<p>My streak is over. Belgium had its chances but Argentina played a very smart and organized game. Both teams ought to be pleased with their performance, if not the outcome. Belgium is eyeing the Eurocopa and Russia 2016. </p>
<p>Wow! Costa Rica golf keeper is tough.</p>
<p>Great game. The better team won. </p>
<p>The Netherlands vs Argentina…</p>
<p>Robben vs Messi…</p>
<p>Wow! NED backup golf keeper saved 2 goals to win.</p>
<p>I want Argentina to win now, although it wouldn’t really affect me either way. Messi is amazing though. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>the U.S. is not “world class” at any position except keeper (btw our #2 keeper is VERY good as well).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>CF, you might enjoy this England cheer that they have when they play Germany: “Two World Wars and One World Cup”</p>
<p>… 3 times the Brits came out victorious over the Germans =P</p>
<p>I agree with Ballack. We lose the ball too much in the midfield. Or never get it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is worth noting as you go looking at these numbers, that players that play forward and players that play wide have the most opportunities to post top sprinting speeds. Wide players make “overlapping” runs (especially the defenders) and join the attack. While forwards will certainly have times that they are “chasing” a ball that has been booted up the field. I would not use these numbers as hard cutoffs. They are more “interesting”. In addition to different positions on the field being more conducive to faster runs, different players play the same positions differently. </p>
<p>For example, Andrea Pirlo (Italy / Juventes) topped out at 24.1, and he is still one of the best playmakers in the world at age 35. Andres Iniesta (Spain / Barcelona) at 25.6. Sulley Muntari (Ghana / AC Milan) at 26.3, Klaas Jan Huntelaar (Netherlands / Schalke 04) at 26.7. </p>
<p>The “highest level” is not a defined term, though a lot of people use it to mean “Champions League” (where the top club teams in all of Europe compete against each other). Last season Jeff Cameron played 41 times for Stoke City, who finished 9th (of 20) in the English Premier League.</p>
<p>I would agree with you that the players you listed cannot compete at the “highest level”… but not necessarily BECAUSE of the speed they maxed out with at the world cup.</p>
<p>I hope soccer doesnt become statistics driven like baseball. </p>
<p>Soccer is a creative imprivisational sport. Numbers arent going to tell the whole story.</p>
<p>For example, look at how often Messi and Robben are triple teamed. </p>
<p>Also… What is a player’s role on a team?</p>
<p>There is game speed and there is regular speed </p>
<p>Wayne Gretzky was asked why he was always in the right place. </p>
<p>I am paraphrasing. Gretsky said I dont skate to the puck. I skate to where the puck is going to be…</p>
<p>Messi is in the conversation for best player ever. I was always a Cruyff fan.</p>
<p>I was a Cruyff fan too.</p>
<p>Mark my words somebody is already devising simple statistics for soccer that will soon be used and improved on. Before Bill James, baseball had only about a half dozen hitting stats and a half dozen pitching stats. I feel there is a need to have familiar terms at the easy grasp of announcers and sportswriters. If 25 million viewers in the US are watching a WC match, my guess is at least 20 million of them have no clue why nobody has scored for the last full hour. Give them the turnovers, interceptions, steals, saves, fouls, pass completions, tackles, takeaways and recoveries. Show examples of each category during the pregame shows. </p>
<p>We are already familiar with most of them from other sports. I watched one game last week and Michael Bradley made two poor passes in a row right to the other team. I watched him like a hawk from then on but didn’t catch any other blunders…what do we call them - interceptions, turnovers, steals, or giveaways? I wondered how Cameron’s Castrol Index could be higher than the other defensemen. He had a great first game against Ghana. Here was an opportunity to educate fans about ways to evaluate the defense by explaining his stats and why JK put him in against Belgium.</p>
<p>I would prefer knowing who excelled in takeaways and tackles and fewest turnovers compared to what we have now: Michael Bradley, 1 shot on goal, 9 km total. </p>
<p>Better stats will come as better technology becomes available. If it will help identify the better players is doubtful. Think about Tony Romo and the debate about him. Some think his stats mean absolutely nothing. :)</p>
<p>Also, how do you identify the performance of goalies. Look at Courtois versus Howard. How do you measure someone who had 16 saves versus one who might have had fewer than that in the entire WC? How do you compare Courtois to say Ochoa, who made saves with his forehead and plain luck? What can be said about GK in stopping penalty kicks? How does one stop the kicks from the Dutch players (they were perfect) and what is to say about some of the previous kicks that were truly awful? What is a block and what is a missed PK? </p>
<p>The reality is that soccer is a different beast altogether.</p>
<p>When the US National Team made a stop in Seattle, I went to a presentation for local soccer coaches by one of the assistant coaches for the men’s team. Most in attendance were professional coaches, with only a few (like me) being volunteers. He had some examples of the types of information they collect about games, other team’s games, and how they would organize the practices to counter the other team’s strengths and to best attack the defense.</p>
<p>The most interesting to me was the passing chart of every pass during the game. You could see immediately who was most likely to play long balls, who ends up out of position, etc. </p>
<p>Agree about the US team not being anywhere near the level of Argentina. They were clearly superior to Belgium, who was clearly superior to the US.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Clearly superior must be in the eye of the beholder. The Belgium-USA game was a one-way affair with one goal transformed into a shooting gallery. There was no parallel to the Argentina-Belgium game. Argentina scored and had the better chances in the first 55 minutes, but there was no clear superiority. If there was a difference, it was in experience and game savvy. Argentina is a team with very experienced players; Belgium had the youngest team in the final eight and a very young coach whose tactics were challenged by the quick goal of Argentina. </p>
<p>And, for all intents and purposes, it is good to remember that Messi remains an impossible puzzle for most challengers with his mere presence. Even in his worst days, his presence forces opponents into a different game. You can’t mark him for 90 minutes nor play zone … as the previous games underscored. No other player in the world has such influence on the game. In a way, that is his biggest similarity to Maradona. And also the differences between him and Pele, Cruijff, and perhaps Ronaldo. </p>
<p>Fwiw, replace Bradley with Messi, and the US becomes a top team overnight, and this despite the overall lack of talent of the current team. He is THAT good and influential. Messi is Argentina and without him the team is just above WC average (as the recent records in the WC show.) </p>
<p>Penalty kick stats are useful to know but not very educational for most fans. I’m thinking of goals given up on corner kicks and direct kicks that are the KEEPER’S fault, for example. How about quality saves, if the GK doesn’t block it with his head or his cleat then it will definitely be a goal. How about goal kick completion percentage to your team?</p>
<p>Passing charts will show trends and who kicks long balls and where are they kicking them etc. It helps in preparing a “book” on your competition just like they do in football, baseball, and basketball. </p>
<p>I think soccer could do itself a big favor by capitalizing on this interest and making stats available that are accessible to the regular sports fan who previously may not have dabbled in soccer. I agree with TonyK and think people will stay vested if they feel like they have a greater grasp of what they’re watching. I like the Bill James mention. Nate Silver has been doing some interesting stuff that, to me, makes the game more accessible even if some of it is silly (taking the WC teams and pitting them based on their national foods 
) but some of it is really interesting, like what Neymar’s absence means for Brazill’s chances of winning it all (Answer: Not too much because Brazil is sooo deep).</p>
<p>xiggi has hit me where I live by mentioning Romo on this otherwise enjoyable thread. And he knows it. 
If only games were played on paper! lol</p>
<p>ETA: Messi is so amazing. I liked the post-game analysis that showed how his presence affects the entire game, even if he doesn’t score a single goal. Just his presence is a game-changer. Ds2 and I were laughing about how he handles the ball while walking, not even running, and how the opposition is just flummoxed.</p>
<p>Regarding the stats:</p>
<p><a href=“Statkeepers Call the Shots, But They Can’t Agree on Them | FiveThirtyEight”>http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/statkeepers-call-the-shots-but-they-cant-agree-on-them/</a></p>
<p>YDS … Viva Antonio Romo! 
</p>
<p>It would’ve been nice if ESPN dedicated a section of their coverage to something like a “coach’s corner” where they really went over some key plays, and not just 5 seconds where the goals are scored, but the entire buildup and runs off the ball, etc. Also do it for defense and great passing combinations.</p>
<p>A lot of soccer happens off the ball. The USA goal by Julian Green against Belgium was a great example… Bradley made a great pass and Green finished, but if you back the play up farther you will see where Green started his run, what the field looked like when he started his run, the path he took, how he got open, where Green was when Bradley passed the ball compared to where Green received the ball, etc.</p>