2014 FIFA World Cup - Brazil

  • Thread starter Thread starter Akmuq
  • 4,127 comments
  • 151,142 views
Everyone wanted Chile to win for some reason (except from Brazilians).


Next up Colombia vs Uruguay, Colombia has nearly all the odds in it's favour, but Uruguay is not an easy team.
 
C-ZETA
Indeed, this does rather confirm Brazil's demise from contention.
The Dutch are still my favourites. But I really do fear, with the way some of this has gone, they will just get smashed out of nothing.
I fear for this because they're the team I'm now supporting. And Mexico smashed one of my other teams - Croatia.
Click to expand...
I think the Netherlands has already learned their lesson against Australia. As for the opponents, there are harder ones than Mexico and Costa Rica, despite how well they have done. After all, Chile also won against a big opponent (Spain) but lost from the Netherlands.

The real danger probably is Argentina, in the half finals. Argentina has only won from its opponents so far with only one goal every time, while the Dutch score royally. So if this pattern continues, there's are real chance we will see the Netherlands in the final once again. Against Germany or France (can't say for sure, France scored more but Germany had harder opponents).
 
NICKname
Germany had harder opponents
Click to expand...
Not in the form of Ghana they didn't. Especially not one that sent team members home and were almost in it for money.
France, on the other hand, played a respectable Swiss side and scored 5. And it should have been 7 (Benzema pen miss+Cabaye's rebound miss, and Benzema's final whistle goal).
But as said, at this World Cup nearly everything has happened.

I'm thinking Colombia, France, Netherlands and Argentina for the SFs as well. But at this rate, for all we know it could just as likely be Urugay, Nigeria, Costa Rica and Usa (hah! yeah right) instead.
 
Brazil might have been taken to a penalty shootout - and a terrible one at that - but they put twenty three shots on goal (nearly twice what Chile managed) and triple the on-target efforts from Chile. I wouldn't be in a hurry to write them off.
 
Famine
Brazil might have been taken to a penalty shootout - and a terrible one at that - but they put twenty three shots on goal (nearly twice what Chile managed) and triple the on-target efforts from Chile. I wouldn't be in a hurry to write them off.
Click to expand...
And they scored 1 goal from all that.
When you only manage 1 goal, stats like that make one team look worse, if anything.
 
C-ZETA
And they scored 1 goal from all that.
When you only manage 1 goal, stats like that make one team look worse, if anything.
Click to expand...

I don't see how, it shows me they made more opportunities to attack then Chile should have allowed. I agree that in the sense only one goal came from it that isn't great, but if Brazil keep playing like this other teams may not have the defense to stop them and be worse off than Chile was.
 
C-ZETA
And they scored 1 goal from all that.
When you only manage 1 goal, stats like that make one team look worse, if anything.
Click to expand...
The managers of any team Brazil will face next won't be looking at how many went in - that's irrelevant because they've already scored enough to face you. They'll be looking at the fact they took a shot every five minutes and trying to work out how to stop that from happening.
 
Akira AC
Next up Colombia vs Uruguay, Colombia has nearly all the odds in it's favour, but Uruguay is not an easy team.
Click to expand...
No Suarez, but Forlan and Abel Hernandez are potential match winners. Not to mention the old cliche of garra charua (Edit: doh). I think Colombia will win, but it's foolish to write off the Uruguayans.
C-ZETA
Not in the form of Ghana they didn't. Especially not one that sent team members home and were almost in it for money.
Click to expand...
Nevertheless, Ghana played very well in their first two matches. They only really fell apart after the Germany match.
 
Last edited:
To be fair, it's not like Fred did Brazil any justice.
But Chile are not the most defensive team you'll see. Not with a team featuring not a single player at even 6'0".

Forlan is, sadly, past his best. He's one of only two Uruguayans I can love (Godin is the other) but there's no escaping the fact that since the 2010 glory he's gone to Japan. And Abel Hernandez is not exactly an international legend.

Colombia are the dark horses, and James should have another blinder. I was never keen on him before - he was just sort of 'merely' good and I didn't like the way he looked - but now I see what everyone was banging on about.

If Urugay do win though, I will be very angry.
 
Last edited:
C-ZETA
Not in the form of Ghana they didn't. Especially not one that sent team members home and were almost in it for money.
France, on the other hand, played a respectable Swiss side and scored 5. And it should have been 7 (Benzema pen miss+Cabaye's rebound miss, and Benzema's final whistle goal).
But as said, at this World Cup nearly everything has happened.
Click to expand...
True. But they didn't win with as large against easier opponents (not scoring at all against Ecuador), so how good France exactly is at the moment is vague.

Then again, I didn't watch any of France's games other than against Switzerland. I know the Netherlands played poorly against Australia because they were too arrogant. If that's the case, they need to take care of it. Messing up against Germany in the knockout stage is WAY worse than messing up against Australia in the group stage.

Famine
Brazil might have been taken to a penalty shootout - and a terrible one at that - but they put twenty three shots on goal (nearly twice what Chile managed) and triple the on-target efforts from Chile. I wouldn't be in a hurry to write them off.
Click to expand...
Any fool can shoot on goal. Shots on goal don't mean anything unless they go in. Brazil didn't do that once tonight.
 
zzz_pt
I think it would be good for brazilians if they lose this game. They could concentrate and think about their country's problems instead.
Click to expand...

Winning or losing won't make any difference on that.

XxInNOutxX
Pity Chile lost to a penalty shootout. Brazil manage to go thru, but they WONT WIN the world cup, you can quote me on that!

Favourites to win the world cup for me are Netherlands and France. Colombia as dark horses :D
Click to expand...

You are right.

I miss his magic..



At least we would loose with a spectacle.
 
NICKname
I know the Netherlands played poorly against Australia because they were too arrogant.
Click to expand...
I just think Australia had the game of their lives, really. They wouldn't have come back from behind if there were a problem with the team.

While I do think France have a real chance, I'm still hoping they would lose. I have a French person I need to laugh at for that.
There is also a very unfortunate situation ahead if Nigeria and Germany go through...
 
C-ZETA
I just think Australia had the game of their lives, really. They wouldn't have come back from behind if there were a problem with the team.

While I do think France have a real chance, I'm still hoping they would lose. I have a French person I need to laugh at for that.
There is also a very unfortunate situation ahead if Nigeria and Germany go through...
Click to expand...
Imagine if that had happened in South Africa... :lol:
 
NICKname
Any fool can shoot on goal. Shots on goal don't mean anything unless they go in. Brazil didn't do that once tonight.
Click to expand...
Actually, they did. Exactly once, in fact.

But as the saying goes, you miss 100% of the shots you don't take. Shots lead to goals. 23 is a lot of shots, even in 120 minutes, and on another night, six of them could have gone in. Or none. Minimising how many shots your opponent has is half of the battle.

Edit: I'd also like to add:
Luis Suarez
I lost my balance, making my body unstable and falling on top of my opponent. At that moment I hit my face against the player leaving a small bruise on my cheek and a strong pain in my teeth.
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
Famine
Actually, they did. Exactly once, in fact.

But as the saying goes, you miss 100% of the shots you don't take. Shots lead to goals. 23 is a lot of shots, even in 120 minutes, and on another night, six of them could have gone in. Or none. Minimising how many shots your opponent has is half of the battle.
Click to expand...

Well said.

Brazil had quite a few dangerous shots on goal that could have gone in and nobody would have said "what a crap goal/poor job by the keeper", it goes to show Bravo did a good job keeping his goal at bay.
 
There must be one guy on a camera whose sole assignment is to find the hot women in the crowd. He did a pretty good job toward the end of the Columbian anthem.
 
Famine
Actually, they did. Exactly once, in fact.
Click to expand...
Nope. Own goal.

Famine
But as the saying goes, you miss 100% of the shots you don't take. Shots lead to goals. 23 is a lot of shots, even in 120 minutes, and on another night, six of them could have gone in. Or none. Minimising how many shots your opponent has is half of the battle.
Click to expand...
For those goals to go in you have to get the ball past the defenders and the keeper. None of the 23 shots went in (at least none goals an opponents foot helped with). That's either because they were bad at aiming to night or because the opposition stopped the shots from going in. Like I said: any fool can make shots on goal, but if you're good enough to win you make the ball go past the defenders and into the net.
 
LeoStrop
Winning or losing won't make any difference on that.



You are right.

I miss his magic..



At least we would loose with a spectacle.
Click to expand...


Aye we all miss Ronaldinho and co... The Brazil now has less skill, more tactical play. Well, we can always watch Neymar grow... he still have 2 more WCs to go! :D
 
Goal of the competition, won't be beaten. My god..
 
NICKname
Nope. Own goal.
Click to expand...
An own goal in Brazil's favour credited to a Brazilian player?

Even if you want to think it's an own goal, it followed a header on goal from a Brazilian player. That's a shot converted to a goal.
NICKname
For those goals to go in you have to get the ball past the defenders and the keeper.
Click to expand...
You know how you can make that happen? You take a shot.

Not taking shots guarantees you don't score. Taking the shots means you might. Stopping your opponents from taking shots is how you stop them from scoring and winning. Whomever Brazil play next have to stop a team who take a shot every five minutes from taking any shots. That way they stop them from scoring.
 
Certainly a good goal. But I wouldn't call it goal of the cup yet...
Or even so far. Yeah, bite me...
You can just tell James will be pure class.
 
What a strike by Rodriguez! take a bow son!

Hope they show highlights of the game earlier, sounds like I missed a cracker...
 
Famine
An own goal in Brazil's favour credited to a Brazilian player?

Even if you want to think it's an own goal, it followed a header on goal from a Brazilian player. That's a shot converted to a goal.You know how you can make that happen? You take a shot.
Click to expand...


It didn't follow any header. It was the defender's foot.

Famine
Not taking shots guarantees you don't score. Taking the shots means you might. Stopping your opponents from taking shots is how you stop them from scoring and winning. Whomever Brazil play next have to stop a team who take a shot every five minutes from taking any shots. That way they stop them from scoring.
Click to expand...
While it indeed must be noted that Brazil takes a lot of shots on goal, they never succeeded on scoring. Preventing Brazil from scoring on goal will rule out the possibility of goals, but it becomes less serious if they don't do a good job at scoring anyway.
 
NICKname

It didn't follow any header. It was the defender's foot.
Click to expand...
Neymar corner, Thiago Silva header on goal, David Luiz scores. Look at the title of your video, look at who the goal is credited to by FIFA. It's the Brazilian defender David Luiz, coverting Thiago Silva's shot (with his head) on goal.
NICKname
While it indeed must be noted that Brazil takes a lot of shots on goal, they never succeeded on scoring.
Click to expand...
Except the one they did score. And it's irrelevant how many goals they have - or haven't - scored to get them to the place they are now. If you let them shoot you give them a chance at scoring against you. They took 23 shots against Chile - one every five minutes - and any one of them could have lead to a goal (or not).

Shots lead to goals. Not shots don't lead to goals.
 
Not sure how not shooting is relevant. The fact is that Brazil weren't racking up the important stat - the goals.
 
That Suarez excuse was ridiculously laughable, imagine if other players used that excuse..

Zidane 'I fell into Materazzi'
Cantona 'I slipped into a fan'
Giggs and Terry 'I fell into your wife'
 
Not to mention you don't even need to score a goal to win the World Cup. If your in the right Group under the right circumstances you could get through on 3 0-0's.

Then just win on penaltys throughout. Never gonna happen, but possible.
 
Brazil's first goal was an own goal. The header was not on target, the ball was sent to goal because of the Chilean player's foot. Had he not been there, I guess David Luiz would have scored himself.
 
Back