Serbia 1-0 Germany: red card changes the game
A game that was shaping up to be an interesting battle until Miroslav Klose’s unnecessary sending-off towards the end of the first half. Serbia won but failed to impress, whilst Germany had the better of the second half despite their numerical disadvantage.
Germany predictably kept the same eleven which thrashed Australia 4-0 in the first game, and they set out in the same 4-2-3-1 system.
Serbia made three changes from their opening day loss to Ghana. Neven Subotic for the suspended Aleksandar Lukovic was expected, whilst Zdravko Kuzmanovic replacing Nenan Milijas was a slight surprise in the centre of midfield. Marko Pantelic, anonymous in the first game, was dropped with Milos Ninkovic coming in.
This meant a change of shape for Serbia – the 4-4-2 was shelved in favour of a system that could be described as 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1, 4-1-4-1 amongst others, but was broadly a 4-5-1. Dejan Stankovic sat deepest on Mesut Ozil, whilst the two other central midfielders essentially played as carrileros. This change in shape made the decision to bring in Kuzmanovic more understandable, as he is a better user of the ball than Milijas.
Serbia shut out Germany
Although they never really showed attacking quality themselves, the change in shape worked well for Serbia. When Germany played Australia, they prospered in midfield because they had an extra man in that position – Ozil, generally – and so dominated possession and played their way around the Australians easily. It would have been the same situation had Serbia maintained their 4-4-2 from the first game, especially as they didn’t really play a true holding player in that system. But it was 3 v 3 in the centre of midfield, and Ozil was far quieter today.
Serbia also pressed more effectively than Australia. Pim Verbeek’s side tried to close down all over the pitch, which resulted in a high defensive line and space in behind. Serbia were more reserved and more intelligent – letting Germany have the ball in defence, before pressing the three central midfield players when they got on the ball.
Serbia’s lack of a player ‘in the hole’ meant Germany’s two central midfielders didn’t need to remain in that position, and took it in turns to charge forward to link up with Ozil and provide support to Klose. Sami Khedira was particularly effective at this and had a good game in the Michael Ballack role – indeed, he provides a lot more energy than Ballack is capable of these days, and he was often the main threat, with Ozil being taken care of surprisingly well by Stankovic.
On the other hand, Serbia were unable to form many attacks of their own, because Germany were also pressing well in midfield. Dejan Stankovic was not allowed time on the ball by Ozil, and struggled to get the ball forward. The full-backs were again disappointingly reserved – Aleksandar Kolarov got forward slightly more, but was tracked well by Thomas Muller.
With no-one getting much time on the ball, the game was a bit of a stalemate early on. The runs of Khedira combined with the movement of Klose looked most likely to break the deadlock – Lukas Podolski and Muller were both disappointing when they got the ball in wide zones, and Serbia barely got into the final third. When they did, they looked for the two wingers, but Germany coped well – Schweinsteiger and Khedira doubled up with their full-backs and crosses rarely arrived into the penalty area. Germany’s defensive shape was excellent when they had eleven men.
Klose off
The game changed with Miroslav Klose’s second yellow card. To get sent off for three such innocuous tackles is rather unfortunate, but if you commit the same foul three times, you are risking a sending-off. Most other referees would have shown some leniency because they were three nothing tackles, but then strikers get away with ‘persistent fouling’ far too much, and Klose was stopping a mini-counter-attack.
Joachim Low didn’t really change his change after that goal, he simply left Ozil as the highest central player and kept the two wide players in position – although Podolski played slightly higher up and made some excellent diagonal runs.
Route one the best options for Serbia
Serbia took the lead immediately following the sending-off. They got the ball to Milos Krasic, he crossed for Nikola Zigic, who headed down for Milan Jovanovic to score. It was a move notable for its sheer simplicity, and because it was so rare that the front three actually linked up together.
Zigic may be more than a mere target man, but Serbia’s best moves all came from using his height. In addition to the goal, he later hit the bar with a header from a right-wing cross, and he also won the ball and flicked it back for Krasic. He was brought down, and Kolarov’s free-kick went close.
Podolski the main threat

The gap between Serbia's two right-sided defenders was too large, and kept letting Podolski in
Germany were creating chances by playing the ball towards Podolski, mainly because the gap between Nemanja Vidic and Branislav Ivanovic was huge, making balls into that space very, very easy. Podolski had two shots that went close, and his cross also resulted in the penalty when Vidic needlessly handballed, although it was Podolski who missed from the spot.
Germany certainly could have scored, but the tactics that Low used were a little disappointing – keeping Ozil high up the pitch meant he had little chance to influence the game. Sometimes, when going down to ten men against a 4-5-1 / 4-3-3, moving to a 4-3-2 system is preferable to a 4-4-1, especially when the ‘1′ is uncomfortable upfront anyway.
Take Jose Mourinho’s tactics in the Milan derby when Wesley Sneijder was dismissed – he went 4-3-2, which meant he still had 3 v 3 in the midfield, and then he told his forwards to play between full-back and centre-back, and track the full-back to the halfway line if needed. That way, he didn’t lose the midfield advantage and was still able to cause the Milan back four problems. Low could have done the same here – moving Ozil into his usual position, and telling Podolski to work the right-sided Serbian defended, and Muller the left-sided two.
Substitutions
Bringing on Cacau and Marko Marin were the obvious changes, but they influenced the game little as Serbia sat deep. Serbia were awful at closing out the game, though – despite having an extra man they were hitting the ball long into the corners rather than retaining possession and taking the pace out of the game. They defended well at the back, but it was a far from impressive performance.
Conclusion
A difficult game to draw too many conclusions from, because the red card changed everything. Serbia look like they’ll be best off trying to nullify the opposition and use the height of Zigic – if not, then the two wide players will have to up their game – they’ve both been disappointing so far.
A big setback for Germany, but you sense they would have won with eleven players on the pitch. Playing three central midfielders against them is the way to go – you can’t afford to give Ozil space between the lines. The final game against Ghana will be very interesting, because Ghana’s defensive 4-5-1 shape might be exactly the way to play against Germany…
Serbia 1-0 Germany: red card changes the game




ZM, Dont you think, a 4-3-1-1 with Ozil linkin up with Muller and Schwein and Sami being carrileros worked. Difficult to press, this one.. Dont ya think so?
Apart from that, a fairly normal game. Tactical nous might well help Germany’s progress in the tournament as they like Spain have become a li’l too predictable..
Over to you, Joachim..
WE BEAT GERMANY! I HAVEN’T FELT THIS GOOD SINCE FINALLY HOOKING UP WITH ARIJADNI WALTERS IN TENTH GRADE!!!!
ZM, completely agree with your analysis, as always. I was drawing the
4-2-3-1 tactics last night with my five year old, figuring Stankovic had to play a more reserved role, following Oezil around. Germans did everything right though, they were just unlucky. See, they needed Badstuber further up, however with Krasic lurking the entire game, that was impossible.
Anyway, Lazovic should start instead of Zigic the next game. Same formation, however, but Aussies are much slower in the back and that should be exploited.
Peace…
This is an interesting group, because I think there’s a very decent chance that three sides could finish on six points…
Y’know, today I finished my exams, so it’s a double wammy of awesome for me.
So, YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Great analysis once again, not much to add. Im in envy for this side, i so wish that there was even one site in germany that would give such insides into football tactics, outstanding job! I fully support your thesis, that the red card(which was no surprise for a ref that card-happy) let Serbia take the win quite easy. Germany(Klose) beat itself, unforgivable for a striker with his experience.
The only thing id add would be a point about Badstuber, who had problems defensively versus Australia already. Today every hopefull attack of the Serbs came over his side and i dont think he won any of those engagements, Podolskis defensive behaviour didnt help him in any way. Clearly Löws mistake, though its his way of supporting young players, which helped him form this team in the first place. Its going to be interesting to see the german starting XI vs Ghana, i suspect that Löw will come up with pretty much the same formation minus Klose obviously, though i hope for something more creative.
Yep, Lahm and Badstuber are not famous for their defending ability, and Lahm gets more support from Müller. Other than this, the pressing done by two midfielders and the guys in front are remarkable. Probably, Löw can ask Khedira or Schweinsteiger to help a little bit though.
I have to disagree here: Lahm is usually quite good at defending (i seldomly saw him comiting a foul like the one he got booked for today), the problem with Badstuber is, that he is a center back not a left back (that´s why you rarely see him participating in offensive moves).
Agreed re: Badstuber. Krasic’s pace ruthlessly exposed Badstuber’s lack thereof. His positioning left a lot to be desired at times, as well.
Well, to me, Lahm is still a full back better at attacking than defending. In this match only, after that yellow card, he became very very cagey in defending – but I can fully understand that.
Lahm is good at defending 1v1 due in part to his low center of gravity. But you MUST keep him out of the box under aerial attacks. Having Mertesacker on the pitch you simply can’t let the tallest forward in the tournament go into aerial battles with your tiniest defender. This was an apparent flaw even against Australia and a conclusive one today.
To defend against this you need excellent defensive coordination and on-the-field marking changes. Someone must remember the last Liverpool vs Mourinho’s Chelsea in the CL, Crouch entered fray in the second half to jump over Cole, but Carvalho would dynamically handle the marking assignment change so that whenever a long ball came, it was Terry who was defending Crouch and Cole who got inside.
This might sound complicated, but if Germany cannot manage it they are providing a very easy way to get pwnd later in the cup.
I seriously think now Germany is lack of a secondary threat in front when Özil is tightly marked. On both flanks, neither Podolski nor Müller has the ability to take on the full-back one on one (compare to Krasic against Badstuber). Podolski wasn’t having his best day, but this just happens.
Probably Özil can go deep a little bit to draw one or two defenders out with him, and provides space for teammates to exploit (but who? I guess Khedira or wingers getting inside). Klose may not suitable for playing Serbia since their defenders are tall, Cacau could start the game and goes to some wide position often. Germany is too obsessed to play within a 15m range as well, should have done more mid to long shifts whilst attacking IMO.
Brilliant analysis as usual, we’re so fortunate to have such a brilliant website with such astute analyses so quick=D
I agree with ZM that Germany might have wanted to change to 4-3-2 the way Inter did… But do you think that Serbia could have pushed their full backs further forward to attack? Although I guess if the 2 forwards would have made diagonal runs into that space, the full backs could have been contained…. Who knows, who knows…
Well Serbia beat us fair and square but the yellow card fest was awful. I understand that you can give some of those yellow cards – but this is the world cup of football, not little league curling (sorry, at loss of words to come up with a better non contact sport).
Not impressed by that disallowed goal for the US team either
The players should decide the outcome of games, not refs.
Regarding subs, second your motion regarding Özil. I would have brought Cacau in earlier, and would have kept Özil on. Take off Müller, move Özil right, put Cacau up front, and rely on Khedira to get more offensive to support them. But easy to say now, big game #3 coming up against Ghana on Wednesday.
Honestly, we didn’t beat you fair and square. Germany deserved a point, if not more. Playing 55 minutes with an extra player and not scoring more then one goal is pretty crappy. We were lucky.
However, since this type of thing never happens to us, I’ll take it. Good luck to der Mannschaft (its dativ, correct?) in the next game.
Not just lucky, Filip, also quality display. Good luck to your team as well. “der” is correct – it is Dativ, but you wouldn’t have needed a “zu” (“to”).
Regarding subs, I think it would have been a better idea to take Podolski off for Cacau, moving Özil to the left. Maybe later bring in Marin for Özil. To play the mostly offensive minded Podolski and Marin together doesn’t seem to be a good idea if you play with only ten players. Marin is a good sub to break up the opposing defense, but he also looses the ball more often than not, potentially causing a lot of trouble. I think the hard working Cacau and Müller should have played together, as they both are more versatile. After the substitution there was a huge change in the German game, who were not able to build up the attack like they used to do before.
You could litterally feel the missing Striker in the box. It was very easy for Serbia to defend, since they only needed to close down the central area and force the German wingers to the sideline. Crosses were not really an option after the red card, even though Friedrich and Khedira tried to provide the arial threat occasionally.
I don’t think that the substitutions were very good and I am a bit disappointed by Löw.
Good roundup – indeed hard to draw any conclusions. Whatever you make of the refereeing at this WC in general, too many principally fair matches are played 11 v 10 from too early points in time on.
One remark: A crucial pair on the pitch has been Badstuber – Krasic. Most dangerous Serbian stuff has been initiated on their right side, with Krasic beating an habitually tardy Badstuber in virtually all one-on-ones. Obviously, Badstuber’s also lacked cover from either one of the center-backs or central midfielders, increasingly contributing to his reluctance.
Yeah that’s a good point. it helped when the ball was played quickly and directly to Krasic, because when there was a more gradual buildup, Schweinsteiger tended to double up against Krasic.
One of the things I’ve been admiring the most from your analyses is that you tend to focus on strategy and tactics, instead of paying attention to refereeing decisions, which are better left to the average shallow commentators.
Why so much focus on the red card? Is it really “unnecessary”? That might be argued – for that matter, I think Klose really deserved it – but discussing about that is pointless. Having a player sent off can always happen and should not be an excuse for anything.
Apart from this, congratulations on yet another great review. This is my first comment here but this website has become my primary source of tactical information about this World Cup.
Well, I don’t know why is “shallow” to comment on the fact that referees’ decisions affect games as well. Today the US should have won against Slovenia, but the referee wrongly invalidated that goal.
Well, in a game, you can change tactics, but cannot change referee. That’s why…
Anyways, not only US should get that goal, they actually should have got one or two penalties too.
Sure, but when analyzing a game where a ref wrong decision clearly affects a team then I don’t see why is it shallow to comment on it. Take for example the US game, the ref’s decisions took away two points from them.
Actually, even if the referee was right… a red card surely changes the game. And usually affects on the tactical aspect as well. So, maybe instead of blaming the referee, the blame should go to Klose. Either way, that red card affected Germany.
Why not? It was the key feature of the game, and tactically the most interest stemmed from the red card, because Germany were forced to reshape without their central striker.
I’ve no desire to get into “it was/wasn’t a red card” etc because like you say, it’s pretty boring. But if you’re analysing where 11 guys on a pitch stand, you’ve got to take account when one side goes down to ten.
I didn’t necessarily say it was “unnecessary” on behalf of the referee, “unnecessary” can equally apply to Klose.
I think the question is not whether it was a sent-off or not – the referee was fair and gave also the Serbian players the yellow card for the easiest tackle. Indeed this constant threat of beeing sent off (9 yellow cards and 1 sent-off in a really fair game!!!!!) had definitely a big impact on the game so I guess it is justified to list the sent-off of Klose as a key feature of the game…
We clearly had issues with Krasic before Klose was sent off.
And while Serbia pressed well, and at times high up the pitch, the lack of speed in our build-up was the main issue to me.
The send-off still changed everything. (Seven yellow cards for something like 14 fouls in the first half were a bit of a joke, as in several matches before – if all those fouls are yellow cards then how many red cards are they going to hand out once the tournament gets going with tough tackles and stuff? I’d also say that Klose was almost the only player not goal-side of the ball, so it was hardly a counter-attack – but stupid anyways. Disappointing how such an experienced player would not be able to read the referee.)
Bit of a mess in the end as well, when both Marin and Podolski drifted to the left wing, while the right wing was only occupied when Lahm moved up.
ZM, I really dont think the red card changed the game. Even before that it was quite evident what Serbia was going to do in this game. More than 35 minutes and Germany still couldnt score proved it.
Normally Germany is always in the benefitting end with Red cards, at least in WC. For once it isnt.
Also I think, the referee just strict obsessively with the rule books. This isnt an EPL stage.
Please, I am so curious to know who you really are. If you cannot publish it here, please could you mail to fotobirajeshatgmail.com
You are excellent. How much I am learning from you.
His real name…is Batman.
His name…is Robert Paulsen…
“Normally Germany is always in the benefitting end with Red cards, at least in WC.”
For example?… Stop using some stupid clichee, if anything jugoslavian teams benefit (like the WC match Germany-Croatia 1998)
Serbia didn’t score in the first 35 minutes either. So by your logic that means that they weren’t doing that well.
Sometimes when a team is playing deep and especially the fullbacks play deep, it’s better to tell your wingers to switch sides and force either one out of their position, specially if you also have attacking fullbacks. So why Löw as an example never ordered Özil to the left, Podolski to the right cutting inside and moving Müller as an additional presence into the center, is baffling.
As for the rest, when they were with 10 men, you have already pointed it out. I would add that Guardiola did against Madrid kind of the same thing, so moving Khedira to the 6, Schweinsteiger in a more passing role on the right, Özil to the left moving forward and Müller and Podolski up front, well, you could have tried it at least.
red card was okay, stupid foul (too many tactical fouls). and if you don’t use your chances (penalty. stupid Vidic, but not a good shot from Podolski), you have nothing to complain about. a draw would have been okay because Germany played well in the second half with ten man. serbia played clever and deserved this victory.
ten mEn of course.
Löw could have tried more. like many people wrote: Ozil on the left etc. but Germany played good for 20 minutes, and Serbia defended very well. maybe a attacking full back (Jansen) or play a three men defence earlier (with Lahm in midfield / wing back and Aogo on the left). against Australia was not everything perfect and today is not the total disaster.
It’s easy to be wise after the event.
Antic .. Remember him from mid-90s. Will never make mistakes like Verbeek did. Btw Vidic handball was phenom…. He can give a try in the goal
.
ZM: Can we someday (after the hustle bustle of WC is over ) have a discussion on the talents the Balkan states produce. I remember very very fondly the Yug team from 1990.
Indeed. Some great results from Balkan sides in last two decades – Bulgaria ‘94, Croatia ‘98, Turkey ‘02, and most recent – Greece on Euro ‘04.
ZM took care of that. Check out the Teams of the Decade section from the front page. Waddaya know – Greece 04 is the number one team of 00’s.
Please note that Germany’s manager is called Löw, not Low, Mesut Özil is not Mesut Ozil and Thomas Müller is not Thomas Muller.
Ö and o are two different letters of the alphabet and not interchangeable (ditto for ä,a,ü and u).
If no ‘ö’/'ü’/'ä’ is available, it’s written as ‘oe’/'ue’/'ae’ so Löw becomes Loew, Özil becomes Oezil and Müller becomes Mueller.
Yes, try to find a Ö on an US keyboard. but you are right Löw and Özil or Loew and Oezil.
You don’t need to have it on your keyboard to use it.
Anyway, it’s perfectly alright to use oe, ae and ue, but not o, a and u.
oe/ue/ae are used for German words/names only.
So Mueller is okay but as Özil isn’t a German name (it’s Turkish) you should just write Ozil if need be. ‘Oezil’ looks like you don’t know it’s not German or you are German and just apply your rules to everything containing an umlaut
Yes, in Turkish ‘ö’ is not written as ‘oe’ but it’s still different from ‘o’ so using ‘o’ instead could be confusing…
As Özil is a German citizen and does not posses a Turkish passport anymore, why not use the German rules to avoid any confusion?
I’m not an expert with languages, but Ö (œ) is in German O Umlaut (‘O’ with an little ‘e’ on top). So if you write the turkish name Özil in German, it stays Özil. But in the German version it must be possible to write Oe. So I think as long as i’m writing the German ‘translation’ of Özil i can also use Oezil.
If we go back to Turkish, Ö (œ) is not the same as O (ɔ) and it is not possible to write Ozil.
If you want to know it Oezil is also correct in turkish, don’t ask me. but I like to know.
Well…as long as I know, Attatürk introduced the german alphabet because he thought it suits the Turkish language very well… but that doesn’t really matters as long everybody knows which player you mean. So please no discussions about orthography but tactics.
no problem.
this Ö – Oe, comes back with every German game.
people from the US and UK (and elsewhere) keep it simple. I know who Ozil is.
Well, here there is obvious need of harder editing hand to bring the comments section of ZM back to what this site is all about, that is pre- and postmatch football analysis beyond superficiality, fanatism or language purism. One can understand though that in the maelstrom of a WC you would need to clone ZM to suffice with the tasks of watching, analysing, responding and/or commenting the comments AND censoring. So, at risk for rapid decadence of an absolutely superb site the cleaning business probably got to wait until the storm eases.
I have no qualm with Ozil. I just don’t want to see Freidrich
What i don’t understand is-
1. The sending off- firstly concerning the refereeing, what was he thinking? I think he was being overly sensitive and in the end had started to call fouls which were actually on the ball.
2. The set-pieces of Germany- the penalty miss was bad, but so were the free-kicks and the corners. Out of all the corners and free-kicks, atleast 1 header could have been on target or somewhere useful. In an international game in the World Cup finals, the standard of set-pieces has to be upped.
3. Choice of penalty taker- Podolski was having an absolutely miserable day. With Schweinsteiger having scored twice from the spot before the finals, why put Podolski under the unnecessary pressure of scoring a must-score penalty when he obviously was not doing well?
4. Use a left back at left back. Badstuber is a centre back, and neither affords the width, nor the pace or crossing from the flank.
5. Choice of substitutions- bringing off Mueller is understandable, he was having a bad game. But why keep Podolski on? He had 7 shots on goal, 1 on target which was saved (penalty). He wasn’t even seeing the runs from the flank of Marin behind his marker.
6. The goal- Lahm is about a foot shorter than Zigic. The cross was the central defender’s ball and he had to have got that. Plus the 2nd centre should have covered Jovanovic. He was free 5 feet from goal.
1. not a good referee, “but if you commit the same foul three times, you are risking a sending-off”
2. set-piece of Germany, a problem since Klinsmann and Loew.
3. you are right, bad penalty (and Stojkovic was early down).
4. Badstuber played 90% of the games for Bayern at LB. So left back or centre back, come up with something better.
5. maybe a 4-3-2 would have been a good idea (gives Serbia a new problem), but Loew is not a great tactician when it comes to substitutions. Maybe a midfield with Schweinsteiger, Khedira and Kroos and two strikers (Ozil, Podolski, or a sub like Cacau etc.)
6. one failure. next game: Lahm on the bench and Boateng plays right back? failures like this happen.
1. Well, yellow cards in general were awful, not just for Germany. Surely took steam out of a game that that have it in the first place.
2. Germany has one player in Kroos whos great at set pieces – but Löw doesn’t play him, nor does he seem to train them. Watch Heinze movement (with others blocking) on corners for Argentina instead…
3. Podolski blew it – but to be fair he has a great penalty record and a penalty can always go either way – no guarantee for Schweinsteiger to hit it either.
4. Problem is that he is still the best regarding defensive responsibility on the left. Other options are Jansen, Aogo. Or well Lahm on left, and Boateng on right. None of these options are guaranteed to have done much better.
5. Thing is Podolski has the best shot on the team. Even if many of his shots went wide – he can score any time any position on the pitch. A gamble for sure. Regardless I would have brought Cacau (for Müller) earlier, and moved Özil right and pushed Khedira somewhat up.
6. Eh, man in the middle can’t be free, the real problem. Sucks for Lahm to be 30cm shorter but what can you do, it was a good cross, nice goal for them.
Well, we can discuss PKs forever, but one would think Podolski would use his powerfull shot to blast the ball. That way, keeper’s last second decision makes no difference. I was sure he was gonna strike it hard to the keeper’s right.
Anyway, watch Van Persie take PKs. By far the best PK taker at the moment.
As long as van Persie isn’t German, this leads to nothing. Lukas is usually a good penalty taker. this one was poor, I’ve seen it the moment he shot. And the goalie was already down, Podolski just had to shoot into the other corner. but shit happens. who cares as long as you can’t change it.
1. I admit, the refereeing was fair and he called Serbia as many times as he called Germany, but there really weren’t any bad tackles in the whole game and the so many bookings! Still, in the end, I believe Germany really didn’t play well, so why blame the ref? It still smarts though. Klose?!
2. I don’t mean that Germany should have scored on set pieces, but atleast a couple of good headers keeps the opposition under pressure and also keeps up your game. In the end Serbia were very content to defend deep and counter and Schweinsteiger and Khedira were at a complete loss in the midfield. You could see the body language of the team at the end, they were totally down and out of ideas.
3. Again, there’s no guarantee of Schweinsteiger scoring, but if Podolski is having a bad game, why put him under pressure?
4. 90% games at LB for Bayern is right, but he is still not a NATURAL LB. Serbia were defending deep with 2 lines of 4. Nothing was coming through the centre, the only option was crossing from the byline and hoping Gomez got something on it. Plus he gets beaten on pace fairly easily for Germany and for Bayern. The goal came from a cross on the right.
5. Marin is physically very weak and Serbia were just putting bodies behind the ball. Germany needed a couple of fast, physical players up the pitch. Cacau is good, but Gomez looks really disinterested. For a man who’s come on at 77′, he showed much less drive and energy than others on for the whole game. What does he want? For people to give the ball to him in the 6 yard box so he can poke it into the net and celebrate?
6. I do not say the mistake was Lahm’s. It was the centre back’s ball and he should have been marking Zigic. It is very evident that the chances of Lahm getting the better of Zigic at a crossed ball are fairly low.
Lahm should be tracking Jovanovic. Leave Zigic to one of the central defenders.
This match highlighted most of Germany problems.
1. Badstuber is not a natural LB. He has problems with pacey wingers as he has all season long with Bayern. It was easy for Krasic to look so threatening and it eventually led to the goal.
2. Slow central defense. Mertesacker and Friedrich are slow and cannot cope with technical or pacey opposition highlighted when Jovanovic slipped into the box for the goal.
3….coming from the previous point. this forces the fullbacks to cover far too much, especially Lahm who while he goes up a lot he constantly has to cover for the central defense. Ironically enough he has the same situation at Bayern. Moreover, when he goes I fell because he needs to come back so quickly he resorts to too much crossing when he can just contribute to link ups or make a run at goal himself. The left side is not nearly as balanced as Badstuber rarely shows attacking impetus.
4. No Oezil = No creativity. Germany are overly reliant on him and it was evident when he came off, and oddly enough Loew thinks of Cacau as his replacement instead of being Klose’s.
5. Podolski’s laziness. When the team clicks, he offers a lot but when chasing the game he consistently shows indifference, nerves, and more often than not selfishness. Also, it’s Germany’s over reliance on him being the main attacking/scoring outlet that is worrying because Gomez will not look likely to score coming off and Kiessling is simply not even considered.
Podolski to me lacks determination and spirit. I felt Mueller showed a lot of that and was getting into the game more when he was removed.
This is a bit embarrassing to blame Podolski, specifically on attitude. His movement through out was excellent and drawing defenders leaving space for others to move in
Özil’s substitution, for the second match running, marked the end of Germany as an attacking threat. Müller was very disappointing today, and Podolski was mentally finished after that penalty; in fact, I couldn’t understand why Schweinsteiger was not the penalty taker.
Even worse, placing Gomez on the field was as helpful to Germany as if they’d had TWO men sent off. He lacks the ability to contribute to Germany’s build-up play, hold the ball up effectively for teammates, or make use of limited space within the box (thanks to his poor touch and technique).
I don’t understand Löw’s decisions in this match. Removing Özil as he was beginning to pick apart the Serbian defence was baffling; the only possible explanation I can think of is that Löw decided the game was beyond Germany at that point, and did not want to risk Özil receiving a yellow card, which would have ruled him out of the decisive Ghana match.
When playing a man down, a playmaker is to much of a luxury. Löw knows that cacau is klose’s replacement and that he needed a striker on the field. If Özil was to remain on, he would’ve been moved to the left to maintain the attacking trident and allow the central kids to push i
up into a more creative role with th serbians content to sit deep in the center.
But Germany seemed to play better overall when Özil was still on the pitch. Since they still tried to attack, taking off a playmaker who also knows how to move into the box and score is to much of a luxury in my opinion, especially when you bring on the second central striker later on.
A front three of Özil, Cacau and Müller would have been better in my opion, as Cacau and Müller usually do a lot of work defensively and Müller and Özil can go down the line as well as cut into the box. That probably would have made the German game more versatile.
It’s not a luxury when you are chasing the game. With Oezil they had their best spell in the match and led to a penalty. Without him, they were forced wide far too much and became too linear. Taking him off was even worse as any sort of unpredictability was removed and no longer was there anyone on the field for Germany to control the match and pick out passes and create chances. Everything was one-dimensional and Podolski took it upon himself rather selfishly most of the time.
…no it doesn’t
… the problem was really that everyone had to hold back due to the referee’s yellow hand
… at least he was fair and gave his yellow cards to both teams, but his style definitely had a big impact on the game…and after Kloses sent-off it was clear that it would be very hard….
…to fight back and create chances with one man down with the constant!!! threat of another sent-off was indeed a quite astonishing achievement…I don’t have the impression that it would have made a big difference for this game whether one player might be slower than another one or whether BAdstuber is or isn’t a born LB…
on the other side it would have made a huge difference if they would have taken their chances … and a missed penalty has nothing to do with the 5 points you listed above
…
A team is truly tested when faced with these circumstances. Weaknesses are exposed because of it and this side already has inherent weaknesses before this match. They weren’t tested in the opener. of curse they could probably have won if Klose wasn’t sent off but that’s not the pint f my pst.
The fact that they were able to create chances with ten men was remarkable but even moreso was that Loew believed taking oezil off was the right thing to do and using other player wrong.
Badstuber got worked because krasic was quicker, that’s a fact. Lahm would have had no problem with him for instance.
Germany are playing a more attacking style this days compared to before. ZM do you really think this style will work for them when they play teams like Argentina Spain or Brazil??
Can you pls tell me how they played in 90s and in 2002?
early 90s: defence like a wall (Kohler, Berthold, Augenthaler, Buchwald, Brehme), Matthäus or Brehme cross to Klinsmann or Völler, header, goal. Main problem: lack of creativity, but compensated through physical strength.
2002: Please don’t mention the by far worst German side that ever played a World Cup. Yes they reached the final. By beating Paraguay, the US, South Korea. They lost to the first big side they came across, and that was Brazil. That German side had one world class player: Kahn, two were decent: Ballack and Schneider. Don’t mention the rest.
How they played: defence like a loose wall, midfield passing in tortoise style, Ballack scoring the odd winner.
2002
+Hamann
I think Lahm should have played on Badstubers side against Krasic. Lahm can play both sides. In the german team are enough possibilities to change positions. Then Friedrich or Boateng would have played against Zigic, that would match much better at least on the paper.
by the way: great work, great analysis, I am reading this for quite a while…
But the balance of experience and youth is maintained on either flank by playing Lahm at right-back. Podolski/Badstuber, Lahm/Müller – far less risky. Plus, Lahm and Podolski might have left the flank even barer for Krasic to exploit.
It’s been remarked on frequently how dependent Brazil is on Kaka for creativity and imagination in midfield. Germany is perhaps equally or even more dependent on Ozil. There’s no other player on the team with skill sets that are particularly similar. Germany looked far less fluid after he was substituted out and that was even with him playing out of position prior. Quite remarkable for a 21 year old to carry so much of the burden for a team of Germany’s stature.
From here on out stopping Ozil is going to be priority number one for any side. They are going to mark him very closely. With Klose and Podolski in variable form, Low is going to need to use Ozil’s flexibility creatively and change tactics as needed to put him in the best position to succeed.
The lack of pace on the German back line was very evident today. Argentina and Germany have analogous issues in this regard.
Kroos, Marin, Müller are maybe no Özil, but they surely can play that position as well. But due to being one man down, Löw needed a striker. Getting Cacau in was good, but in my opinion he waited too long. I just would have kept Özil in and moved him on the right wing instead. Marin for Podolski later.
Gomez for Badstuber, meh. Would have rather liked Kroos then.
The best substitute for Özil might be Kroos – but since we didn´t see him yet i can only but speculate about his abilitys on that position.
Spot on. Marin is quick and awesome on the dribble, but often feels like he’s a bit of a headless chicken. Kroos is the best substitute for Ozil.
I like Cacau a lot. Watched the friendly vs Bosnia and he really impressed. Thought he was a better option then Klose up top…
You may be assured that Kroos is about as good as Oezil. Same passing, same vision, not as fast, less dribbling, but unlike Oezil a shot as lethal as it can get…
Put that roboshot Podolski out and Marin in, put Kroos in the middle and Oezil on the right, and there’s not much more creativity you can demand from a team.
Podolski could have been moved to striker position and Marin could have taken over the left midfield. I have absolutely no idea why Loew insists on using Mario Gomez, who is a proven failure at both country and club level. Whenever he comes on, the team looks shut down immediately.
Oh come on, please don’t call Gomez a proven failure. He has scored tons of goals in past seasons, only last season (his first at Bayern) was mediocre, because the style of play there doesn’t suit him. Still, he managed 10 goals in the league. What is true is that his technique is bad and in order to compensate he needs space, or physically weaker defenders.
And that’s why it was stupid to field him: Is there any stronger defender out there than Vidic, with Subotic not bad in the air either?
Gomez scored over 100 goals in his last 3 Stuttgart years. He is having a hard time with bayerns system and that led to lack of confidence.
Can we scratch out Germany from the possible winners of this cup? I guess we can. The real candidates are: Brazil, Argentina, Italy and perhaps Netherlands.
Why can we do that? And why exactly do you think that these teams are the real candidates? What about Spain for example?
Italy? Because they do have a great team, not to mention that they are rarely defeated in knock-out stages… just take a look… Italy on the last world cups, when defeated, is via penalties… the only exception was against South Korea and we already know that the reffing in that game was bad.
Netherlands? Mainly because they are strong team, lots of potential.
Argentina? Because they have the best offense. Messi is playing like he does at Barcelona. Their weak point is the defense.
Brazil? Come on, it’s Brazil. They have the best defense (perhaps even better than Italy) and they know how to win games. Just take a look on how they qualified.
Spain has a great team, but they traditionally fail at the knock-out stages…
Argentina looked strongest so far. To write anyone off at this point will bite you in the ass – well maybe aside of France ;=)
Italy…?
Brazil???? … 2 draws against Portugal and IC and they are likely out…..
ZM, I’d like to get a feedback on a question, we’ve been discussion fairly hotly over the last couple of hours: Friedrich at all to blame for anything regarding the goal? Germany’s leading soccer magazine Kicker put up a 3D-analysis of the goal (http://www.kicker.de/news/video/1071296/video_WM-Schock—Deutschlands-Fehlerkette-beim-03a1-%283D%29.html) and among other things is saying that Friedrich reacted to slowly not mentioning Mertesacker at all. I feel Mertesacker is more to blame, as he should be the one marking Zigic. He gets pulled out of position, so suddenly Lahm – all 4 foot 1 of him – is up against the giant Zigic. Mertesacker realizes this, also goes for Zigic and leaves Jovanovic unmarked. I can’t really see Friedrich’s fault in this. Doesn’t he have to be where he is standing when Krasic crosses just in case Krasic does decide to pull inside and not cross the ball?
People from Kicker are clueless. Friedrich is in no way at fault. It was a missed assignement by either Mertesacker or Lahm. I think, well, in retrospect, that Lahm is mostly at fault. He should have covered Jovanovic since the high balls are Mertesacker’s job. It happens…
I blame Lahm’s parents.
…you might be right here – they should have put im on a stretch bed
…
indeed IMO the whole defense (also Neuer) wasn’t very impressive in this scenario, but it was after the sent-off …they will learn from this….
one shocking moment after the red card. no concentration and Serbia had a fast mind.
First let me say how much I am grateful for your wonderful work, ZM.
It really is a pleasure being able to see such elaborate tactical analysis on games.
To find a place one can identify himself these days is particularly rare.
Secondly, while I agree with the overall analysis, and the tactical aspect of it, I disagree on how you described the performance of Krasic.
On my humble opinion he was, probably, the man of the match. Always looking to go at the german defense with a mix of pace and skill and was clearly the main source of problems for them.
Just a small note.
Continue your fantastic work.
Low lost the game. Muller and Oezil out was an horrendous mistake. Germany has too many young players this time. I don´t see them in the final.
“I don’t see them in the final”. Ooops, that is what Americans call a no-brainer. Who in the Everest summit can see that team in the final?
They’re Germans though. And Germany is often very German.
It’s better for the young german team, not to have won that match! I say that as a german. They’ll learn a lot from that one today. And I hope, Löw does that too… He should have seen, that Özil was just getting into the match and just needed a striker to score.
My opinion: the goal was the mistake of Mertesacker and Friedrich, but not Lahm’s fault. It was their job to back the serbian strikers.
What if Germany played Lahm on the left against Krasic and Boateng on the right in this game?
Boateng would have been sent off 30 seconds after kick-off. *g*
Seriously, when Löw said he was thinking about a switch last night, I was absolutely sure it would be the left back position and it would consist of Lahm on the left and either Boateng or Aogo on the right. It would have had the added bonus that Lahm as a right-footed player on the left flank would always have had an advantage on Ivanovic, a right footed right-back, when cutting inside as he does so effectively. I feel, although it will never be proven that this would have been a far superior alternative to the one Löw eventually chose.
with this kind of referee Boateng would indeed not playing more than 20 minutes…
I would like to see Aogo or at least friedrich on one side and Lahm on the other side. with the flexibility of Lahm there are some tactical options. I really would like to see another game against serbia, with different defense… I they continue to play like yesterday they will have no chance.
So that was the bad game, I mentioned last time. I really wonder how many of the “big” european nation will go early.
The yellow card man was totally coherent in his decision. You foul, I book you. As a player and after 5 fouls and 3 cards in the game so far it should have been noticed. A type of refereeing, that will help the little and creative players, so should have been good for Germany.
The goal over Badstuber’s side was the one happy moment for the Serbs and they were clever and lucky enough to hold on to it. I really wonder if Lahm’s zonal marking or Mertesackers one on one defense was the wrong move with the flank coming in.
Without Klose Germany played like their striker was not gone but always marked. A little bit funny for me.
Podolski, or as was stated Roboshot, was Mr. Unlucky himself. As he was standing for the penalty and the TV showed his face AND the referee was still blocking the ball like a goalie who want to stress the shooter, I knew he would not score. That was so obvious. If he would have gone to the ball, after the ref went away and took it up in his hand and positioned it again, he would have scored. The ref broke the bond between him and the placed ball by standing in between and talking to him. And that was the most partisan and unfair moment in the refereeing of the game.
Congratulation Serbia! …good fight and spirit from Germany, but IMO you could see that this team is just too green. The sent off was predictable with this referee giving a yellow card for the slightest tackle from behind and if it wouldn’t have been Klose no doubt it would have been another (likely German) player. After 20 minutes the big question was: which team could keep his players longer on the field? … and here Serbia was just cleverer…
Germany should have reacted a little bit more flexible …and when there is a big risk when trying to win the ball back by coming from behind due to the “referee’s style”, then get your players behind the ball so in most cases you have the Serbian players in front of you … Germany didn’t need a win, a draw would have been good enough and a more clever team would have changed tacticts after 20 minutes to adress the referee special style (9 yellow card and one sent-off in a fair game – I assume he is also a referee for basketball and got it a little bit mixed up
)and would have sit back and would have take a draw home….
You know, the player with the most experience was the one sent off. So being green was hardly the problem there regarding cards.
If anyone looked ‘green’ it was Badstuber but that had little to do with cards.
..as I said: if it wouldn’t had been Klose it would have been another player, but you are right, he should have known better after 20 minutes …but he was very critized in the past and might have been a little bit overmotivated….they (the Germans) are green as a team…if he wouldn’t have worked hard so hard trying to win balls in the German half as he did he would have been criticised too … sometimes you just can’t do it right
…they will learn….
btw: ZM is such a fantastic site! Wish we had a german one like that… please continue with your great analysis.
ZM, what do u think if Law change the two side back’s position, I mean Lahm on the left to keep an eye on Krasic, while Badstuber on the right to help Metesacker on Zigic. Because Zigic like to position himself between right cente back and right side back, we have seen a couple of times that when Metesacker was far away from ball, Lahm have to jump and defend Zigic for headers, which was obeviously unacceptable as Lahm is only 170cm and Zigic is over 200cm high.
If Lahm played on the left, he could use his pace to defend on Krasic which Badstuber doesnt have. And more, Lahm on the offsive side, could help Podolski which Badstuber again didnt do in this game.
Hmm maybe a point with Lahm, but wouldn’t have played Badstuber on the right…
Or like Germany did in 2006, use Fredirich as right side back, and Badstuber as left centre back…
Friedrich is not really a right back either. He played there in 2006 put got a lot of stick, especially in the first game where he twice left Wanchope onside. He says he’s not comfortable playing right back. At Hertha he’s more or less always played as a central defender. If Löw had switched Lahm to left back, which, as I posted above, would have been a good solution in my view, he would have had to bring on Boateng or Aogo.
I wish Germany had a player like Summer now, really liked German sweeper tactic.
@ ZM:
As this is my first post on this splendid site I would like to start with my deepest appreciation of your work. This is at least one of the most interesting sites covering football game analysis, I just love to read your articles!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@ Florian: You are completely right saying that Friedrich isn’t a born right back, but he definitely can play this spot, even against strong opponents! Don’t you remember the Euro2008 game against Portugal and how Friedrich constantly managed to stop C.Ronaldo?
Playing Tasci in the middle, Friedrich as right back and Lahm on the left side would have been the far better choice. I know that it’s easy to make similar comments after the game, but this problem should have been obvious to anyone who saw the Champions League quarter-final, second leg match Manchester United vs Bayern Munich. Badstuber’s performance against A. Valencia was completely ridiculous, making his problems against technically skilled, pacey wingers more then evident. Even the odd german commentator Bela Rethy uttered his concerns about this tactical choice (don’t remember if before or after Jovanovic’s goal).
IMO fielding Badstuber against Krasic was pretty naive, even Aogo or Jansen (I know he isn’t a defender, in fact I knew it even before Klinsmann
) couldn’t have played it worse.
Thx again for this wonderful website!
P.S.: As i was trying to make my point that Friedrich had some decent performances as right back in the national team, I completely forgot, that since Germany is missing an adequate left-footed full back, my ideal fullback formation would be Lahm on the left (more offensively minded) and Boateng on the right (more defensively minded).
@Joolez: In my mind the statement about Friedrich’s performance against Portugal actually strengthens the point of Friedrich not being a right back. He was lauded for taking Ronaldo out of the game, doing a brilliant man-marking job, proving he is more adept at being a central defender. When somebody runs at him with pace on the wing, he gets found out quite often.
On your analysis on Badstuber having already been in five kinds of trouble against ManUtd I can only agree. That game showed that young Holger with the Helmet haircut is not a left back, and honestly I don’t understand why Löw put him there in the first place. Even though Lahm might not like it himself, Lahm is by far the best left back in the squad and playing on the right you take away much of his attacking strength (the aforementioned “foot-advantage”, his runs cutting in at pace around the 18-yard-box). I feel this could be accepted if there were a decent left-back in the squad (e.g. either Marcel Schäfer or Christian Pander on form) but since there is none (Jansen, as you rightly said is not a left-back at all. I feel he would work as a wing-back in a 3-5-2, though) I think you need to play Lahm on the left.
Ok, I see your point, but, let me think for a moment…..
If Friedrich would have had man-marked Jovanovic….*thinking*,…uhmm….I just don’t remember who scored the goal….
Just a joke, but since Kolarov hardly moved forward, maybe even this solution would have worked.
Anyway, I think we agree on the most important things (so let’s apply together for Loew’s job)
“He was lauded for taking Ronaldo out of the game, doing a brilliant man-marking job, proving he is more adept at being a central defender. When somebody runs at him with pace on the wing, he gets found out quite often. ”
I’m confused by this. Didn’t Ronaldo run at him with pace? If he can mark Ronaldo out of the game, surely he can mark out any other winger just as easily?
The game was about two years ago, so my recollection of the game is murky at best. But the way I remember it, was that Friedrich hardly ever let Ronaldo run at him with any pace which is what made the job so brilliant. He was on his game for 90 minutes, probably because his opponent was Ronaldo and he wanted to prove something against other less well-known wingers he often wasn’t on his game for 90 minutes.
This game is a good example of the remaining shortcomings of this team.
1. Loew’s mistakes today are not isolated incidents. Rather, they’ve been a steady feature of his time in charge of the National Team. That’s not taking away what he has done right. But poor squad selection and mid game tactics have been his biggest flaw in the last four years.
2. The overreliance on Oezil for creativity. Since Oezil introduction and immediate impact in the NT, Loew has not figured out that making him the central player of this team is putting on him all responsibility to create and dictate the flow of the game. Everything runs through him and when he isn’t on his game, marked, or taken off Germany’s initial game plan stops dead in its tracks. Instead of creating a system not reliant on Oezil, Loew maintains one that does. And he appears none the wiser. The solution? Utilize players like Cacau and Marin who are equally capable of creating chances and linking up. Klose and Podolski are not and without Oezil, they tend to bog down the team.
3. A slow incompatible center back partnership that is neither good on the ball or reading the game in terms of build up. A real liability whenever faced with tricky pacy strikers or caught on the counter.
4. The obvious use of Badstuber as LB. Aogo and Jansen are on the team but neither is much of an upgrade. Jansen is better in midfield and Aogo is at this point very raw. Lahm has played all season at RB and should remain there. No use switching things completely because it will create another vacuum on the other side.
5. No alternative to Germany’s original game plan. Loew’s team is possession based, excelling when able to utilize time and space. Without the ball they are very vulnerable, especially when confronted with a tightly packed narrow opponent. Again, this goes back to the use of players like Podolski and Klose, both of which are very reliant on the team clicking around them.
Poor refereeing aside, today’s match provides invaluable experience for the young players.
…yeah …”….poor squad selection…” tzzzz …. come on man, give this coach and team some credit…. and as I mentioned in a comment before: is one of your listed points really relevant if you don’t take your chances and you miss the penalty????
wrt “poor squad selection”:
would have liked to see how long Frings would have been on the field with this referee
…..
Not the point. Football is not a world of extremes. Most of everything fits into a gray area, this included. I’d like to hear an actual response to the points I brought up instead of an unsubstantiated dismissal.
Zigic was dead on his feet the last 30 minutes which goes some way to explain why Serbian attacks got killed off quickly. He didn’t get into the areas he should be in and if he ran too quickly then he got into the offside trap, and instead of running back he stood there looking like a lost puppy, meaning he blocked the path for other interlinking play by the Serbs since he would get any play behind the defense to be called offside!
@zm
In my oppinion Löw (and of course the referee) pretty much lost the game for Germany.
I just can`t understand why Özil was sent off. He is the only german player who can play these excellent passes out of nowhere. Instead of Özil, Podolski should have been sent off, not only because of the failed penalty kick but also because he lost all his self- confidence after this miss. All he did after that was standing on the field and shaking his head.
If you brind a striker like Mario Gomez you need someone who can give him the balls he needs, neither Marin who is a guy for the 1 vs. 1 situation nor Cacau are able to do that.
For sure, playing with Gomez at the end of the match without Özil was a mistake. One can argue that he could have been a weapon because of his height…but there were Vidic and Subotic in the centre defense of Serbia….
Also, in my oppinion it would have been better to let Müller continue playing on the right wing and change Khedira vs. Cacau. Schweinsteiger would have managed to stop the centre midfield of Serbia alone, especially because the main thread of Serbia, the man who was the most dagerous player at the end, surely was Milos Krasic.
And now there is the worst mistake Löw did:
It was absolutely predictable that Badstuber would get troubles defending against Krasic.
It was the same problem as against Manchester where he was without a chance trying to stop Valencia. It could have worked well to let Boateng play the right full back and switch Lahm on the left side, who surely could have stopped Krasic.
The biggest problem of the german team in my oppinion is that we have troubles at that position of the defense Lahm doesn’t play.
Sure, that is a problem of quality because we just don’t have a second Lahm but I am convinced if Löw would let Friedrich defend right as he did many years and Lahm switch on the left side, Germany would have no troubles with the wingers of any opponent.
Friedrich ist defenately the most solid Defender Germany has on the full back position…except Lahm.
The free role in the centre defense would be free for Hummels from Dortmund or Höwedes from Schalke, which Löw failed to nominate for the worldcup.
To conclude:
The referee and some wrong decisions of Löw where the reason why germany lost that game, but having watched that game I am far more conviced Germany will play an excellent role at this world cup. There are few teams having such a great defense then serbia and the way Germany dominated the game with 10 men was pretty much impressing.
As sais before, Boateng and Undiano would not fit together very well…Boateng ist well known for stupid fouls…
That’s a huge misconception. Boateng has only been given a straight red once in his entire playing career. The yellow/reds he has gotten were all when played out of position. Loew’s mistake is utilizing him as a fullback, which is baffling to say the least.
I think that this analysis is a little bit biased. The most important thing is that the red card was well deserved.
Both Klose’s yellow cards might have looked like innocent tackles but they were far from that. Those were tactic fouls meant to destroy Serbian’s counter attacks as Klose himself admitted later.
As the matter of fact Germany did fouls like that nonstop when Serbia went for counter attack. The ref established the criteria and gave yellow cards for the things like that. Klose knew that and as the most experienced German player should have been more careful. Plus before the second yellow card he was in a chance for goal when the ref blew offside. But he scored the goal anyway. He should have been sent off after that, so basically later on he played on borrowed time.
One more thing – Serbia should have scored more goals but the point is that they were afraid of scoring goals. Even when they were in a goal scoring chance it was obvious that they were not focused much on scoring goal but rather thinking of runing back to defence.
The conclusion is that after this match we still cant say about the real strength of both Serbia and Germany. The same situation we were before this match.
“The most important thing is that the red card was well deserved. Both Klose’s yellow cards might have looked like innocent tackles but they were far from that. Those were tactic fouls meant to destroy Serbian’s counter attacks as Klose himself admitted later.”
That’s almost exactly what the article says, is it not?
Yes you did. Ive read it again so it seems that I have rushed with my conclusion.
Although I didn’t mean that your analysis was wrong (as you were always brilliant in every analysis).
I said that I think that it was biased. You correctly said about those tactical fouls of which 2 resulted in red card. Buy it seemed to me that that was lost in the text and not singled out as an important thing.
That was the way the Germany dealt with Serbian attacks before the sending off. So after the red card they had to change their strategy. But then the goal came and after it the serbs lost their interest in scoring another.
I wish people wouldn’t throw accusations of ‘bias’ about if they disagree with something in the article.
The Germany v Australia piece I was accused of being biased against Germany, now presumably I’m biased towards Germany? It gets a bit ridiculous, it’s far more interesting to actually debate the game rather than the author’s own footballing persuasion.
@ ZM:
I don’t understand, why so many people including you regard Klose’s 2nd foul as a tactical one. Just because Stankovic was facing the german goal and was moving towards it?
Isn’t the “tactical foul” a foul used to break down the attacking play in order to gain time to give the defending team the possibility to reestablish the defensive order?
In this situation the german players had yet completely retreated to their own half, everything was under control.
Ivanovic had a little space on the right wing but Badstuber was (once) positioned in a decent way.
IMO this wasn’t a tactical foul, this yellow card was entirely redundant.
If my english was understandable, I would be very grateful for an explanation.
Has anyonme ever mentioned that actually the referee didn’t want to send off Klose…
If you watch the replay you can clearly see that he looks on his notes after showing Klose the 2nd yellow card. This is when he notices first that he has to show Klose the red card. I’m sure he didn’t feel comfortable with that. I’m 100% sure, he forgot that Klose already had a yellow card, ’cause if he remembered, he wouldn’t have shown him the red card.
Its a shame.
@ZM: What do you think about Podolski not playing on the line but instead running in the middle, where he almost always only slowed down the game. Müller did better on the right side and much of the attacks came from the right. Podolski does not know that you can bring a cross in or two, if your are a winger instead of a striker.
Or do you think that his line of play is better, hence his many chancesm, especially from (poor taken) wide shots?
I must say I viewed it completely different to you, I thought Podolski did better than Muller!
Thanks for your compliments. And to everyone else who has expressed similar thoughts, and thanks too for all your comments i ngeneral, the level of commentary has astounded and delighted me in equal measure!