Ever. Or at least since the inauguration of this great competition in 1930.
Some people measure success by the amount of titles won. Jose Mourinho would agree with this logic as this is how he defines himself. In several verbal jabs at his fellow colleagues (for instance, Claudio Ranieri, Carlo Ancelotti, Arsene Wenger, to name a few), he boasts about his trophy cabinet at home, constantly comparing the range of titles he has to their collection. Yes, I'm sure he would be blinded if sunlight ever touched any of that, but let's be realistic here. With the exception of Porto, wherever he went (Chelsea, Inter, Real Madrid), he basically had a blank checkbook to work with. If this standard were used on the national stages, Brazil would be considered the strongest nation with 5 titles. And yes, there is sufficient argument to say that they are. In fact, I am simply proposing an alternate way of looking at success, as soon follows.
Some people measure success in other ways. For instance, the quality of play on the field. Attractiveness on the field might win you fans and support, but it might not win you results. On the club level, the most obvious example is that of Arsenal. It's been 5 years since they won anything, the FA Cup back in 2005. On the international level, many people consider The Dutch team of 1974 composed of Cryuff and Michels to be the greatest ever squad never to have won the world cup. Spain is another nation, never having made it past the quarterfinals until this year's edition. Luckily both countries will have the chance to change that piece on Sunday. And hopefully, there will be attractive football displayed on both ends.
Now, I can't talk about the attractiveness of team's plays before 2000, as I had only been avidly following the sport since then. But I have done a lot of reading over the past 10 years on previous world cup results and I simply cannot believe Germany's results (and this, Que Golazo, might help with why people keep referring to Germany as a machine).
A year ago, I was having a discussion with my friend Sherief about how he thinks the world cup would play out. I had my usual picks in Brazil, England (...forgive me...), and Spain, because of their recent Euro 2008 success. He immediately mentioned Germany. He told me they were always there towards the latter stages of the tournament. I looked this up and what I found shocked me.
Germany have played the most matches in world cups. 98. This takes into account the 1930 world cup, which they did not participate in. This also includes the 1950 world cup, which, for reasons you can guess, Germany (West/East?) could not participate in. Brazil have the advantage of being the only nation in the world to have participated in all 19 editions of this illustrious competition. So that's 17 competitions they participated in. Let's divide 98/17 and you get 5.76. This means they played an average of 5.76 games every tournament. Even though the number of teams have changed since the beginning (in 1982, it increased from 16 to 24, and in 1998, it increased from 24 to 32, where it currently stands), the number of games played for teams reaching the final has been 7 for the majority of the World Cup's history. In the early days, it was less, adding even more weight to Germany's 5.76. That means on average, they reach the semifinal more often than not. Let's see if that works out.
The truth is a lot of what can happen in football is luck. Refereeing decisions infect the game in more ways than you want it to. This world cup has seen its fair share, and let me not get started about the 2002 fiasco. And this is when technology is more advanced, where fans, players, coaches, and other stakeholders have the luxury to rewind, fast forward, and publicly criticize with the benefit of hindsight. I wonder what could happened last century when this wasn't possible. So how does Germany keep itself anchored to success? all the time, from 1934, its first world cup, till now? I don't know.
In 1934, they came in 3rd place. In 1938 was the only time they did not make it past the first round (hmm...maybe they had other things on their plate?). This is considered their worst result in a world cup. There were no world cups in 1942 and 1946 because of the wars. After being banned in 1950, they claimed their first world cup in 1954. In 1958, they came fourth. In 1962, they went out in the quarterfinals against a very strong Yugoslavia side. In 1966, they came 2nd. In 1970, they came third. Truly, no one could really match up with the best team of all time, Brazil 1970s. In 1974, they won it again. In 1978, they lost against Austria in the second round. That game even became known as 'The Miracle of Cordoba'. Naturally, for the German fans, it was considered 'The Disgrace of Cordoba'. The fact that this match is dubbed a miracle serves to show how much of an upset this was. Think Italy and France this year, except worse, because we aren't going to dub any of their performances as miracles or disgraces. In 1982, Germany came second place, with the exploits of Paolo Rossi and co. ensuring Italy got its 3rd world cup title. In 1986, Germany lost in the final to...Maradona's Argentina. This was the greatest player in the world we are talking about. It should be understandable. Then in 1990, they got their revenge by replaying the 1986 final; a 1-0 scoreline in favor of Germany. So from the years 1982 to 1990, they were in three consecutive finals of the World Cup, losing twice and winning once. Okay, Brazil did one better and actually won two of their finals (1994, 2002), and lost in 1998 against Zizou magic. This was a Brazil with Romario, Rivaldo, Ronaldo, Cafu, Roberto Carlos, Dunga, Ronaldinho, and a host of other superstars.
In the 1994 and 98 editions of the world cup, Germany performed poorly by their lofty standards. They went out in the quarterfinals against Bulgaria and Croatia, respectively. This outcome actually made them invest in their youth development to ensure players of the upcoming generation did their country proud. They specifically targeted 10 to 17 year olds and invested close to 500m pounds. Emphasis was placed on technical ability. Another key reason was the country's FA worked alongside the government to ease immigration laws. A number of players (ozil, podolski, boateng, khedira, tasci, aogo, marin, gomez, just to name a few) benefitted from this and became key members of the senior team set-up. Furthermore, Germany won the U-17, U-19, and U-21 championships following these investments.
Oh, and they didn't do too bad right after the 1998 'debacle' of only making the quarterfinals. They made it to the final the following World Cup, made it to the semi-finals in 2006 only to lose to the eventual champions (2 minutes, 2 goals...thank you grosso and del piero), and they look favorites to come third place again for the 2010 edition.
Let's also look at this year's German team with their ages:
GK - Neuer - 24
GK - Wiese - 28
GK - Butt - 36
DF - Badstuber - 21
DF - Mertesacker - 25
DF - Lahm (c) - 26
DF - Boateng - 21
DF - Jansen - 24
DF - Friedrich - 31
DF - Aogo - 23
DF - Tasci - 23
MF - Ozil - 21
MF - Marin - 21
MF - Khedira - 23
MF - Schweinsteiger - 25
MF - Kroos - 20
MF - Trochowski - 26
FW - Gomez - 24
FW - Klose - 32
FW - Podolski - 25
FW - Kiebling - 26
FW - Muller - 20
FW - Cacau - 29
This is the youngest team Germany has sent out since the 1934 world cup. So, not only have they been successful in the past, but Germany have a core foundation with which to build upon for the next two world cups.
One of the reasons I am very impressed with Germany as well as been their commitment to youth development, which I only briefly mentioned. Countries like England and Italy will suffer in the future because of their reluctance to commit to youngsters, both for different reasons though. England's Premier League currently has 68% foreigners. This unfortunately leaves very little room for top young talent to blossom at the highest level. Remember, Theo Walcott was the next big thing when he was selected for England four years ago? Italy, on the other hand, don't allow their talented youngsters to even play until they are 23 or 24. Players like Giovinco, Motta, Santon, and Balotelli hardly got game time for their clubs; yet they are the players whom Italian hopes are resting on for the upcoming world cups.
Germany has gotten things right ever since they sent out their first world cup team. How they have consistently been at the latter stages of the world cup will continue to puzzle me. Not even Brazil can boast of results like Germany. Yes, Brazil do play a more entertaining brand of football. Yes, Italy have won more titles than Germany. But I would still choose Germany, as this German machine shows no signs of slowing down anytime soon.
read more...
Some people measure success by the amount of titles won. Jose Mourinho would agree with this logic as this is how he defines himself. In several verbal jabs at his fellow colleagues (for instance, Claudio Ranieri, Carlo Ancelotti, Arsene Wenger, to name a few), he boasts about his trophy cabinet at home, constantly comparing the range of titles he has to their collection. Yes, I'm sure he would be blinded if sunlight ever touched any of that, but let's be realistic here. With the exception of Porto, wherever he went (Chelsea, Inter, Real Madrid), he basically had a blank checkbook to work with. If this standard were used on the national stages, Brazil would be considered the strongest nation with 5 titles. And yes, there is sufficient argument to say that they are. In fact, I am simply proposing an alternate way of looking at success, as soon follows.
Some people measure success in other ways. For instance, the quality of play on the field. Attractiveness on the field might win you fans and support, but it might not win you results. On the club level, the most obvious example is that of Arsenal. It's been 5 years since they won anything, the FA Cup back in 2005. On the international level, many people consider The Dutch team of 1974 composed of Cryuff and Michels to be the greatest ever squad never to have won the world cup. Spain is another nation, never having made it past the quarterfinals until this year's edition. Luckily both countries will have the chance to change that piece on Sunday. And hopefully, there will be attractive football displayed on both ends.
Now, I can't talk about the attractiveness of team's plays before 2000, as I had only been avidly following the sport since then. But I have done a lot of reading over the past 10 years on previous world cup results and I simply cannot believe Germany's results (and this, Que Golazo, might help with why people keep referring to Germany as a machine).
A year ago, I was having a discussion with my friend Sherief about how he thinks the world cup would play out. I had my usual picks in Brazil, England (...forgive me...), and Spain, because of their recent Euro 2008 success. He immediately mentioned Germany. He told me they were always there towards the latter stages of the tournament. I looked this up and what I found shocked me.
Germany have played the most matches in world cups. 98. This takes into account the 1930 world cup, which they did not participate in. This also includes the 1950 world cup, which, for reasons you can guess, Germany (West/East?) could not participate in. Brazil have the advantage of being the only nation in the world to have participated in all 19 editions of this illustrious competition. So that's 17 competitions they participated in. Let's divide 98/17 and you get 5.76. This means they played an average of 5.76 games every tournament. Even though the number of teams have changed since the beginning (in 1982, it increased from 16 to 24, and in 1998, it increased from 24 to 32, where it currently stands), the number of games played for teams reaching the final has been 7 for the majority of the World Cup's history. In the early days, it was less, adding even more weight to Germany's 5.76. That means on average, they reach the semifinal more often than not. Let's see if that works out.
The truth is a lot of what can happen in football is luck. Refereeing decisions infect the game in more ways than you want it to. This world cup has seen its fair share, and let me not get started about the 2002 fiasco. And this is when technology is more advanced, where fans, players, coaches, and other stakeholders have the luxury to rewind, fast forward, and publicly criticize with the benefit of hindsight. I wonder what could happened last century when this wasn't possible. So how does Germany keep itself anchored to success? all the time, from 1934, its first world cup, till now? I don't know.
In 1934, they came in 3rd place. In 1938 was the only time they did not make it past the first round (hmm...maybe they had other things on their plate?). This is considered their worst result in a world cup. There were no world cups in 1942 and 1946 because of the wars. After being banned in 1950, they claimed their first world cup in 1954. In 1958, they came fourth. In 1962, they went out in the quarterfinals against a very strong Yugoslavia side. In 1966, they came 2nd. In 1970, they came third. Truly, no one could really match up with the best team of all time, Brazil 1970s. In 1974, they won it again. In 1978, they lost against Austria in the second round. That game even became known as 'The Miracle of Cordoba'. Naturally, for the German fans, it was considered 'The Disgrace of Cordoba'. The fact that this match is dubbed a miracle serves to show how much of an upset this was. Think Italy and France this year, except worse, because we aren't going to dub any of their performances as miracles or disgraces. In 1982, Germany came second place, with the exploits of Paolo Rossi and co. ensuring Italy got its 3rd world cup title. In 1986, Germany lost in the final to...Maradona's Argentina. This was the greatest player in the world we are talking about. It should be understandable. Then in 1990, they got their revenge by replaying the 1986 final; a 1-0 scoreline in favor of Germany. So from the years 1982 to 1990, they were in three consecutive finals of the World Cup, losing twice and winning once. Okay, Brazil did one better and actually won two of their finals (1994, 2002), and lost in 1998 against Zizou magic. This was a Brazil with Romario, Rivaldo, Ronaldo, Cafu, Roberto Carlos, Dunga, Ronaldinho, and a host of other superstars.
In the 1994 and 98 editions of the world cup, Germany performed poorly by their lofty standards. They went out in the quarterfinals against Bulgaria and Croatia, respectively. This outcome actually made them invest in their youth development to ensure players of the upcoming generation did their country proud. They specifically targeted 10 to 17 year olds and invested close to 500m pounds. Emphasis was placed on technical ability. Another key reason was the country's FA worked alongside the government to ease immigration laws. A number of players (ozil, podolski, boateng, khedira, tasci, aogo, marin, gomez, just to name a few) benefitted from this and became key members of the senior team set-up. Furthermore, Germany won the U-17, U-19, and U-21 championships following these investments.
Oh, and they didn't do too bad right after the 1998 'debacle' of only making the quarterfinals. They made it to the final the following World Cup, made it to the semi-finals in 2006 only to lose to the eventual champions (2 minutes, 2 goals...thank you grosso and del piero), and they look favorites to come third place again for the 2010 edition.
Let's also look at this year's German team with their ages:
GK - Neuer - 24
GK - Wiese - 28
GK - Butt - 36
DF - Badstuber - 21
DF - Mertesacker - 25
DF - Lahm (c) - 26
DF - Boateng - 21
DF - Jansen - 24
DF - Friedrich - 31
DF - Aogo - 23
DF - Tasci - 23
MF - Ozil - 21
MF - Marin - 21
MF - Khedira - 23
MF - Schweinsteiger - 25
MF - Kroos - 20
MF - Trochowski - 26
FW - Gomez - 24
FW - Klose - 32
FW - Podolski - 25
FW - Kiebling - 26
FW - Muller - 20
FW - Cacau - 29
This is the youngest team Germany has sent out since the 1934 world cup. So, not only have they been successful in the past, but Germany have a core foundation with which to build upon for the next two world cups.
One of the reasons I am very impressed with Germany as well as been their commitment to youth development, which I only briefly mentioned. Countries like England and Italy will suffer in the future because of their reluctance to commit to youngsters, both for different reasons though. England's Premier League currently has 68% foreigners. This unfortunately leaves very little room for top young talent to blossom at the highest level. Remember, Theo Walcott was the next big thing when he was selected for England four years ago? Italy, on the other hand, don't allow their talented youngsters to even play until they are 23 or 24. Players like Giovinco, Motta, Santon, and Balotelli hardly got game time for their clubs; yet they are the players whom Italian hopes are resting on for the upcoming world cups.
Germany has gotten things right ever since they sent out their first world cup team. How they have consistently been at the latter stages of the world cup will continue to puzzle me. Not even Brazil can boast of results like Germany. Yes, Brazil do play a more entertaining brand of football. Yes, Italy have won more titles than Germany. But I would still choose Germany, as this German machine shows no signs of slowing down anytime soon.
