Germany vs England Friendly

Andersonisgod

blueser wrote: »

You really don't like England, do you?

I don't like them. They are basically the opposite of the type of football I most enjoy.

Mushy

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Great. You think they can win it. They won't, but having beliefs is good I guess.

Isn't that what its like for every team?

Mars Bar

astonaidan wrote: »

Delighted for Kane, good Galway man

I coach two of his relations actually. One of them is pretty good and the other isn't as good but they are only 7 and 8 respectively so I wouldn't be writing them off just yet!

Ulysses Gaze

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I don't like them. They are basically the opposite of the type of football I most enjoy.

Aren't you a Chelsea fan? As well as a Barca fan.

Andersonisgod

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Aren't you a Chelsea fan? As well as a Barca fan.

Chelsea fan from childhood, Barça fan from a love of the game.

Paully D

A nice win for England but the ridiculously over-the-top reaction to same has been a bit bizarre IMO. At the end of the day, it was a friendly. The post match reaction from all concerned (media, fans, players and manager) would be more suited to a knockout win at a major tournament.

Boskowski

Didn't see the match but bad result for England.

Harry Palmr

Paully D wrote: »

A nice win for England but the ridiculously over-the-top reaction to same has been a bit bizarre IMO. At the end of the day, it was a friendly. The post match reaction from all concerned (media, fans, players and manager) would be more suited to a knockout win at a major tournament.

I think most of it is hinging on the youth of the team, the dead wood of the so called golden generation has, bar Rooney been cleared out and they look all the better for it. The only real issue is the manager - the game started as a 4-3-3 and ended 4-4-2 diamond but come the tournament will it essentially end up 4-5-1 with say Milner as one of the 5? Safety first or damn the torpedoes?

astonaidan

Mars Bar wrote: »

I coach two of his relations actually. One of them is pretty good and the other isn't as good but they are only 7 and 8 respectively so I wouldn't be writing them off just yet!

I was coached by his cousin and played with others, was only one decent player out of them :pac:

astonaidan

I kinda hope Germany/Spain do win it, I dont think certain people would actually be able to take it, imagine what the poor lads parents would be like with all the crying in the basement, they wouldnt have a wink of sleep

Andersonisgod

Harry Palmr wrote: »

I think most of it is hinging on the youth of the team, the dead wood of the so called golden generation has, bar Rooney been cleared out and they look all the better for it. The only real issue is the manager - the game started as a 4-3-3 and ended 4-4-2 diamond but come the tournament will it essentially end up 4-5-1 with say Milner as one of the 5? Safety first or damn the torpedoes?

They became more threatening once they went to a diamond though I don't think it's too much of a coincidence that the game turned after Hummels went off (apparently with a slight muscle strain). Tah is a terrific young player but this was his first senior cap and he has ability on the ball is not yet at the level of Hummels. Without the Dortmund defender Germany really struggled with the first phase, not helped by Khedira's deficiencies in this area of the game. Weigl excels here.

BeepBeep67

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Greece won it in 2004 with a similar formula.

I think the Greek formula was a little more 'prescribed'

Beefy78

Andersonisgod wrote: »

While England are able to keep basic possession, there is no art in their play, no ingenuity. They have a team of players that are strong and quick but that lack the understanding and ability to play anything other than either a counter attacking game or, against smaller sides, a dull, one dimensional approach to breaking teams down.

Looked OK to me, tbh :cool:

Beefy78

Harry Palmr wrote: »

I think most of it is hinging on the youth of the team, the dead wood of the so called golden generation has, bar Rooney been cleared out and they look all the better for it. The only real issue is the manager - the game started as a 4-3-3 and ended 4-4-2 diamond but come the tournament will it essentially end up 4-5-1 with say Milner as one of the 5? Safety first or damn the torpedoes?

I think that's harsh on Hodgson. Since the defeat to Italy at Euro 2012 he's realised that he hasn't got any decent defenders and has tended to put out attacking formations, especially in the key games. First game at the last World Cup Against Italy he basically named four forwards in Rooney, Sturridge, Sterling and Welbeck.

Giggsy11

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Haha what do you think they are? Their strength is their athletic ability, Kane is the most typical English number 9 you'll ever see and Vardy's strengths are pace and tenacity (though his movement there was quite good). If you can't tell the difference between a player whose strengths are technical quality and a player whose strengths are athleticism then you're not worth my time.

It's so much clear that you don't have any idea about Kane. Maybe once in a while you should watch him before spouting random bs.

Optimalprimerib

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I don't like them. They are basically the opposite of the type of football I most enjoy.

I kind of want England to win it now. I feel unclean.

Andersonisgod

Giggsy11 wrote: »

It's so much clear that you don't have any idea about Kane. Maybe once in a while you should watch him before spouting random bs.

I watch a lot of football. Any player I talk about I've watched pretty extensively, that's the Andersonisgod guarantee.

Giggsy11

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I watch a lot of football. Any player I talk about I've watched pretty extensively, that's the Andersonisgod guarantee.

I refuse to believe that when you say Kane is typical England striker when he is anything but.

In the Internet era anyone can just act like an expert, it's not hard to gather some information on any player.

Andersonisgod

Giggsy11 wrote: »

I refuse to believe that when you say Kane is typical England striker when he is anything but.

In the Internet era anyone can just act like an expert, it's not hard to gather some information on any player.

Tell you what, how about every time I'm watching Kane play I'll comment about it on this Board. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised, or entirely horrified, with just how true I am to my word.

Giggsy11

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Tell you what, how about every time I'm watching Kane play I'll comment about it on this Board. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised, or entirely horrified, with just how true I am to my word.

Give it a try. After that if you still believe he is typical English striker then you don't have a clue on what "typical english striker" means or you are really very poor judge of player ability.

Horrified? lol.

Andersonisgod

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Give it a try. After that if you still believe he is typical English striker then you don't have a clue on what "typical english striker" means or you are really very poor judge of player ability.

Horrified? lol.

OK I'm gonna bite. What is, by your definition, the typical English centre forward because I want to be sure we're singing off the same hymn sheet.

Beefy78

Kane is a traditional English number 9 in one sense. He's a big, powerful striker. But he has a lot more to his game. His finishing is exceptional and he has brilliant technique. I think you could plug him into any system and he'd fit into it because he's a very clever player.

I see a lot of Alan Shearer in him.

Andersonisgod

Beefy78 wrote: »

Kane is a traditional English number 9 in one sense. He's a big, powerful striker. But he has a lot more to his game. His finishing is exceptional and he has brilliant technique. I think you could plug him into any system and he'd fit into it because he's a very clever player.

I see a lot of Alan Shearer in him.

To be honest I also think Shearer when I see him though time will tell if he has the same longevity. I'm not saying he isn't skillful, English centre forwards can be skillful but he's a big guy who uses his frame to upset defenders and who has the legs to run channels. If you are putting him in a framework it's as a traditional number 9.

Giggsy11

Andersonisgod wrote: »

OK I'm gonna bite. What is, by your definition, the typical English centre forward because I want to be sure we're singing off the same hymn sheet.

Athleticism/Physical presence > Technical ability. That's a typical English CF.

IIRC you said the same thing in the post I quoted, that Vardy's and Kane's strengths are their athleticism. Right in Vardy's case but in Kane's case it's so far off the truth.

So what in your opinion is typical english CF.

Giggsy11

Andersonisgod wrote: »

To be honest I also think Shearer when I see him though time will tell if he has the same longevity. I'm not saying he isn't skillful, English centre forwards can be skillful but he's a big guy who uses his frame to upset defenders and who has the legs to run channels. If you are putting him in a framework it's as a traditional number 9.

Kane's intelligence and movement > his physical presence.

Beefy78

Andersonisgod wrote: »

To be honest I also think Shearer when I see him though time will tell if he has the same longevity. I'm not saying he isn't skillful, English centre forwards can be skillful but he's a big guy who uses his frame to upset defenders and who has the legs to run channels. If you are putting him in a framework it's as a traditional number 9.

I think people would accept that to a degree but you rubbed them up the wrong way a bit by saying that players like him will never be as good as a 'proper' footballers. Kane is a quality footballer and England and Spurs are lucky to have him. Just because he is big and powerful doesn't prevent him from also being very good at football.

You said "If you can't tell the difference between a player whose strengths are technical quality and a player whose strengths are athleticism then you're not worth my time" but those strengths aren't mutually exclusive. Ronaldo had both, as does Cristiano Ronaldo for that matter. Kane isn't in that league but by any metric he's a good player.

Andersonisgod

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Kane's intelligence and movement > his physical presence.

Haha do you really think so? I'll use a world class forward as a comparison since that's the class that most see Kane in now. If Kane had the same physical capacities as Luis Suarez do you think he'd be playing at Spurs? Do you think he'd be in the Premier League? Suarez is a guy with minimal pace, he's not particularly tall or incredibly strong. What he's got going for him is remarkable technical skills and he's surely one of the most clever footballers I've ever seen. He's an example of footballing ability taking precedence over athletic ability.

By the way I'm not even saying that being more athlete than footballer is a bad thing. My favourite player is Drogba, incredibly skilled but definitely someone whose athleticism was key for.

Andersonisgod

Beefy78 wrote: »

I think people would accept that to a degree but you rubbed them up the wrong way a bit by saying that players like him will never be as good as a 'proper' footballers. Kane is a quality footballer and England and Spurs are lucky to have him. Just because he is big and powerful doesn't prevent him from also being very good at football.

You said "If you can't tell the difference between a player whose strengths are technical quality and a player whose strengths are athleticism then you're not worth my time" but those strengths aren't mutually exclusive. Ronaldo had both, as does Cristiano Ronaldo for that matter. Kane isn't in that league but by any metric he's a good player.

As I said above, sure you can have both. Equally a footballer with an outstanding physical trait (Messi and his pace) is favourable. My point was rather taking an extreme view of the sport, something along the lines of 11 Iniesta's beat 11 Ramires' almost every time.

I must stress I'm not saying he isn't a good footballer, my point is of the simpler variety. His key strength is his athleticism.

gosplan

Andersonisgod wrote: »

As I said above, sure you can have both. Equally a footballer with an outstanding physical trait (Messi and his pace) is favourable. My point was rather taking an extreme view of the sport, something along the lines of 11 Iniesta's beat 11 Ramires' almost every time.

I must stress I'm not saying he isn't a good footballer, my point is of the simpler variety. His key strength is his athleticism.

But you're being hugely elitist. In your posting style, opinion of your own knowledge and opinion of world football.

You're correct about your own preferences obviously but it seems your whole basis for judging everything in football is that you think Guardolia's Barca, and Barca in general are the sh1t.

gosplan

Also AIG ...

'England are basically the opposite of the football I enjoy, athleticism first blah blah blah ... My favourite player ever is Drogba'

Doesn't make much sense to me.

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

Also AIG ...

'England are basically the opposite of the football I enjoy, athleticism first blah blah blah ... My favourite player ever is Drogba'

Doesn't make much sense to me.

Childhood favourite player. The guy was an incredible player and person. Though as I've gotten older my love for possession football and the technically gifted proponents of that style have won my heart.

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

But you're being hugely elitist. In your posting style, opinion of your own knowledge and opinion of world football.

You're correct about your own preferences obviously but it seems your whole basis for judging everything in football is that you think Guardolia's Barca, and Barca in general are the sh1t.

While I'm a Barça fan, there's more to possession football than just Barcelona or Pep Guardiola. I've got a lot of admiration for teams like Villareal, Borussia Monchengladbach, Napoli ect. Certainly Barcelona are the standard bearers in football and all must ultimately be judged against them but I'm not on this thread to speak of Barcelona, I'm here to extols the virtues of possession football and an excellent German squad.

Fakman87

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Childhood favourite player. The guy was an incredible player and person. Though as I've gotten older my love for possession football and the technically gifted proponents of that style have won my heart.

So you are about 20 years old. It all makes sense now.

DubDani

Good win for England, but I don't think it is good for the Team. The english press will now make them out to be a real contender, and the team could do without the pressure.

As for Germany.. they have been pretty rubbish since the WC. In 6 friendlies since then they have won one, drew one and lost 4. Said that, we are talking about Germany here, and they will surely be there for the business end of the EC16, semis at least.

Andersonisgod

Fakman87 wrote: »

So you are about 20 years old. It all makes sense now.

Older. Though if I'm to describe myself I'd say I'm a motivated, enthusiastic individual with more football experience than most. I participate with football locally and I watch more games per weekend than probably any other poster on this Board and quite a varied selection too. In between that I read constantly about football from quality journalists. Outside of football I'm an avid wrestling fan and TV show and movie enthusiast. I've been told exactly 17 times that I'm very handsome, I agree with this school of thought.

gosplan

Andersonisgod wrote: »

While I'm a Barça fan, there's more to possession football than just Barcelona or Pep Guardiola. I've got a lot of admiration for teams like Villareal, Borussia Monchengladbach, Napoli ect. Certainly Barcelona are the standard bearers in football and all must ultimately be judged against them but I'm not on this thread to speak of Barcelona, I'm here to extols the virtues of possession football and an excellent German squad.

Yeah but to be honest I think you wouldn't be involved if there wasn't a clear line from Barca to Guardiola to Germany.

You end up in this thread comparing players to Suarez and Iniesta. The truth is there isn't a forward or midfielder on either the English or German team comparable to either.

That was a golden generation like no other. Iniesta, Xavi, Busquets, Pique and then add Messi - unbelievable. But you can't base all your opinions on them. Otherwise you are useless in 95% of arguments.

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

Yeah but to be honest I think you wouldn't be involved if there wasn't a clear line from Barca to Guardiola to Germany.

You end up in this thread comparing players to Suarez and Iniesta. The truth is there isn't a forward or midfielder on either the English or German team comparable to either.

That was a golden generation like no other. Iniesta, Xavi, Busquets, Pique and then add Messi - unbelievable. But you can't base all your opinions on them. Otherwise you are useless in 95% of arguments.

That's a bit of a conspiracy theory I'd say.

Yes, examples of technical players, I've also spoken very highly of Julian Weigl here. Find the link between him and Pep.

My opinions aren't based on a single squad of players, to suggest otherwise is silly. In fact up until other posters wanted to find out more about Andersonisgod, I was perfectly content speaking German football with people and on the deficiencies in England's setup. Alas some simply force me to arrive back in Barcelona.

Boskowski

Well, slow morning. Any craic in here?

astonaidan

The funniest thing is how wrong a person can be but still keep digging to prove they are right, its hilarious, sir you need to put down the spade and slink of for a couple of days as per usual, youve been prove incorrect again, its like this weekly dose of you being shown to know nothing about football has taught you nothing

gosplan

Andersonisgod wrote: »

That's a bit of a conspiracy theory I'd say.

Yes, examples of technical players, I've also spoken very highly of Julian Weigl here. Find the link between him and Pep.

My opinions aren't based on a single squad of players, to suggest otherwise is silly. In fact up until other posters wanted to find out more about Andersonisgod, I was perfectly content speaking German football with people and on the deficiencies in England's setup. Alas some simply force me to arrive back in Barcelona.

Germany is the link. That's why you're here.

As regards the rest, you choose to come up with the astonishing point that you prefer players like Suarez to players like Kane.

Like find me someone that doesn't.

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

Germany is the link. That's why you're here.

As regards the rest, you choose to come up with the astonishing point that you prefer players like Suarez to players like Kane.

Like find me someone that doesn't.

I think this might be one for the conspiracy theory forum because that is quite the leap.

Perfect, we can all live together peacefully in my utopian society.

astonaidan

But seriously lads, dont know how you can argue about Kane being a typical English striker. Think about it Heskey, Ricketts, Davies, Kane is pretty much their clone :pac: makes me think back to the route one football up to Owen working for flick ons. Oh wait maybe typical English striker is eh the most cliche thing anyone can say and shows what you know about the sport

Beefy78

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Older. Though if I'm to describe myself I'd say I'm a motivated, enthusiastic individual with more football experience than most. I participate with football locally and I watch more games per weekend than probably any other poster on this Board and quite a varied selection too. In between that I read constantly about football from quality journalists. Outside of football I'm an avid wrestling fan and TV show and movie enthusiast. I've been told exactly 17 times that I'm very handsome, I agree with this school of thought.

Don't forget the radio show you host on North Norfolk Digital

Andersonisgod

Beefy78 wrote: »

Don't forget the radio show you host on North Norfolk Digital :cool:

Not yet. I've done a small bit if podcasting but it's not the same. If you want to find out anything else about me feel free to PM me.

SlickRic

Andersonisgod wrote: »

As I said above, sure you can have both. Equally a footballer with an outstanding physical trait (Messi and his pace) is favourable. My point was rather taking an extreme view of the sport, something along the lines of 11 Iniesta's beat 11 Ramires' almost every time.

I must stress I'm not saying he isn't a good footballer, my point is of the simpler variety. His key strength is his athleticism.

Buy Kane's key strength isn't his athleticism. It's his cleverness and quality of movement.

Also, you say he'd be at Barca like Suarez if he was good as you think we're all saying. You do know Suarez was awesome for years before arriving at Barcelona right? Kane is allowed to be awesome before going somewhere else (if he ever does).

I don't think your issue is you don't watch Kane and such. I think the issue is that everything players do is referenced against a very specific style that you like. I'd guess that you didn't rate Suarez as highly as you do now until you saw how he worked at Barcelona. He's as far from tiki-taka, at first glance, than you can get, with everything direct and powerful.

Just think outside the box a bit. You might learn to appreciate certain players sooner.

Liam O

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Older. Though if I'm to describe myself I'd say I'm a motivated, enthusiastic individual with more football experience than most. I participate with football locally and I watch more games per weekend than probably any other poster on this Board and quite a varied selection too. In between that I read constantly about football from quality journalists. Outside of football I'm an avid wrestling fan and TV show and movie enthusiast. I've been told exactly 17 times that I'm very handsome, I agree with this school of thought.

Did you give up on the MMA after your hero turned out to be a drug cheat?

Hope that doesn't happen with any more of your heroes...

Andersonisgod

SlickRic wrote: »

Buy Kane's key strength isn't his athleticism. It's his cleverness and quality of movement.

Also, you say he'd be at Barca like Suarez if he was good as you think we're all saying. You do know Suarez was awesome for years before arriving at Barcelona right? Kane is allowed to be awesome before going somewhere else (if he ever does).

I don't think your issue is you don't watch Kane and such. I think the issue is that everything players do is referenced against a very specific style that you like. I'd guess that you didn't rate Suarez as highly as you do now until you saw how he worked at Barcelona. He's as far from tiki-taka, at first glance, than you can get, with everything direct and powerful.

Just think outside the box a bit. You might learn to appreciate certain players sooner.

Again putting words in my mouth that I absolutely dud nit say. It's be becoming a running theme.

If you really think his strength isn't his athleticism then there's really no point in speaking with you. The guy plays as a line striker precisely because of his athleticism qualities, his movement is decent, I wouldn't say his football brain is anything to write home about to the extent of players like Muller or Suarez.

I didn't say that actually. At no point in my many comments on my thread did I say that. That's not even the point I was making. Please read my comments before responding to them otherwise you're wasting your own time and mine.

Not everyone has to come through La Masia for me to appreciate them and I could give numerous examples of players I appreciate outside of those prototypical Barcelona players. He's a proper Street footballer, all smarts and skills, impossible not to love a player like that.

Corholio

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Older. Though if I'm to describe myself I'd say I'm a motivated, enthusiastic individual with more football experience than most. I participate with football locally and I watch more games per weekend than probably any other poster on this Board and quite a varied selection too. In between that I read constantly about football from quality journalists. Outside of football I'm an avid wrestling fan and TV show and movie enthusiast. I've been told exactly 17 times that I'm very handsome, I agree with this school of thought.

Not sure why you deal in high probables in which you couldn't possibly know. It makes 'interesting' reading if anyone was to foolishly take it as fact but in reality is based on zero. But I'm sure you don't mind at all that yet another thread has become responses to you.

Andersonisgod

Liam O wrote: »

Did you give up on the MMA after your hero turned out to be a drug cheat?

Hope that doesn't happen with any more of your heroes...

I didn't realise I was doing a full on self-appraisal. Sure I really enjoy mma too. I enjoy foreign films. I have a particular love of Japanese culture. What an odd direction this forum is going in. How about you LiamO, tell me some things about yourself, I want to get to know the guy behind the username.

Andersonisgod

Corholio wrote: »

Not sure why you deal in high probables in which you couldn't possibly know. It makes 'interesting' reading if anyone was to foolishly take it as fact but in reality is based on zero. But I'm sure you don't mind at all that yet another thread has become responses to you.

I know it's so strange. I'm here talking about football but inevitably people want to know more about me, I must he bloody riveting.

Back on football (!) I watch quite a few games live and via tv during the week. I'm working on probabilities but if I were a betting man I'd be confident in the likelyhood of what I say.