QUOTE (kurtsimonw @ Jul 7 2010, 10:51 PM)
I do think Fillipo was talking about on the tournement as a whole, rather than just tonights game. But tonight Spain showed they deserved it more by beating them head-to-head. I think the Germans played 2 very bad teams, 2 really under-acheiving teams and 1 over-acheiving team.. this was there first real test.
Spain keeping the ball had nothing to do with Germany losing, England had more possesion than Germany when we played. The difference, in my opinion, was that Spain were quicker a the back, so they couldn't just launch balls for Ozil and Podolski to chase. Muller was missed too.
Yes, indeed I had. Spain was overall better.
I thought a little about the wins against great teams - I'm not prepared to deminish the success Germany made winning 4-0 or 4-1(2). IMO it is always hard and special to win against Argentina or England, no matter how strong the teams are.
If we view the whole tournament Germany, after loosing against Serbia had a chain of 4 very heavy matches and opponents who were not maybe at their best, but had the quality to make a surprise or win with ease.
Spain on the other hand had - Honduras as a easy fixture, then Chile, then Portugal and then Paraguay. They had their ups and downs which allowed them to give 100% in this match.
Germany did not play good. It disappointed both the fans and the players as well. Schweini clearly said - we did not played the way we wanted. They looked like Paraguay.
My conclusion is - if Germany would have maintained a chain of wins against 5 or 4 teams it would, without overrating, be a precedan rarely seen in World Cup history. Of course, it did not happen.
It does hurt when I remember that Spain and Holland had much more up's and down's. Germany-Holland would be an ideal fixture, a clash between two systems and two courses. Spain-Holland is just a clash between to tactics.