World Cup GDT: July 5th - Quarter-finals

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Itse

I'd say this is more of a black mark on van Gaal than a credit. Even Greece found a way to score against Costa Rica.

A black mark? They had 20 shots on net, and how many posts/bars did they hit? They pretty much dominated the entire game. Sometimes they don't go in, but they still managed to get through.

Seems like it doesn't really matter how they play or what the result is you find a way to slam the team or the way they play. They're in the semis........they're a lot better than what you give them credit for.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

A black mark? They had 20 shots on net, and how many posts/bars did they hit? They pretty much dominated the entire game. Sometimes they don't go in, but they still managed to get through.

Seems like it doesn't really matter how they play or what the result is you find a way to slam the team or the way they play. They're in the semis........they're a lot better than what you give them credit for.

I have never said they're anything but one of the best teams in the tournament. That is a completely different issue from me not liking them. Same as with Canucks back when they were good.

20 shots, sure, but not really that many great ones. This wasn't Belgium vs. USA. Netherlands has the best group of strikers in the tournament by a ridiculous margin and their midfield is among the best. It doesn't take a great coach to win the shots in that situation. They were 2 nervous players away from losing this game.

Look at Algeria vs. Germany. Löws idea of a lineup was a bloody mess. They won because their players were so much better, but if that was a coaching match, it would have been a clear loss. That game was a huge black mark on Löw.

This was not impressive by van Gaal. Maybe a black mark is a bit of a stretch, but in the end they had by far the easiest opponent of the four finalists, and yet they were the only one that couldn't score a single goal.

I don't see how that is NOT some seriously unimpressive coaching.

This was the first really defensive squad they faced, and they didn't have a real strategy for it. Mexico, Spain, Chile and even Australia to some extent played an offensive style.

Good thing for Netherlands there's no defensive teams in the top 4.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Itse

I have never said they're anything but one of the best teams in the tournament. That is a completely different issue from me not liking them. Same as with Canucks back when they were good.

20 shots, sure, but not really that many great ones. This wasn't Belgium vs. USA. Netherlands has the best group of strikers in the tournament by a ridiculous margin and their midfield is among the best. It doesn't take a great coach to win the shots in that situation. They were 2 nervous players away from losing this game.

Look at Algeria vs. Germany. Löws idea of a lineup was a bloody mess. They won because their players were so much better, but if that was a coaching match, it would have been a clear loss. That game was a huge black mark on Löw.

This was not impressive by van Gaal. Maybe a black mark is a bit of a stretch, but in the end they had by far the easiest opponent of the four finalists, and yet they were the only one that couldn't score a single goal.

I don't see how that is NOT some seriously unimpressive coaching.

This was the first really defensive squad they faced, and they didn't have a real strategy for it. Mexico, Spain, Chile and even Australia to some extent played an offensive style.

Good thing for Netherlands there's no defensive teams in the top 4.

So if two or three of those shots that hit the bar were an inch or two different Van Gaal is a good coach?

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

So if two or three of those spots that hot the bar were an inch or two different Van Gaal is a good coach?

And if Costa Rica scores after van Gaal let them in the game by subbing in van Huntelaar, who didn't do anything else than get carded, we'd have a consensus that he made a huge mistake that cost the team the game.

Close doesn't count. Belgium hit the bar, Chile hit the bar, Algeria was close, Switzerland was close, USA hit the post... Yet everyone agree the right team won those games.

At the end of the day, Netherlands had chances, but not a lot of great ones, and nothing van Gaal did during the whole game did anything to change that, other than somewhat pointlessly subbing in van Huntelaar which made things worse.

[Itse]

And don't get me wrong, I think van Gaal IS a good coach.

But this game was not one of his better ones.

[GirlySports]

It did worry me that Holland never busted the offside trap.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

It's definitely strategic these days. Next time you hear some crap English announcer say 'the lottery of penalties' shoot him.

Congrats on getting your daily whine in about the announcers.

Originally Posted by Itse

I'd say this is more of a black mark on van Gaal than a credit. Even Greece found a way to score against Costa Rica.

Because your pov is impartial, right?

It's a credit. Accept it.

[afc wimbledon]

Costa Rica played an 8-1-1 virtually, which is what they had to do to have a chance, Holland played well and against most goalies would have won 2-0

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Congrats on getting your daily whine in about the announcers.


Because your pov is impartial, right?

It's a credit. Accept it.

It's an opinion, not a POV.

Look, I get that some think that van Gaal did everything okay and the only problem was that the guys couldn't put the ball in. Fine. I disagree, but that's more speculative, since we don't know exactly how well they executed his plans, and to what extent he actually had plans.

I can also get that people will consider this an okay performance, because in the end they won. But considering it a CREDIT when the huge favourite wins the huge underdog by the smallest possible margin is just ridiculous.

Here's my problem.

If this wasn't poor coaching by van Gaal, what the heck was the problem?
- Lack of execution? He has some of the best strikers in the world in his squad, seems kind of a weird complaint.
- Lack of effort by the players? Didn't look like that to me at all.
- Unreal play by the other side? Hardly. Costa Rica was in the ropes for most of the game, and while Navas had a few great saves, this was far from being one of the many actual top performances by goalies in this tournament. No Costa Rican defenseman looked like a huge star either.

Basicly I can see only two chances
a) Just bad luck.
b) Van Gaal being severely outcoached by his Costa Rican counterpart.


And I don't believe in 120 minutes of bad luck.

[Bagor]

So, I'm assuming you choose B then.
The Dutch absolutely dominated yet Van Gaal got severely outcoached? Elaborate on that one.

I honestly believe you have some sort of significant issue with the Dutch rendering you unable to give them any credit. You've made a few baffling statements about them, calling them the most boring team in the tournament, then when the Spain match was mentioned suggesting that it was only so exciting because Spain were so bad?

And whilst we're on the subject of coaching you also suggest that the clueless, directionless, tactictless, hoof the ball up Belgiums played well?

[V]

Originally Posted by Itse

I have never said they're anything but one of the best teams in the tournament. That is a completely different issue from me not liking them. Same as with Canucks back when they were good.

This is the same team that was supposed to be the worst Dutch team in 50 years, right?

Getting out of the group stage was an achievement for this team. Making the semis is crazy good for this team. Van Gaal appears to have done very well here.

[browna]

Chiming in late here, but great move on the switch. Krol looked a good 3 inches taller, banging on the cross bar before each shot...combined with the trash talking, made for an intimidation factor....nevermind the fact that just subbing in a goalie like that must have Costa Rica thinking (even if they knew nothing about him) that this guy was an expert....all those little subtleties play a factor into the mental game that are PK's.

Again though Kuyt, Sneijder were solid, and Robben can run for miles with the ball and creates something every time he decides to attack, able to attack ant full speed..diving issues aside, he is a difference maker and one of the top players in this WC for me.

Full credit to the Dutch and justice was served. Don't think Argentina plays the same trap Costa Rica does, and, the Argentine goalie can't hold a candle IMO to the Costa Rican.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Itse

20 shots, sure, but not really that many great ones.

Really? Crossbars and posts don't count as goals, but the Dutch didn't have many great shots? I wonder what your opinion would have been if the stats were reversed and Costa Rica dominated like that......would they have had not many great shots?

They were 2 nervous players away from losing this game.

And CS was one goalie away from getting dominated in regulation.

This was the first really defensive squad they faced, and they didn't have a real strategy for it. Mexico, Spain, Chile and even Australia to some extent played an offensive style.

Their strategy was push the pace, control the ball and dominate the shots on net. You really don't think the Dutch played an offensive style? You watched that game and came to that conclusion? They pretty much dominated for 120 minutes..........what more did you want them to do?

Listen........even Dutch people like myself or Dutch supporters aren't proclaiming this squad to be dominate or a favourite in this WC. I think most of us would have been pretty happy getting out of the group stage first and foremost and seeing what happens from there. To destroy the Spanish team in the first match, to go undefeated in the group stage and now make the semis......they're doing ok. If you dislike them, that's fine, just say as much.

[GirlySports]

I don't think Van Gaal was outcoached, heck I could have coached Costa Rica today, just play a high offside line and then counter-attack.

I thought the goalkeeping switch was a bit strange because in shootouts all the pressure is on the shooter. By making a change all of a sudden the pressure is on the keeper because if he failed the coach would look dumb. Also thought the Dutch were a bit slow, especially forwards lazy coming back causing a dozen offsides.

[M*A*S*H 4077]

Yeah, not sure what Van Gaal could have done more of. How many chances did his players miss? The Dutch could have won by 3 or 4 if the strikers had their finishing boots on.

I also would have preferred Costa Rica to have advanced. I love the underdog/CONCACAF stories!

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Bagor

So, I'm assuming you choose B then.
The Dutch absolutely dominated yet Van Gaal got severely outcoached? Elaborate on that one.

I honestly believe you have some sort of significant issue with the Dutch rendering you unable to give them any credit. You've made a few baffling statements about them, calling them the most boring team in the tournament, then when the Spain match was mentioned suggesting that it was only so exciting because Spain were so bad?

And whilst we're on the subject of coaching you also suggest that the clueless, directionless, tactictless, hoof the ball up Belgiums played well?

Which part of "they're my bet for champion at this point" and "they have by far the best forward group in the tournament" is in your opinion not giving them credit? I mean, what is YOUR problem?

Yeah, I don't LIKE them, but that is way different from not giving them credit. If you have so much trouble with me not liking them, then I'm sorry but that's just you being annoyed because people have different preferences. And constantly reading additional meanings into what I actually said.

Originally Posted by V

This is the same team that was supposed to be the worst Dutch team in 50 years, right?

Reference please? Considering that the last time van Gaal coached Netherlands they didn't even make the World Cup, I think it's pretty safe to say that this team is better than that one

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I don't think Van Gaal was outcoached,

I could have coached Costa Rica today, just play a high offside line and then counter-attack.

I don't see how those two sentences can be true at the same time. Which is my problem.

Costa Rica has way worse players. They had a relatively simple and very predictable tactic. No-one is saying their players were playing over their heads. And yet they almost won. But somehow we should give van Gaal credit?

I really just don't see how that can even theoretically make sense.

[Itse]

Btw, I freely admit I'm nitpicking, if that's somehow unclear

[Blaster86]

Van Gaal should have coached those bars to deflect into the net, not away from it.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Itse

Which part of "they're my bet for champion at this point" and "they have by far the best forward group in the tournament" is in your opinion not giving them credit? I mean, what is YOUR problem?

Let's keep it in context of the last game.

As requested, elaborate on your claim that Van Gaal was severely outcoached.

[GirlySports]

Itse: that's just how Holland is, good coach or bad coach, good tactics or bad tactics. They struggle against teams who park the bus. Too many individuals.