Those who are saying Italy did not beat any big teams..can you answer this ?

Question

I have been reading a lot of comments posted by people who know pitifully less about the history of the game...they say Italy didnt deserve the title as they didnt beat Brazil or Argentina..well then Brazil didnt deserve it in 1994 or 2002..neither France in 1998

Lets see...teams Brazil beat in 2002 - China, Costa Rica, Turkey, Belgium, England, Germany..if we consider England as a big team..which they are not ..then that makes 2 strong teams..3 of the others didnt even make it to 2006.

France in 1998 - South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Denmark,Paraguay ,Italy, Croatia , Brazil again 2 big teams.
Brazil in 1994- Russia,Camaroon ,Sweden,USA, Holland, Italy again 2 big teams.
West Germany in 1990- UAE, Colombia,Yogoslavia,Holland, Czechoslovakia, England, Argentina..3 big teams...

Italy too has beaten 3 big teams Czech Republic..Germany, France so stop talking nonsense about being lucky...they equalled France's record of conceding least goals..and also were the 2nd highest scorer...

londo girl i didnt see any logic in ur answer just typically english kind of mindless bragging..

Pancho...Ghana are not current african champs but are 4 time champs. Egypt are the current champs.

hey shivers Germany is always a big team in WC..whether they play well or not..they have reached 11 SF more than anyone else..even Brazil..& Italian football is not dull..its more tactical, besides these days Brazilian coaches even publicly speak against playing attacking football so quit blaming Italy only..

Answer 1

Losers and haters will always find excuses... ;-)

Actually, the group Italy was in, was called "the group of death"... so they were not easy teams at all! As for the following rounds, Australia proved they weren't so easy, even against Brazil. Ukraine were at their first World Cup, but they had a big champ, Shevchenko, who, at his best, could be very dangerous. And Germany and France were two big teams indeed!

Answer 2

I don't know how much football knowledge you possess, but I can give you the humble opinion of a longtime football fan. Italy has beaten big teams now and in the past. It is not the "beating" part that matters to me, but the "how". Many teams possess a powerful attack and play the game the way it's supposed to be played: OFFENSIVELY. I simply don't think Italy deserved to win, because their game is so dull, boring and much too defensive. Any team that defends with 11 men and scores MOSTLY through set pieces or with a counter-attack does not qualify for me as a great team. Granted, Italy is an excellent DEFENSIVE team and if you like defensive football, by all means cheer them on. I just think that people who appreciate beautiful football, such as the one we use to see in the 60s, 70s and to some extent in the 80s are just tired of this defensive nonsense (having the lone striker in front crap). In recent years, only in 1990 was the Italian team exciting and should have won at home. On the other hand, all of this depends on the coach. I hope the next Italian coach will be somewhat like Klinsmann and push the Italians towards a strongly offensive, creative stance.

Please note that you're definitions of big teams is overly simplistic; for someone who claims that others know "pitifully less" about the game, you don't seem to put the "big team" mantra into context. For example, in 2002, Germany was not a big team, but they were strong in 1990. Likewise, Croatia was a stronger team than Italy in 1998, but definitely much weaker this time around. England has been strong and weak depending on the World Cup. Also, I think the lucky part comes from the fact that they beat Germany in overtime and France in a penalty shootout. The shootout is only about luck, especially since Trezeguet's crossbar gave Italy the title (not a Buffon block). Had France won the shootout, you would be saying that the French were lucky to win. So everything is relative...

Gianluca: Italian football is dull; Did you see that final Champions League match between AC Milan and Juventus???That was the most boring match in the world that rightly so finished in a Penalty Shootout. Italian football is much,much too defensive. That's sad. The 1982 might have been better; I really liked the 1990 team; they were really offensive..


Dorian Gray:

WELL YEAH: BRAZIL PLAYED TACTICAL FOOTBALL WITH ONE STRIKER (RONALDO) AND LOOK AT THE RESULT!!! (THEY PLAYED HORRIBLY AGAINST FRANCE). WELL, FEEL FREE TO INDULGE YOURSELF WITH TACTICAL FOOTBALL WHERE NOTHING HAPPENS AND PLAYERS KNOCK THE BALL BETWEEN EACH OTHER FOREVER. I JUST PREFER QUICK, ATTACKING, CREATIVE FOOTBALL; SOMETHING THE ITALIANS DON'T HAVE; BUT YEAH: EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN TASTE . JUST ADMIT IT: PLAYERS TODAY ARE NOT AS CREATIVE AND DARING AS FAR AS CREATIVITY GOES AS THEIR FOREFATHERS WERE (PELE, GARINCHA, ZICO, ROMARIO, ZAGALLO, BECKENBAUER, CRUYFF, MARADONA, EUSEBIO,ETC..)..AND LET'S FACE IT; COACHES ARE LITTLE GIRLY MEN WHO ARE SCARED OF CONCEDING THE FIRST GOAL...

Answer 3

Italy beat: Ghana, a team that while playing better than expected, isnt considered to be one of the best teams, and they didn't beat the United States, a team that while playing below their potential, whose potential isnt very good anyway, and the Czech Republic, a team that played worse than expected, in part due to injuries, but is generally considered a very good team. Then they beat Australia, a team that isnt considered to be very good, and in fact wasn't supposed to advance, but nonetheless did, who played very well, oh and they could only beat them by one goal from the spot...pretty whimpy performance. If you say it was because of the red card, which WAS unjust, well, that may be true, but against the United States you had a man advantage for half the game, so you are certianly even as far as reffing goes. Then you beat Ukraine, a team that played decently, and while being respected as a good team, was never a champion contender, or anything near it. Then you beat Germany, a team expected to do decently and played really, really well. That was probably your first win against a 'Big Team'. And then you tied France, and took the cup on Penalties. That isn't actually a win, so you tied a 'Big Team'. So thats 1 win, 1 draw against 'Big Teams', '2 wins, 1 draw' if you count the Czech Republic, which you shouldn't, seeing as they had a poor tournament. So...just shutup, you already won the cup on freaking penalties for christsake, after you failed to beat the United States and had to get lucky against Australia. Go away.

Answer 4

Italy bascially won the world cup when they took out Germany in the Semis. The final (although tightly contested) was kind of academic. The general feeling was that they were leaving Berlin with their 4th star.

However, Italy's '82 run is the greatest run of all time.

They had to beat Argentina, Brazil, and Germany to win the cup. It's never been done before or since by anyone


And to Shivers with the comment above,
Italy dull? They were the main reason why the Germany-Italy semifinal was by far the best game of the tournament

Answer 5

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy for the Italian fans that their team won, but I do agree that they didn't have to play a few of the big power houses. I'm not 100% convinced Italy would be able to beat Argentina or Brazil. (based on how they played this WC) I think they deserve the title but I still don't believe them to be a better team than Brazil or Argentina. But then again, who really cares because they are the World Cup Champions. Good job!

Answer 6

Yup, Italy did. Germany n France are 2 big teams. Brazil always a big team but England is not really. Since 1966, they're not up to the standard of a big team. Ghana will be close to that in the next WC (maybe). But WC is always a different atmosphere. Every team has chance to be big...

Answer 7

Being an England fan I agree that they were bad in 2002 but Germany??? they were a different team from this world cup yes.. but its not easy to beat Oliver Kahn and until that final no team had really beaten him and won :s
I think Brazil deserved it
I dont think it really matters how many big teams you beat. Some of the best players in the world have stated that World Cup games are not only the most exciting for a player to participate in.. but to play in because of the physical and mental demands that it has on players i.e. at the end of this world cup's final.. Henry.. a striker with club and international fitness under his belt has cramps because of the physical strain and goes out.. same with Veira.. it doesnt matter who you play.. you have to go play a hard 90 minutes

Answer 8

Those who say that are idiots.
Before the cup started: Chech Republic was one of the favorites to win the cup.
Ghana was the African Champion. In the last world cup Senegal the African champion had assured France not reaching the second round.
Germany was the host country.
Ukraine came out as group leaders in qualifiers against Turkey, Denmark, Greece. Turkey the semi finalist in the last world cup, Greece the reigning European Champions, and Denmark always a great nation.
Then France.
They can all shut their holes.

Answer 9

It was a great tournament, some great games, and some great moments. The United States failed to advance but there is no need for condemnation nor having any games replayed. I will never forget the Italy / Germany match for it was a magnificent example of world class football. I feel that the host nation should be recognized for staging a class event. I always say "Savor the moments for they make great stories for the young ones." To get caught up in the "could have, should have, would have" drama is pointless. Italy won fair and square, and there is only one factor in sports that I consider most important and that is RESULTS.

Answer 10

it's not that italy didn't beat any big name teams... it's that all those so-called big name teams didn't qualify to meet italy in the finals maybe except germany & france!

look at it his way - to be the world champs, you have to defeat any team that's in your way, whether it's a big name team or a small name team!

so how do you get to be a big name team? talk a lot, like england? or let your feet do the talking, like italy which jumped 11 places to 2nd in the fifa world ranking; swiiss from 35th to 13th; ukraine from 45th to 15th...

by beating all teams that italy faced, italy deserved to be the champions of the world!