Originally Posted by Xela M:
“BIB - I disagree that Holland were poor against Costa Rica.
Firstly, you cannot compare Costa Rica's third meaningless group game against England to the way they played against Holland in the quarter final. They clearly couldn't be bothered against England and even then it was a 0-0 draw.
Secondly, Holland were extremely unlucky not to score against them. I don't know how many chances they had throughout the 90 and then 120 minutes. They hit the woodwork countless times, they were held up by Costa Rica's incredible keeper and really just pure inexplicable luck. They attacked for 120 minutes and I only remember Costa Rica have one real shot at the Dutch goal. It's very difficult to play against a team which has 11 players in their own half trying to stop you from playing football. Nevertheless, Holland attacked relentlessly creating chance after chance. Their level of fitness was quite spectacular and of course they kept their nerve in the penalty shootout. England could only dream of such a performance.
On the other hand, Mexico were a very strong opponent and maybe one of the best teams in this tournament, so it was always going to be a very difficult game. The Dutch got lucky, but they worked incredibly hard to get that first goal in the 87th minute. Their perseverance paid off.
As for Robben, he is very often fouled and I wouldn't say he dived more than the Germans who practically invented diving. Argentina is not exactly renown for fair play and Brazil have been disgusting throughout this World Cup - fouling and diving all over the place. So it's unfair to pick on Holland.”
“BIB - I disagree that Holland were poor against Costa Rica.
Firstly, you cannot compare Costa Rica's third meaningless group game against England to the way they played against Holland in the quarter final. They clearly couldn't be bothered against England and even then it was a 0-0 draw.
Secondly, Holland were extremely unlucky not to score against them. I don't know how many chances they had throughout the 90 and then 120 minutes. They hit the woodwork countless times, they were held up by Costa Rica's incredible keeper and really just pure inexplicable luck. They attacked for 120 minutes and I only remember Costa Rica have one real shot at the Dutch goal. It's very difficult to play against a team which has 11 players in their own half trying to stop you from playing football. Nevertheless, Holland attacked relentlessly creating chance after chance. Their level of fitness was quite spectacular and of course they kept their nerve in the penalty shootout. England could only dream of such a performance.
On the other hand, Mexico were a very strong opponent and maybe one of the best teams in this tournament, so it was always going to be a very difficult game. The Dutch got lucky, but they worked incredibly hard to get that first goal in the 87th minute. Their perseverance paid off.
As for Robben, he is very often fouled and I wouldn't say he dived more than the Germans who practically invented diving. Argentina is not exactly renown for fair play and Brazil have been disgusting throughout this World Cup - fouling and diving all over the place. So it's unfair to pick on Holland.”
Costa Rica looked as likely to score in extra time if not more than Holland, they looked more intent on trying to win in extra time! I didn't think Holland went for it like they could've done, and risked it all with the penalties (which went their way this time). I'm not saying CR were the better side, but they can only play to the quality of their squad. Holland just seemed to be a little too cautious when they really could've been all over Costa Rica. Perhaps playing against so called 'lesser teams' does affect attitudes - well there's no more 'lesser teams' left in now
I don't think it helps overall, that for two weeks we were a little spoiled with many exciting games, and now we'd reached the last eight, the teams really had something to lose, and all four SF teams weren't at their best. It makes for a very unpredictable last four though!
As for the original question, this Costa Rica team is far more attacking than that Greek team in 2004... but as pointed out elsewhere, their 'novelty' against Uruguay would've been sussed out for later games, and other teams adjusted accordingly.
