@MajorPom said in FIFA World Cup:
Keep going. One day you’ll figure out the one thing makes the other.
Nope
Two completely different methods to achieve the same result (no goals)
And I think both provide a boring on field spectacle
But, it's the WC, and you do play to win the game, so you do what you can do.
The passing/possession style is worse IMO, because it's a double whamy.
Not only ensuring only one side can score; but also making it impossible for the other (you cant score without the ball).
Where as the defensive type set-up gives away the ball, and basically says to the opposition, show us what you got.
Which is a little better philosophically, IMO.
the interest being provided by the close margin on the scoreboard
goin down early against a euro big shot, is usually game over, and then everything is boring . . . change the channel
Paraguay style; completed only 8 passes in a half of football, but scored a goal and went on and won the game.
The All Whites aint the All Blacks so they should have played a Paraguay type style, more defensive.
They actually led a couple of games (I think), and had a pair of quite sharp strikers
If they'd played a style better suited to their skill set, they'd have had a better outcome.
Instead they were a bit naive, and leaked goals constantly
With the logical result, an early trip home
prefer the sub-saharan style (critiqued by Schweinsteiger recently) myself
But play like that against the euros, and there is usually only going to be one result
Only the South Americans seem to able to deal with the euros