DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Where Eagles dare! Discuss Nigerian related football (soccer) topics here.

Moderators: Moderator Team, phpBB2 - Administrators

User avatar
anointed
Flying Eagle
Flying Eagle
Posts: 50283
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 8:25 pm
DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by anointed »

Top scoring teams in each WC tournament

• 1930: Argentina - 18 goals
• 1934: Italy - 12 goals
• 1938: Hungary - 15 goals
• 1950: Brazil - 22 goals
• 1954: Hungary - 27 goals
• 1958: France - 23 goals
• 1962: Brazil - 14 goals
• 1966: Portugal - 17 goals
• 1970: Brazil - 19 goals
• 1974: Poland - 16 goals
• 1978: Argentina & Netherlands - 15 goals each
• 1982: France - 16 goals
• 1986: Argentina - 14 goals
• 1990: West Germany - 15 goals
• 1994: Sweden - 15 goals
• 1998: France - 15 goals
• 2002: Brazil - 18 goals
• 2006: Germany - 14 goals
• 2010: Germany - 16 goals
• 2014: Germany - 18 goals
Only the highest scoring teams in 1934, 1962, 1970, 1978, 1986, 1990, 1998, 2002 and 2014, meaning fewer than half of all World Cup tournaments have been won by the highest scoring team.
Last edited by anointed on Sat May 26, 2018 11:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
TOUCH NOT MY ANOINTED...
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding...hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe
User avatar
Coach
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 34432
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 3:07 pm
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by Coach »

How many of those highest scoring teams scored the bulk of their goals in the group stages? #OlegSalenkos. When it matters most, the big boys swing low at the urinals. Germany 7 - Brazil disgraced.
User avatar
Kabalega
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 18727
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:44 pm
Location: Here
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by Kabalega »

Shouldn't you look at goals per game?

Before you call me an ITK and hurl insults my way just think about it.

A team that makes it to the final is bound to have more goals scored than most, simply because they played more games.
Even without looking at the list one can predict that Germany, Brazil and Argentina will dominate it.

But hey, what do I know?

Now you can start your insults....
Last edited by Kabalega on Fri May 25, 2018 10:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“If your opponent is of choleric temper, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant.”- Sun Tzu
User avatar
theYemster
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 35648
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 12:25 am
Location: ßos✞on ✈️ Mo✞own ✈️ Lægos
Contact:
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by theYemster »

anointed wrote:Top scoring teams in each WC tournament

• 1930: Argentina - 18 goals
• 1934: Italy - 12 goals
• 1938: Hungary - 15 goals
• 1950: Brazil - 22 goals
• 1954: Hungary - 27 goals
• 1958: France - 23 goals
• 1962: Brazil - 14 goals
• 1966: Portugal - 17 goals
• 1970: Brazil - 19 goals
• 1974: Poland - 16 goals
• 1978: Argentina & Netherlands - 15 goals each
• 1982: France - 16 goals
• 1986: Argentina - 14 goals
• 1990: West Germany - 15 goals
• 1994: Sweden - 15 goals
• 1998: France - 15 goals
• 2002: Brazil - 18 goals
• 2006: Germany - 14 goals
• 2010: Germany - 16 goals
• 2014: Germany - 18 goals
Only the highest scoring teams in 1934, 1962, 1970, 1978, 1986, 1990, 1998, 2002 and 2018, meaning fewer than half of all World Cup tournaments have been won by the highest scoring team.
Fix this.
O-Qua Tangin Wann! Die with memories, not dreams.™

© ɹ ǝ ʇ s ɯ é ʎ ǝ ɥ ʇ
" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User avatar
Bell
Egg
Egg
Posts: 7032
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:43 pm
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by Bell »

WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT...


...a goal scored or a goal saved? There's your answer.
Bell
Image
folem
Egg
Egg
Posts: 4607
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:30 am
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by folem »

"Attack wins you games, defence wins you titles"
User avatar
Bell
Egg
Egg
Posts: 7032
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:43 pm
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by Bell »

folem wrote:"Attack wins you games, defence wins you titles"
SO...

...how does defense win you titles without first winning games?
Bell
Image
User avatar
Coach
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 34432
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 3:07 pm
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by Coach »

Weinstein attacked and won the game he played, #MeToo has leapt to the defence of the defeated and will win Weinstein a title...Rapist. 4726 D Block.
User avatar
pajimoh
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 32654
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 5:32 pm
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by pajimoh »

Bell wrote:
folem wrote:"Attack wins you games, defence wins you titles"
SO...

...how does defense win you titles without first winning games?
Bell
You're oversimplifying things. Yes you need to score goals but you only need to win a game by scoring just a goal. If you have the meanest defence, it wins you games. You don't lose games by not conceding, which enhances your chance of winning with the odd goal or more.

Both are important but good coaches build from the back. Pep knew defence was his major headache, even with all his attacking options.
Super Eagles - Fly Above The Storm!!!
User avatar
anointed
Flying Eagle
Flying Eagle
Posts: 50283
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 8:25 pm
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by anointed »

Most of the WC won by Brazil were won despite having defensive woes. They just scored and scored. But Brazil's best sides that didn't win the WC, like the legendary 82 team, would almost certainly have defensive issues.
TOUCH NOT MY ANOINTED...
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding...hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe
User avatar
anointed
Flying Eagle
Flying Eagle
Posts: 50283
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 8:25 pm
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by anointed »

theYemster wrote:
anointed wrote:Top scoring teams in each WC tournament

• 1930: Argentina - 18 goals
• 1934: Italy - 12 goals
• 1938: Hungary - 15 goals
• 1950: Brazil - 22 goals
• 1954: Hungary - 27 goals
• 1958: France - 23 goals
• 1962: Brazil - 14 goals
• 1966: Portugal - 17 goals
• 1970: Brazil - 19 goals
• 1974: Poland - 16 goals
• 1978: Argentina & Netherlands - 15 goals each
• 1982: France - 16 goals
• 1986: Argentina - 14 goals
• 1990: West Germany - 15 goals
• 1994: Sweden - 15 goals
• 1998: France - 15 goals
• 2002: Brazil - 18 goals
• 2006: Germany - 14 goals
• 2010: Germany - 16 goals
• 2014: Germany - 18 goals
Only the highest scoring teams in 1934, 1962, 1970, 1978, 1986, 1990, 1998, 2002 and 2018, meaning fewer than half of all World Cup tournaments have been won by the highest scoring team.
Fix this.
Thanks, bros :thumbs: That should be 2014.
TOUCH NOT MY ANOINTED...
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding...hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe
User avatar
anointed
Flying Eagle
Flying Eagle
Posts: 50283
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 8:25 pm
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by anointed »

Kabalega wrote:Shouldn't you look at goals per game?

Before you call me an ITK and hurl insults my way just think about it.

A team that makes it to the final is bound to have more goals scored than most, simply because they played more games.
Even without looking at the list one can predict that Germany, Brazil and Argentina will dominate it.

But hey, what do I know?

Now you can start your insults....
You are not just ITK, you are are also obnoxious. It will continue to earn you insults.

Take for instance:
Even without looking at the list one can predict that Germany, Brazil and Argentina will dominate it.
Is this not the height of obnoxiousness in the vein of "I didn't watch the match but I can tell you how Nigeria played".

End of day, your drivel about who dominated the list has zilch to do with the thrust of the thread but you have only advertised your legendary comprehension deficit. Before running your amatoki buccal cavity on average goals scored, you must also factor average goals conceded in deciding how far you want to go.

While I haven't taken sides, as you have implied, I have only posed a teaser: would attacking and scoring 27 goals like Hungary in '54 or 8 like Spain in 2010 or defending like Switzerland in 2006 take you far in the WC?
TOUCH NOT MY ANOINTED...
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding...hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe
User avatar
pajimoh
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 32654
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 5:32 pm
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by pajimoh »

anointed wrote:Most of the WC won by Brazil were won despite having defensive woes. They just scored and scored. But Brazil's best sides that didn't win the WC, like the legendary 82 team, would almost certainly have defensive issues.
Abeg stop. Having a good defense is necessarily not conceding, even though that is the best scenario. Brazil has a reasonable good defense with ball players. That enables them to keep most teams busy both offensively and defensively.

That does not negate the fact, as you pointed out, some teams can just outscore their opponent.

Relying on outscoring your opponents by conceding bags full of goals is not the best. The best teams can win by a lone goal or more. Defense definitely win titles. Attacks win you games
Super Eagles - Fly Above The Storm!!!
User avatar
airwolex
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 34793
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 5:45 pm
Location: Your worst Nightmare
Contact:
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by airwolex »

Generally attack, unless you are Italy.
User avatar
Coach
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 34432
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 3:07 pm
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by Coach »

The problem here is the misunderstanding of the art of defence, theres more to the science and discipline than muddy shorts and last ditch challenges. True defence not only negates the attack, but renders it obsolete, case in point, one of the greatest defences in competitive sport, Mr Floyd Mechanics Mayweather Okeosisi I. Floyd was far from a gun slinger and yet emerged from many gun fights unscathed, having made all the Butch Cassidy's squander their bullets in wayward shots. Canelo one of the most heavy handed in the division at the time, schooled and rendered near useless. A sound defence not only blunts the attack, but forces it into positions where attacking opens up avenues of vulnerability. At one point Canelo had no clue what to do,

Rounds 7 and 8, expert defence, Canelo soaking up huge counter punches, forced to change his attack as the body shots slid off the shoulder and left his head wide open to receive. What was supposed to be an exhibition of Saul's strength and size advantage, became a talented boxer abandoning his guard with over 6 rounds to go and hoping on a haymaker. Floyd's defence destroyed his attack and forced him to go renegade. Whilst renegading his head was picked off like udala by tree climbing toddlers in Awlaw.
User avatar
theDunamis
Egg
Egg
Posts: 9092
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 9:56 pm
Location: Hidden with Christ Jesus
Contact:
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by theDunamis »

I believe it is more nuanced than just attack or defense.

SUPERIOR ATTACK + BELOW AVERAGE DEFENSE: If you have a well-oiled attacking machine that can overpower almost at will a la Real Madrid and Brazil in their respective top notch attacking eras, then you are always a title contender even with the Achilles heel of a below average defense.

GOOD ATTACK + GOOD DEFENSE: If you have a good attack and a good defense (aka a balanced team) a la A.C. Milan in the mid 2000s, then you are a title contender any day and every day.

BELOW AVERAGE ATTACK + SUPERIOR DEFENSE: Catenaccio takes you far in a tournament too and indeed wins tournaments as the Italians have taught us.

Any of these makeup puts you in contention for a good run and a stake at the title, but as to which of these takes you furthest, in my opinion, a good attack AND a good defense will be afforded more tactical flexibility than the other two makeups and that will typically give it the edge to prevail and run deeper in a tournament like the WC.
theDunamis is signed, sealed, DELIVERED!
User avatar
Coach
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 34432
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 3:07 pm
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by Coach »

Attack is overrated. Two solid centre halves and huge fifty-fifty in the 5 yards from the D and lets see how many stepovers Neymar does thereafter.
User avatar
kalani JR
Egg
Egg
Posts: 7483
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:06 am
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by kalani JR »

anointed wrote:Most of the WC won by Brazil were won despite having defensive woes. They just scored and scored. But Brazil's best sides that didn't win the WC, like the legendary 82 team, would almost certainly have defensive issues.
This is not true.
User avatar
Scipio Africanus
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 31697
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 7:43 pm
Location: Cyberspace
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by Scipio Africanus »

Coach wrote:The problem here is the misunderstanding of the art of defence, theres more to the science and discipline than muddy shorts and last ditch challenges. True defence not only negates the attack, but renders it obsolete, case in point, one of the greatest defences in competitive sport, Mr Floyd Mechanics Mayweather Okeosisi I. Floyd was far from a gun slinger and yet emerged from many gun fights unscathed, having made all the Butch Cassidy's squander their bullets in wayward shots. Canelo one of the most heavy handed in the division at the time, schooled and rendered near useless. A sound defence not only blunts the attack, but forces it into positions where attacking opens up avenues of vulnerability. At one point Canelo had no clue what to do,

Rounds 7 and 8, expert defence, Canelo soaking up huge counter punches, forced to change his attack as the body shots slid off the shoulder and left his head wide open to receive. What was supposed to be an exhibition of Saul's strength and size advantage, became a talented boxer abandoning his guard with over 6 rounds to go and hoping on a haymaker. Floyd's defence destroyed his attack and forced him to go renegade. Whilst renegading his head was picked off like udala by tree climbing toddlers in Awlaw.
Great points! :clap: :clap: :clap:

By the way, you need to contact boxing addicts anonymous. :mrgreen:

Wha choo looking at?!
User avatar
theDunamis
Egg
Egg
Posts: 9092
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 9:56 pm
Location: Hidden with Christ Jesus
Contact:
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by theDunamis »

Coach wrote:The problem here is the misunderstanding of the art of defence, theres more to the science and discipline than muddy shorts and last ditch challenges. True defence not only negates the attack, but renders it obsolete, case in point, one of the greatest defences in competitive sport, Mr Floyd Mechanics Mayweather Okeosisi I. Floyd was far from a gun slinger and yet emerged from many gun fights unscathed, having made all the Butch Cassidy's squander their bullets in wayward shots. Canelo one of the most heavy handed in the division at the time, schooled and rendered near useless. A sound defence not only blunts the attack, but forces it into positions where attacking opens up avenues of vulnerability. At one point Canelo had no clue what to do,

Rounds 7 and 8, expert defence, Canelo soaking up huge counter punches, forced to change his attack as the body shots slid off the shoulder and left his head wide open to receive. What was supposed to be an exhibition of Saul's strength and size advantage, became a talented boxer abandoning his guard with over 6 rounds to go and hoping on a haymaker. Floyd's defence destroyed his attack and forced him to go renegade. Whilst renegading his head was picked off like udala by tree climbing toddlers in Awlaw.
So Coach, how was Mike Tyson's defense? #AskingForAFriend
theDunamis is signed, sealed, DELIVERED!
User avatar
Scipio Africanus
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 31697
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 7:43 pm
Location: Cyberspace
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by Scipio Africanus »

theDunamis wrote:
Coach wrote:The problem here is the misunderstanding of the art of defence, theres more to the science and discipline than muddy shorts and last ditch challenges. True defence not only negates the attack, but renders it obsolete, case in point, one of the greatest defences in competitive sport, Mr Floyd Mechanics Mayweather Okeosisi I. Floyd was far from a gun slinger and yet emerged from many gun fights unscathed, having made all the Butch Cassidy's squander their bullets in wayward shots. Canelo one of the most heavy handed in the division at the time, schooled and rendered near useless. A sound defence not only blunts the attack, but forces it into positions where attacking opens up avenues of vulnerability. At one point Canelo had no clue what to do,

Rounds 7 and 8, expert defence, Canelo soaking up huge counter punches, forced to change his attack as the body shots slid off the shoulder and left his head wide open to receive. What was supposed to be an exhibition of Saul's strength and size advantage, became a talented boxer abandoning his guard with over 6 rounds to go and hoping on a haymaker. Floyd's defence destroyed his attack and forced him to go renegade. Whilst renegading his head was picked off like udala by tree climbing toddlers in Awlaw.
So Coach, how was Mike Tyson's defense? #AskingForAFriend
The best ever! Nobody could match him! His defense was impregnable, his attack was ferocious and he would eat your heart! :mrgreen:

Seriously though, Mike Tyson was on another level in slipping punches and defensive skills. At his prime it was really hard to hit him. I can show you a clip where Tyson dodges about 20 consecutive punches (without throwing a single punch!) before knocking out his opponent with a simple overhand left.

Wha choo looking at?!
User avatar
Scipio Africanus
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 31697
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 7:43 pm
Location: Cyberspace
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by Scipio Africanus »

theDunamis wrote:I believe it is more nuanced than just attack or defense.

SUPERIOR ATTACK + BELOW AVERAGE DEFENSE: If you have a well-oiled attacking machine that can overpower almost at will a la Real Madrid and Brazil in their respective top notch attacking eras, then you are always a title contender even with the Achilles heel of a below average defense.

GOOD ATTACK + GOOD DEFENSE: If you have a good attack and a good defense (aka a balanced team) a la A.C. Milan in the mid 2000s, then you are a title contender any day and every day.

BELOW AVERAGE ATTACK + SUPERIOR DEFENSE: Catenaccio takes you far in a tournament too and indeed wins tournaments as the Italians have taught us.

Any of these makeup puts you in contention for a good run and a stake at the title, but as to which of these takes you furthest, in my opinion, a good attack AND a good defense will be afforded more tactical flexibility than the other two makeups and that will typically give it the edge to prevail and run deeper in a tournament like the WC.
The best Italian sides always combined good defense with extremely clinical strikers(or at least clinical when the chips were down). Rossi, Baggio, Schillacci, Del Piero, Grosso etc. I will never forget Del Piero's goal against Germany in the 2006 semifinal. Ice cold finishing.

Now that Italy have below average attackers they either get bounced in the first round (2010, 2014) or watch from home (2018).

Wha choo looking at?!
folem
Egg
Egg
Posts: 4607
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:30 am
Re: DEFENCE OR ATTACK: WHICH ONE TAKES FARTHER IN THE WC?

Post by folem »

Scipio Africanus wrote:
The best Italian sides always combined good defense with extremely clinical strikers (or at least clinical when the chips were down). Rossi, Baggio, Schillacci, Del Piero, Grosso etc. I will never forget Del Piero's goal against Germany in the 2006 semifinal. Ice cold finishing.

Now that Italy have below average attackers they either get bounced in the first round (2010, 2014) or watch from home (2018).
Grosso, a striker?

Post Reply