Are Italy the best of all time again?

sciacca wrote:

Sushi Master wrote:
A bunch of kids choking? Wait for 2014 when they are more mature.

Italy won in 2006 with a very experienced squad. Most teams do. Germany actually went beyond expectations in 2010. As usual.

I'll wait and see, and I will not be surprised if they do, however you predicted the future is already biased enough. But then again, if you face Italy, don't be surprised to lose again, as you never beaten is in World Cup fixtures.

And did they win no? Why because their known for choking simple.

Biased? Saying experience gives you a better chance?

Biased? Coming from you? Oh, the huge manatee.

sciacca wrote:

Toffer Harley wrote:oi u are supposed to cruise in a merc - in style. call up AMG for the hectic extras.

Sorry, Ferrari already beats all your Volkswagon's, Mercedies and Audi's. Nuff said

. u need a german to drive em tho.

Toffer Harley wrote:

sciacca wrote:

Toffer Harley wrote:oi u are supposed to cruise in a merc - in style. call up AMG for the hectic extras.

Sorry, Ferrari already beats all your Volkswagon's, Mercedies and Audi's. Nuff said

. u need a german to drive em tho.

This needs to be added in the quotes thread..

Toffer Harley wrote:

sciacca wrote:

Toffer Harley wrote:oi u are supposed to cruise in a merc - in style. call up AMG for the hectic extras.

Sorry, Ferrari already beats all your Volkswagon's, Mercedies and Audi's. Nuff said

. u need a german to drive em tho.

Tobad, that all the engineer's were Italian, I wonder who is driving for Mercedes Benz

wow... i almost feel sorry for sciacca, it must be physically painful to be intellectually outmatched so much

VIVA = god and wiggles = extremely annoying with his azzurri bias

sciacca wrote:

Toffer Harley wrote:

sciacca wrote:

Toffer Harley wrote:oi u are supposed to cruise in a merc - in style. call up AMG for the hectic extras.

Sorry, Ferrari already beats all your Volkswagon's, Mercedies and Audi's. Nuff said

. u need a german to drive em tho.

Tobad, that all the engineer's were Italian, I wonder who is driving for Mercedes Benz

. an old man of course - it's mercedes.

Germany better now is not justified and not proven yet.

Yes it is, it's called using your eyes, and you can totally do it, I believe in you, mate.

My eyes? Alright, making it to the Semi's in 2010 is looking, did they win? No... Oh right, In my eyes I saw them not beating Italy again, with my eyes I saw them not even enter the Euro's or the World Cup yet and see that in fact this is their best squad. Sure, whatever you say bro.

Those are results, not performances, let me explain it to you:
In 2002, Germany went through a lucky streak when their opposition was drawn, while Italy actually played good and got screwed by the ref.
Your "data" shows Germany being better than Italy in 2002, which wasn't the case at all. 2002 Italy would've shat all over 2002 Germany who only had Kahn, Klsoe and Ballack and were pretty bad besides that.
2006 Germany was basically a couple of kids managed by a Swabian nimrod, carried by the euphoria of the fans. Okay, Frings, Ballack, Schneider were pretty boss, but still, it's not like they had any star players besides Ballack.
2008 Germany was owned by injuries so hard they took a shitty fullback (Fritz) with them as a winger, actually subbed in a dude named David Odonkor with a straight face and started Thomas "lol what a gimp" Hitzlsperger in a couple of matches.

If you can't see an improvement of the current team containing about 9 world class players to that half-a-team we sent in 2008, you probably cannot be helped.

I for one watched the 2010 WC, and while Germany hilariously choked once they met Spain, they looked damn good, results or no results. Theres some things numbers don't reflect. And I just refuse to believe that a couple of 18 to 26 year old kids are going to care about history.

Look, I see what you mean about player comparisons, but since when do we compare Players making the squad better? It's like saying Man City is the best in the world because they got so many World Class players and yet can't win anything. A squad is based with players, tactics, and mentality. You have the players, though do you have the rest compared to the past German Squads? That is still not determined until we see the Euro's or the World Cup. Shall I add that you were not able to beat us with this Best squad you claim and with a squad like ours which still is growing and improving? Just wondering.

2010 was probably choking, 2002 to 2008 was just being outmatched. 2006 Italy was just much better than Germany. Brazil in 2002 could've pounded Germany had they really tried. 2008 Germany only had to go through Chokugal and Turkey to reach the final.


The hilarious real point to this debate is, though:
History doesn't matter.
2006 Italy was just great.
They didn't win because of the confidence from the 50s.
They didn't win because it gets magically easier if you already got 3 stars on your chest.

They just won because 2006 Italy was a f*cking great squad. And the current rebuilding Italy might send a f*cking great squad to the 2012 Euros. But not because of history, because they're doing it now.
That's why if they meet Germany they might lose. Or they might beat Spain. Hell, Brazil might even beat France one of these days.

You remember how the World Cup didn't have a new winner in so and so many years? And then Spain just went there and won it, for the first time?

Those statistics you history buffs love to cite don't mean shit. You're confusing random numbers with some kind of predetermination.
You're confusing correlation with causality.

Again.

No history does matter, put it this way. Italy have always been dominate every 12 years averagely, making it far in those tournaments.

1970 - Runners UP
12 years later
1982 - World Cup Winners
1994 - Runners Up
12 years later
2006 - World Cup Winners

You see the trend don't you?

1986 - Eliminated Early
2010 - Eliminated Early

History always plays a great part, and once again this shows it.

VivaStPauli wrote:
You didn't explain anything, you've obviously just chosen to not read my post.
Twice.

In fact I did, I explained almost every from 2010, from looking at the present and the past. Everything else was explained before, in other topics and threads, and I'm not in the mood to repeat myself again, on why History matters.

Sushi Master wrote:
Biased? Saying experience gives you a better chance?

Biased? Coming from you? Oh, the huge manatee.

It is biased, your predicting the future, in which is impossible.
Biased coming from me? Oh sure, my bias opinions also come with facts behind them, unlike this logic that you just brought out.

che wrote:wow... i almost feel sorry for sciacca, it must be physically painful to be intellectually outmatched so much

Oh dear, I feel bad and physically painful for England who have gained nothing up until now, except one World Cup in 1966

sciacca wrote:

Oh dear, I feel bad and physically painful for England who have gained nothing up until now, except one World Cup in 1966

luckily i'm not english then... i'll give you two clues to lead you to my country of birth

robert

vittek

che wrote:

sciacca wrote:

Oh dear, I feel bad and physically painful for England who have gained nothing up until now, except one World Cup in 1966

luckily i'm not english then... i'll give you two clues to lead you to my country of birth

robert

vittek

I feel worst now

sciacca wrote:

che wrote:wow... i almost feel sorry for sciacca, it must be physically painful to be intellectually outmatched so much

Oh dear, I feel bad and physically painful for England who have gained nothing up until now, except one World Cup in 1966

Which should have gone to Germany, bringing it up to 4

It is biased, your predicting the future, in which is impossible.
Biased coming from me? Oh sure, my bias opinions also come with facts behind them, unlike this logic that you just brought out.

Predicting the future? I never said they'd win it or anything. I said they'd do better just because they have more experience. Facts? Experienced teams win more than younger ones, that's a fact. That's my only point.

Well Italy should of gotten 2002 and in 50's if it wasn't from our plane crash, we would of won as well, just saying, maybe also in 94...

And I agree, however in 2006 Germany had lots of experience on the squad, didn't end up winning. Experience does not mean an automatic, win, as it stands, well you will go far, but not win in my opinion, this is not a prediction, this is looking into the past.

sciacca wrote:Well Italy should of gotten 2002 and in 50's if it wasn't from our plane crash, we would of won as well, just saying, maybe also in 94...

And I agree, however in 2006 Germany had lots of experience on the squad, didn't end up winning. Experience does not mean an automatic, win, as it stands, well you will go far, but not win in my opinion, this is not a prediction, this is looking into the past.

Only Ballack, Schneider and Frings were experienced and solid. Ballack the only WC in there. The rest were young guys yet not proven or mediocre players.

Italy had an amazing experienced squad.

What are predictions based on? Yeah, looking at the past. I didn't say it's an automatic win, agaain... just saying it helps a lot.

What I can't seem to bring across is this:
I think Italy is good.
I just think it's because they got good players and are now being managed properly, not because of history.

I don't know why those points aren't connecting, but I wish they were. ^^

Italy being great every 12 years would be interesting if it was over the course of 1000 years, not over the course of 80 years.

If such patterns meant anything we would've won the 2010 world cup, because Germany win one every 20 years (ok, we were 4 years early in '90, so maybe we#re only due again in 2014).

Reality doesn't work that way. Historically speaking Spain sucks.

Right now they pwn.

It's not what you did, it's what you do.

Nah, Dutch always look good and always choke. The moments is what will be remembered. Thus, they are second tier. Chelsea is not a legendary team, though they pwn now.

Italy+Good Middlefield=WC

That's not because of magically self-reinforcing history, though, that's because Italy have all the infrastructure to generate WC teams, while Holland has always put too much emphasis on technical football which tends to not work when you're forced to grind out results.

sciacca wrote:

No history does matter, put it this way. Italy have always been dominate every 12 years averagely, making it far in those tournaments.

1970 - Runners UP
12 years later
1982 - World Cup Winners
1994 - Runners Up
12 years later
2006 - World Cup Winners

You see the trend don't you?

1986 - Eliminated Early
2010 - Eliminated Early

History always plays a great part, and once again this shows it.

Dude that is just some freakish coincidence man.

There is not enough data to make that "trend" mathematically relevant.

Winning is a function of how well your team plays, not how well your team played 12 years ago...

Also Holland is drawing from a popluation of like three hundred, or whatever their numbers are. Italy (and Germany) are a proper country, Brazil has even more, and the footballing culture - it's not magic or historic determinism, it's actually pretty easy to find the mechanics that make a great team.

Just look at Germany who totally changed the face of their NT within roughly 15 years. That's how long it takes for new players to go through your new, awesomely improved, youth academies.

BTW those awesome youth academies we totally stole from Spain who showed everyone they f*cking work.

Edit: What Kiranr said, btw. Regarding statistics and math.

Hey Sciacca, who do you concider as a bigger and better team of the following:

1) Genoa
2) Bologna
3) Torino
4) Pro Vercelli
5) Roma

kiranr wrote:Dude that is just some freakish coincidence man.

There is not enough data to make that "trend" mathematically relevant.

Winning is a function of how well your team plays, not how well your team played 12 years ago...

You don't mathematics, this isn't Math class, this is football, and it's common sense. We seem to win each 12 - 24 years. I wonder why experts think in the next 24 years Italy might be on top again. They look at history, now of course this is coming from a fan's perspective, however that prediction came from an expert within Italian football as he knows more than you obviously, so please don't question our references to history, because there's more to that trend.

VivaStPauli wrote:
Just look at Germany who totally changed the face of their NT within roughly 15 years. That's how long it takes for new players to go through your new, awesomely improved, youth academies.

As it stands, it only takes Italy about 2-6 years to regain their World Class players. We went from Paolo Rossi to Roberto Baggio a few years later. We went from Baggio to Totti to Del Piero a few Years after that, and it continues today. Hopefully Balotelli now.(Only pertains to WC Strikers we had). Defends, there's no need to explain.

baresi wrote:Hey Sciacca, who do you concider as a bigger and better team of the following:

1) Genoa
2) Bologna
3) Torino
4) Pro Vercelli
5) Roma

Roma, currently are better presently and historically. Sure only 3 Scudetto's and Genoa have 9 and the others 7 and under. However, this is completely irrelavent, due to the fact that I never said, presently Italy are better, in fact I made it clear that Germany are better presently. The historical references are used to show what to expect from squads, and here is another one. Italy are always underestimated, but when it comes to the World Cup, it's always been taking seriously. Best one yet, Germany have never beaten us in World Cup play, you get what I mean?

wigglesworth wrote:

Saetablanca wrote:Repost:

Meh, Italy were extremely lucky, Spain played better and were wasteful. Buffon doesnt even come close to Casillas right now. And Balotelli is a damn beast.

Also, I really dont get the whole '4 World Cups' thing. I mean, two of them are from the 1930s, and another from the 80s. They have no relevance whatsoever. Saying 'We won the first 5 European Cups, therefore Real Madrid is the greatest' makes more sense than that.

I guess you don't quite get it. Italy is the only team that has continuously been a winner and contender from the 30s to the 2000s. And, you may be unaware of the fact that Italy was the last World Cup winner before Spain in 2006. Young people just don't get it, yet the statistics are there for anyone to see.

History has the most relevance with respect to the World Cup. Over the past 40 years there have been 8 repeat winners and only 3 first time winners. Figure out the probabilities.

Furthermore the history of a national team has everything to do with World Cup performance. Imagine a team with no historical relevance did as badly as Italy did in 2010. Chances are that team would have difficulty qualifying for the next Wrold Cup, much less be a contender. When the Italian players go out to play for the national team, they have and feel a great responsibility to the country that expects excellence that they have known for decades, but also to past players, yes even from the 30s, that won the World Cup for Italy. Look at the faces of the Italian players when the anthem is playing, those guys are ready to give it their all, even Balotelli, who screws around with a club team.

Thank you very much, yes I know this I am not an idiot or a four year old, but thanks for your condescending remarks. Yet, despire what you might think, history has nothing to do with the present in football. Spain never won a world cup before last year. Yet, they dominate on every level now. Italy won 4 WCs, half of them in the 1930s. That makes them better than Spain? Come on, not even you believe that.

Sciaccia, I dont know if you think you are playing a part or something, but you basically just stand there approving everything wiggles says, then quoting '4 World Cups! History!' no matter what argument is put in front of you. Brick wall much?

And I hate it if people are trying to label anyone who doesnt buy this 4 WC stuff as anti-Italian. Italy is a very good side, I dont think that they were better than Spain and deserved to win that friendly, but what the hell does that have to do with world cups won in the 30s?

What am I doing? Or in your words playing a part? I basically just stand there and according to you ONLY approve Wiggles, oh right... Um, are you blind? What have I been doing in all these pages? I was just standing there was saying, okay Wiggles you're right? I did that with one or two posts, other than that I've been debating my friend. So I don't quite understand what you mean. Though what do you want me to say, Wiggles is right, you are acting like a 4 years old as you seem not to read my posts and come up with assumptions. So according to you I only spoke about History, more than World Cups of course, but yet you deny the fact that I didn't speak about the present and even future of both squads, I see... Very smart man you are there.

sciacca wrote:

Toffer Harley wrote:oi u are supposed to cruise in a merc - in style. call up AMG for the hectic extras.

Sorry, Ferrari already beats all your Volkswagon's, Mercedies and Audi's. Nuff said

Last time I checked the Bugatti Veyron was the best road-car on the planet. Did I mention it's a Volkswagen?

Surprisingly, in Bild tests over the past decade, the Porsche 911 is the most reliable car. Ever. Even beating the Japs by miles.

The current 458 engine breaks like every 10km's and needs maintenance after driving it out of a garage. BMW's engine with a similar power to displacement ratio needs 10 times less maintenance.

From an engineering standpoint Ferrari actually make pretty shitty engines.

Phritz wrote:

sciacca wrote:

Toffer Harley wrote:oi u are supposed to cruise in a merc - in style. call up AMG for the hectic extras.

Sorry, Ferrari already beats all your Volkswagon's, Mercedies and Audi's. Nuff said

Last time I checked the Bugatti Veyron was the best road-car on the planet. Did I mention it's a Volkswagen?

Surprisingly, in Bild tests over the past decade, the Porsche 911 is the most reliable car. Ever. Even beating the Japs by miles.

The current 458 engine breaks like every 10km's and needs maintenance after driving it out of a garage. BMW's engine with a similar power to displacement ratio needs 10 times less maintenance.

From an engineering standpoint Ferrari actually make pretty shitty engines.

Oh right, last time I checked Bugatti was started from an Italian, then they stole our ideas and took rights for it Volkswagen, oh by the way when it comes to engines, I wonder why in F1, Ferrari, considered the fastest ones out of all of them