Originally posted by Df02
but the only reason Robinho had the option to run at people was because the Australians were pushing forward to try equalise, if Robinho had been on in the first half he would'vestruggled to do much against a solid block of defenders, who were closing players down quickly, just like the rest of the Brazil team.but Ronaldo is playing piss-poorly, he never looks interested and even when he does he looks off pace and criminally off-form... i say criminally because it's a crime to waste a striker spot when there are dozens of good Brazilian strikers to fill it.
Ronaldo is a big man. He's not out of shape, but something is clearly up with the man. He got barged off the ball by a single guy in the first half, the old Ronaldo would have just shrugged them off. I like him, but I think he needs to be benched and Robinho should be played from now on. Especially after completely missing the volley, when he previously would have buried that, undeniably. I also think we need to see Juninho, so many free kick opportunities that could be goals, and Carlos pelts them into row Z. At least Parriera isn't above taking Ronaldo off, even if he starts him. I just wish he'd leave Ronaldo off and bring him ON if he thinks he's needed. Not wait until he's losing Brazil's chances and then panic. Though he did set Adriano's goal up.
Robinho is smaller, faster and arguably more skillful. Whether he'd have broken through or not is up for debate, but he would have had a better chance at it.
Originally posted by Df02
there was actually no difference between the way Australia played and the way TaT played... both had alot of people behind the ball and both tried to play on the counter.
if you play for the counter ofcourse you're gonna have men bailing back when you lose the ball... TaT had a 15-20 window of the game where they looked threatening and moved forward.. not saying their only chances came then, but it was when they looked to actually play up the pitch... and for the last 10-15minutes of the first half Australia had exactly the same spell of foward minded play.Both teams defended, both teams defended well, both teams tried to counter and both team enjoyed small period of psuedo-dominance... resulting in both teams making their opponents look distinctly average.
there is actually very little difference between the Aussie V Brazil and England v TaT for me, you've just chosen to say England were poor, and that Australia were making things difficult for Brazil, when the reality is, both applies to both, Brazil were pretty poor, and Australia made it difficult, just as England were poor, and TaT made it difficult.
That's the difference, you see. I watched both games also and whilst I'm not denying similarities, I don't understand how you can claim that Trinidad defended as much or as heavily compared to Australia. Trinidad always had a couple of men up the pitch or a couple of men in midfield ready to work on the break. For the biggest part of that game, Australia had their entire team in the box. Brazil did play poorly by their own standards, Australia made it remarkably difficult and I'm never going to deny such things. I've seen Brazil at their best enough to know that this was far from it, I'm not afraid to say I believe Ronaldo is off the boil and should be benched, I'm not even saying Brazil will win it, anything within reason can happen.
It's not bias, it's me genuinely not believing that Trinidad defended as heavily or rabidly as Australia did. That said, I do believe Australia are the better team because we've seen that they can defend, we've seen they can attack (albeit poorly).
I say England played shit because they did, they didn't try anything except the same long ball tactic to Crouch. Try one thing enough times and it'll work sooner or later. Brazil were trying to come in at the side, come in with crosses etc, because they couldn't go direct. Then in the second half they stopped with the crossing and burning down the wing and used Robinho's agility, along with that of Fred and Adriano, to make play directly.
Although he's not as good as Robinho, I think that's why Lennon should be in the team, because we all know Crouch is shit in the air. Lennon can make play for any one of the strikers, as Robinho can for others as well as himself. I'm not trying to make excuses for Brazil, I openly admit when I believe they've played shit, but I honestly see differences in the games, and you don't. That's all it is.
-AC