spain tie vs. (strong) Portugal?
Let's give the cup to Russia. They won their game 5:0.

You might notice Germany being in a tough group. They already lost 1-0 to Mexico failing to score a goal and that result doing no favor in any tiebreaker.

Next Germany have to stew for 6 interminable days to get back on the pitch only to face Sweden. A team designed to give them fits and that knocked out Italy in a playoff to get here. So a tough match to look forward to.

Provided Germany get a result in that one (and likely requiring a margin of more than 1G and scoring at least 2) they then wait to face South Korea who have only been beaten 3/12 qualifying games.

Sure some other big teams lost in first game. They are in far easier groups. France for instance would have to self implode not to advance. For most of the groups its unthinkable the powers won't advance. From the outset this group that Germany finds itself in has no weak knees. Mexico is ALWAYS good at group stage, Sweden have a competitive side, and South Korea are no pushover.

This group is interesting in that beyond Germany pundits had difficulty predicting who would join them in advancing. (A premise that did disservice to Mexico but which suggests the teams are all competitive sides)

 

[Drivesaitl]

? I liked the through balls they played into Werner before the mexicans shocked them & took charge of the match. Draxler...is Draxler...

I'm hoping for a Werner-Brandt duo in front of Mesut by the knockouts.

I did seem to miss it but what positive play was there from Werner yesterday? He had difficulty getting to balls, gave up on balls, lost balls, and had afairc 2 poor attempts on net. By the time he was taken off he had been completely ineffectual for half a game. Not that his opening minutes were better.

I don't see the phrase shocked applying either as Mexico was setting up dangerous fast break counters from the first minute and the only shock in he first half run of play was that Germany was still at evens despite giving Mexico 5 odd man rushes before the opening goal. On at least 3 different occasions before the goal a german defender had to foul in an oddman situation just to avoid disaster. All of which were cynical tackles and any of which could have been booked or worse.

Also with several key Germans receiving yellow cards in the match this doesn't bode well.

 

[Evilo]

You might notice Germany being in a tough group. They already lost 1-0 to Mexico failing to score a goal and that result doing no favor in any tiebreaker.

Next Germany have to stew for 6 interminable days to get back on the pitch only to face Sweden. A team designed to give them fits and that knocked out Italy in a playoff to get here. So a tough match to look forward to.

Provided Germany get a result in that one (and likely requiring a margin of more than 1G and scoring at least 2) they then wait to face South Korea who have only been beaten 3/12 qualifying games.

Sure some other big teams lost in first game. They are in far easier groups. France for instance would have to self implode not to advance. For most of the groups its unthinkable the powers won't advance. From the outset this group that Germany finds itself in has no weak knees. Mexico is ALWAYS good at group stage, Sweden have a competitive side, and South Korea are no pushover.

This group is interesting in that beyond Germany pundits had difficulty predicting who would join them in advancing. (A premise that did disservice to Mexico but which suggests the teams are all competitive sides)

What?
Denmark is better than Sweden. At least equal.
Peru and Mexico are very comparable. Peru might be better.
Korea=Australia

Not sure what makes you think Germany's group is much tougher.

 

[Drivesaitl]

First, in my posts I've mentioned the problem of having Premier sides facing tough opposition in First games. France opened with Australia. How is that equal. That's a gimme match. Canada has half a chance of beating Australia.

2nd Mexico is a perennial WC qualifier and ALWAYS good in group stage. By no means are they ever an easy opponent. To the degree that I feared Germany would lose (said that on the Oilers board) before the game was played Next Sweden beat Italy. Obviously they can play some shut down ball and have. They can get a result against a soccer power. As today demonstrates all you need in a match is some help from VAR to get a result. When has Denmark ever eliminated Germany, or Italy from contention?

Korea I grant you, that side looks awful, but the goalie is very good. Still, Germany made to play Mexico, stiff opposition in first match, then wait 6 days and play shutdown team in Sweden who will look for a draw or a penalty kick. Germany doesn't see the gimme match until they could already be out of the tournament.

Peru I'm not as familiar with tbh.

You don't see any difference or significance in the scheduling. Virtually every team likes to get an easier match under their belt to calm the nerves, get settled and get going. Unless you think Australia=Mexico I'm not sure what you are thinking. Mexico probably would have beaten France as well on the day, had they been in that group. As it were France were fairly pathetic against Aussies requiring a goal line goal and a VAR goal. A very questionable one at that to just edge out vastly inferior Australia. Who Mexico or Germany would take apart for fun.

Nor is my opinion that France was automatically gifted a spot to knock out rounds an isolated view.

World Cup group betting: Preview, prediction and best bets for every World Cup group

"France will be delighted to be in this group"

 

[Evilo]

Where did I say Mexico is an easy opponent? Peru certainly isn't.

I get your point with the scheduling, but to say Germany has a tough group while France has an easy one is beyond absurd since those two groups look extremely similar. A good underrated south/central-american team, a good solid european team and a supposedly weak asian/oceanic team.

I think you also underrate the fact France could have 1 point with two tough games to come. In that case, the scheduling would have been harder.

As for you saying Mexico and Germany would tear Australia, I loled.

Again, if you want to take an easy group to illustrate how incredibly tough Germany's group is (lol), then don't take basically the exact same type of group like France's.

 

[Drivesaitl]

btw this is the most sensible pre tournament ranking that I've seen;

World Cup 2018: Ranking & latest odds on all 32 teams for the World Cup in Russia

In contrast with FIFA rankings which often look fictional.

So in rank ordinal numbers Group F is relatively hard with 2, 17,18, 27

Group D (France) has 4, 14, 24, 30. With the key being Peru and Australia expected to scare nobody and represent two weak sides in the group. In the German group there is only one weak side.

Do a reverse ordinal summation and German group is clearly harder.

 

[Evilo]

If you feel Peru is a weak opponent, what can I say?
Peru is unbeaten in two years, dominated Denmark in their encounter and is generally a very good team, very similar to Mexico.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Where did I say Mexico is an easy opponent? Peru certainly isn't.

I get your point with the scheduling, but to say Germany has a tough group while France has an easy one is beyond absurd since those two groups look extremely similar. A good underrated south/central-american team, a good solid european team and a supposedly weak asian/oceanic team.

I think you also underrate the fact France could have 1 point with two tough games to come. In that case, the scheduling would have been harder.

As for you saying Mexico and Germany would tear Australia, I loled.

Again, if you want to take an easy group to illustrate how incredibly tough Germany's group is (lol), then don't take basically the exact same type of group like France's.

Peru is a formidable opponent? The source I just linked has them 24th pre tournament. I question how much their qualifying had to do with the elevation impacting games played there. Have you ever tried to run hard at 9k elevation? For most people this would be difficult. For Peru they would be more acclimatized. Still, Peru only qualifies for the first time in 40 years due to winning a playoff with New Zealand. Peru also got a subsequent overturned result in a game they lost to lowly Bolivia, 2-0. Even at that Peru placed 5th in qualifying and barely edged Chile, due to the Bolivia gift.

You question that Germany/Mexico would have no difficulty with Australia in WC finals? On what basis are you laughing about that?

 

[Evilo]

Formidable? What?

Good to know Peru benefited form elevation, but not Mexico (also worth noting Peru had to finish above Chile, while Mexico had to finish above the US).

What basis am I laughing about?
How many blowouts has there been in this WC? One. Even right now, Belgium is supposed to walk on Panama and they aren't (so far).
To expect Germany to blow out Autralia is fun, but to expect Mexico to blow out Australia is simply Pejorative Slured.

But again, there isn't much to discuss if you think Mexico is an extremely tough opponent while Peru is a cakewalk.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Formidable? What?

Good to know Peru benefited form elevation, but not Mexico (also worth noting Peru had to finish above Chile, while Mexico had to finish above the US).

What basis am I laughing about?
How many blowouts has there been in this WC? One. Even right now, Belgium is supposed to walk on Panama and they aren't (so far).
To expect Germany to blow out Autralia is fun, but to expect Mexico to blow out Australia is simply ******ed.

But again, there isn't much to discuss if you think Mexico is an extremely tough opponent while Peru is a cakewalk.

Peru finished above Chile ONLY because of forfeited games that were over turned involving Bolivia. Chile had tied Bolivia, Peru had lost 0-2 to Bolivia. Both games were subsequently overturned giving both Chile and Peru 3-0 awarded results in these games. After which Chile and Peru were then tied. Without this overturn Chile would have advanced. Chile also had more wins, and beat Peru twice in qualifying. having a 2-0 record in qualifying against them. But the weird tiebreaker was Peru having a slightly better goal differential.

Peru might not win a single match here. I would say their only hope is surviving Australia.

 

[Evilo]

So we're going from "Peru I'm not familiar with tbh" to "Peru might not win a single match here. I would say their only hope is surviving Australia".

You should stick to what you said first : you don't know about them, fine, then don't comment.

 

[Moncherry]

Peru finished above Chile ONLY because of forfeited games that were over turned involving Bolivia. Chile had tied Bolivia, Peru had lost 0-2 to Bolivia. Both games were subsequently overturned giving both Chile and Peru 3-0 awarded results in these games. After which Chile and Peru were then tied. Without this overturn Chile would have advanced. Chile also had more wins, and beat Peru twice in qualifying. having a 2-0 record in qualifying against them. But the weird tiebreaker was Peru having a slightly better goal differential.

Peru might not win a single match here. I would say their only hope is surviving Australia.

Your point might have the least bit of credibility if Peru didn't completely outplay Denmark from start to finish.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Your point might have the least bit of credibility if Peru didn't completely outplay Denmark from start to finish.

and lost... your fictional claim notwithstanding. Peru started well but Denmark gained composure and took over the game as it proceeded.

Should Peru get another overturn like the Bolivia match? Or the last Columbia vs Peru match which was rumored to be a play for draw fix once both clubs knew of he other results and actually discussed it on the pitch while passing the ball aimlessly back and forth playng for the draw which advanced both sides ?

Peru being here is yet another embarrassment for FIFA. Or football credibility in general.

Chile beats Peru both games in qualifying.

Chile ahead of Peru in standings aside from Bolivia game outcomes reversed.

Chile TIED with Peru in final standings but Peru advances to playdown with NZ despite losing both head to head matches with Chile. go figure


Now who would think goal differential should be a tiebreaker instead of head to head record? hands up

 

[Drivesaitl]

So we're going from "Peru I'm not familiar with tbh" to "Peru might not win a single match here. I would say their only hope is surviving Australia".

You should stick to what you said first : you don't know about them, fine, then don't comment.

heh, I like Chile. You got me with that. But I had heard of the controversy in which Peru did advance so I'm sympathetic to opinions of Chileans who have been pretty upset about it. Chile national side have a couple times trained up here in Edmonton. Also played up here in WC unders. So I've met a few and seen them a lot on the pitch here. Kind of followed their side. I do see Chile as comparable to Mexico. Of course I'm unfamiliar with Peru. Who isn't. Really I can hardly remember Peru ever even being in WC. 82, but I don't remember them playing. So I'm pretty unfamiliar with their national side or style of play.

anyway cheers

 

[Moncherry]

and lost... your fictional claim notwithstanding. Peru started well but Denmark gained composure and took over the game as it proceeded.

Should Peru get another overturn like the Bolivia match? Or the last Columbia vs Peru match which was rumored to be a play for draw fix once both clubs knew of he other results and actually discussed it on the pitch while passing the ball aimlessly back and forth playng for the draw which advanced both sides ?

Peru being here is yet another embarrassment for FIFA. Or football credibility in general.

Chile beats Peru both games in qualifying.

Chile ahead of Peru in standings aside from Bolivia game outcomes reversed.

Chile TIED with Peru in final standings but Peru advances to playdown with NZ despite losing both head to head matches with Chile. go figure


Now who would think goal differential should be a tiebreaker instead of head to head record? hands up

My fictional claim? Denmark didn't take over shit. Their goal was completely against the run of play.

There's nothing wrong with Peru being here either. Your whole point is nonsense.