Klaus wrote:

No, because you're being just as insufferably boring as France right now.

This is a place to discuss our personal opinion, not a kindergarten where you resort to attacking people that don't share your view. I'd just put you on ignore if that's the route you are going to take 

Mexico is a good shout yeah. And Mandzukic is anything but average imo. Very underrated player

Mirth wrote:

Was talking about Japan mainly tbh

But Croatia are up there.

Japan were very good to watch against Belgium, I agree. Their touch,  control and smart passing under pressure was a joy to watch.

Let's agree to disagree on Croatia

Clrnc wrote:

Mexico is a good shout yeah. And Mandzukic is anything but average imo. Very underrated player

I didn't say nor do I think he's average. I agree he's very underrated (I was guilty of it). I was talking about how they usually hoof it to him (similar to how France usually do to Giroud)

Croatia have two very exciting wingers in Rebic and Perisic who can dribble and beat a man, both scored great goals too. Their midfield three have flawless technique and first touches and they work very well to protect their dodgy backline, Subasic has been the best keeper this World Cup by a good distance and made the save of the tourney vs Kane. Dont think its that outlandish a claim to say they've been one of the more exciting teams in the WC

Tactics wrote:

Clrnc wrote:

Mexico is a good shout yeah. And Mandzukic is anything but average imo. Very underrated player

I didn't say nor do I think he's average. I agree he's very underrated (I was guilty of it). I was talking about how they usually hoof it to him (similar to how France usually do to Giroud)

Yeah was responding to Rohit actually about their average defence and forward. Don't think their defence is average too actually.

Don't rate Subasic personally Jones, interesting you think he was the best keeper. He was extremely poor for Trippier's goal

Tactics wrote:

Mirth wrote:

Probably a minorit - borderline hipster - opinion but I'd argue that Japan was probably the team that ran them closest when it comes to tactically advanced and attacking football.

What's it about their attacking play that you'd class as 'tactically advanced'? They use a very rudimentary attacking style : get it to the wings and cross or hoof it to Mandzukic and look for knock downs.  

A tactical advance attacking play is what I'd class Belgium's approach against Brazil: a strikerless set up with both Hazard and Lukaku on the wings and the Brazil CBs scratching their heads about who to mark. Belgium have generally played better and more attacking football than Croatia IMO, England have also been much more positive in their play too. And if we are talking about only the group stages, Mexico were much better to watch IMO.

I just read bar Iran no team has had fewer shots on goal from open play than England. No way they've been more attacking than Croatia

Clrnc wrote:

Tactics wrote:

I didn't say nor do I think he's average. I agree he's very underrated (I was guilty of it). I was talking about how they usually hoof it to him (similar to how France usually do to Giroud)

Yeah was responding to Rohit actually about their average defence and forward. Don't think their defence is average too actually.

Don't rate Subasic personally Jones, interesting you think he was the best keeper. He was extremely poor for Trippier's goal

Talking about this tourney only, he's dodgy overall agreed. His penalty heroics and the save vs Kane already make him a contender imo

Tactics wrote:

I keep hearing people talk about their 'attacking football' , could anyone list for me the matches where they displayed this good attacking football everyone is talking about ? 

Apologies, for some reason thought of the Iceland game. Anyhow don't think Croatia have ever lacked intent in the tournament .

I saw France live. For all that talent it was evident what the plan for and yes it was boring .

arsedoc md wrote:

[size=medium][font=Georgia, Times,]"Seventeen of France’s 23 players are [/font][/size][size=medium][font=Georgia, Times,]children of first generation migrants[/font][/size][size=medium][font=Georgia, Times,]."[/font][/size]

I find this angle that keeps being played out over and over again everywhere is a bit ridiculous considering it is usually thrown in like some sort of novelty.

Maybe I am just very old now, but France's 2006 squad looked like this:

And 1998's was already like this:

It's silly.

Djorkaeff, Zidane, and even Robert Pires were all children of immigrants!

jones wrote:

Croatia have two very exciting wingers in Rebic and Perisic who can dribble and beat a man, both scored great goals too. Their midfield three have flawless technique and first touches and they work very well to protect their dodgy backline, Subasic has been the best keeper this World Cup by a good distance and made the save of the tourney vs Kane. Dont think its that outlandish a claim to say they've been one of the more exciting teams in the WC

Because they have a talented group of footballers? Spain are for me the most technically gifted side and one of the most talented in the tournament,  yet they played a very boring brand of football, save against Portugal (one of the best matches of the tournament IMO).

On paper Croatia have the players to play a very exciting brand of football. However they, just like France, play a very conservative style IMO. No way did they play best football in the group stages by far as I have read on here.

Rohit wrote:

Tactics wrote:

I keep hearing people talk about their 'attacking football' , could anyone list for me the matches where they displayed this good attacking football everyone is talking about ? 

Apologies, for some reason thought of the Iceland game. Anyhow don't think Croatia have ever lacked intent in the tournament .

I saw France live. For all that talent it was evident what the plan for and yes it was boring .

I agree with you on France, they've gone for it at times when they really needed a goal  (against Argentina for example), but they are generally very conservative. Croatia are the same IMO. Both play hoofball and use the wings to counter 

jones wrote:

Tactics wrote:

What's it about their attacking play that you'd class as 'tactically advanced'? They use a very rudimentary attacking style : get it to the wings and cross or hoof it to Mandzukic and look for knock downs.  

A tactical advance attacking play is what I'd class Belgium's approach against Brazil: a strikerless set up with both Hazard and Lukaku on the wings and the Brazil CBs scratching their heads about who to mark. Belgium have generally played better and more attacking football than Croatia IMO, England have also been much more positive in their play too. And if we are talking about only the group stages, Mexico were much better to watch IMO.

I just read bar Iran no team has had fewer shots on goal from open play than England. No way they've been more attacking than Croatia

That's more due to their lack of quality in midfield than anything else IMO. They desperately need a creative midfielder. England for me were one of the most adventurous teams in the tournament

Tactics wrote:

jones wrote:

I just read bar Iran no team has had fewer shots on goal from open play than England. No way they've been more attacking than Croatia

That's more due to their lack of quality in midfield than anything else IMO. They desperately need a creative midfielder. England for me were one of the most adventurous teams in the tournament

Who exactly was adventurous? Kane when he wasn't taking penalties was somewhere near the midfield circle doing fuck knows what. Alli and Henderson were dogshit, Lingard and Sterling tried and failed. England's most exciting player was Trippier by far, a right back and not exactly Dani Alves

England weren't adventurous much IMO. Its been that sort of world cup, no team really stood out. It all been a bit forgettable footballwise.

Gone are the days of truly expressive football. It’s all about well drilled athletes

Hope to see Mbappe use that electric pace. I’m going 3-0 France with Deschamp giving a Last of the Summer Wine bad toothed smile

Mirth was right earlier, Japan probably one of the most bold teams going forward. High defensive line, attacked with intent when they had the ball. And that’s despite it being much more difficult to do so with the talent deficit. Puts the other sides to shame really.

England were not bad, best since 1998 in my opinion, or maybe Euro 2004 in terms of style. The big issue was that lack of creative players in midfield.

Brazil are the ones that really make me want to cry though. They’ve basically turned into a European side.

I loved Mexico's "old school" tactic of keeping their three forwards up when defending corners against Germany as it made for great counter-attack opportunities.
Shame they lost confidence after their loss in their final group match and chickened out against Brazil.

I thought Mexico were terribly overrated. Nothing but a bunch of dirty cheaters. They would have been out of the group if Germany hadn't failed with one of the easiest tasks ever set out for a world champion.