In this game you can see very well just why Miroslav Klose was so important for the german team. Obviously he scored the 1:0, do you see that determination to score? Other players might have fallen in the box, trying to get the penalty but he just races after the ball and just wants to make it. But that's not the only thing. Before the 2:0 it's Klose who plays a brilliant pass to Müller who then passes brilliantly to Podolski. And before the 4:1 it's Klose who gets the ball in his own penalty area, sees Özil and plays another brilliant pass. That's what he did for the team. People saying he only plays in the box are wrong, he mostly scores from there, true, but that's because he always sees when someone else is in a better position. That's what Germany is missing now, because sure there are other good strikers and other guys who can set up chances but no one who combines both as perfectly as Klose did.
+KebabMusicLtd I replied only to one aspect of your comment. I only wanted to discuss the last sentence. Honestly, I didn't even read your whole comment. The main point of it seems to be that a combined British team would be better than four separate national teams, which is not really something that needs to be discussed since it's pretty obvious.
I don't really understand why you brought up club football. It's pretty clear that a league's strength does not necessarily translate to the national team. For example, Brazil's league is much lower than top European ones, yet Brazil is one of the best teams in the world historically. You seem to suggest that a combined British team would be better than Germany historically, which I think is false. First off, I'm pretty sure Germany has produced better players than all of Britain combined for a while now. Also, the list of Champions League winners does not really support your point since there are not players from just one country on a club team, meaning a country with more successful clubs does not necessarily have a more successful national team. English teams have more Champions League wins than German ones, yet the German national team has been more successful than the English one for decades. By the way, you said that both Nottingham Forest and Liverpool won in 1979, which is impossible. British teams have only 13 Champions League wins, and 12 of them are English.
I did not focus on club football simply because I did not want to talk about it. Why would I? We are talking about national teams here. That's all my first comment was about. So I don't see why you want to bring clubs into this. If I had wanted to talk about club football, I would have. Also, I did not see anything I disagreed with regarding club football in your original comment (although it must be noted that I did not read the whole thing), so there was no reason for me to bring up this topic. By the way, in reply to your question, my favorite team is Bayern.
Funny how England is always put up by the English media as something in the very top end of football nations. They really do not have the greatest players, they usually have a totally wacked tactic and play dull and with no nerve. I am not British or German, but I think Germany is by far better both now as in general – plus play a lot better football. Even where I come from, Scandinavia, there have been several victories over England by both Sweden, Norway and still remember sometimes when Denmark have outclassed England. So sorry England….
I love how England fans whine about that call but you don't hear them whine about 1966
it's just karma that bit you in the ass in the end, and it's not Germany's fault the goal was discounted. Germany were just plain better, no excuses asked
Klose is such an outstanding sportsman. In the scene leading up to the 1-0, had he gone to the floor, it would have been a penalty for Germany and a red card against England. Instead Klose stayed on his feet, and gifted his English competitor witha chance to continue.
Anyway, against England Germany doesn't need a man more – it winsthese matches easily anyway. Maybe this went through Klose's mind.
Natürlich war Lampards Lattenschuß drin und es hätte 2:2 stehen müssen, sorry England, aber dafür habt ihr 1966 das Wembley-Tor geschenkt bekommen und damit auch den WM-Titel damals. Ich sage nur: ausgleichende Gerechtigkeit!
In this game you can see very well just why Miroslav Klose was so important for the german team. Obviously he scored the 1:0, do you see that determination to score? Other players might have fallen in the box, trying to get the penalty but he just races after the ball and just wants to make it. But that's not the only thing. Before the 2:0 it's Klose who plays a brilliant pass to Müller who then passes brilliantly to Podolski. And before the 4:1 it's Klose who gets the ball in his own penalty area, sees Özil and plays another brilliant pass. That's what he did for the team. People saying he only plays in the box are wrong, he mostly scores from there, true, but that's because he always sees when someone else is in a better position. That's what Germany is missing now, because sure there are other good strikers and other guys who can set up chances but no one who combines both as perfectly as Klose did.
LMFAO that first goal was an assist coming from the frickin KEEPER!
On this day 5 years ago
Raping England since 1938.
We are coming to get you in 2014! ENGLAND <3
+KebabMusicLtd I replied only to one aspect of your comment. I only wanted to discuss the last sentence. Honestly, I didn't even read your whole comment. The main point of it seems to be that a combined British team would be better than four separate national teams, which is not really something that needs to be discussed since it's pretty obvious.
I don't really understand why you brought up club football. It's pretty clear that a league's strength does not necessarily translate to the national team. For example, Brazil's league is much lower than top European ones, yet Brazil is one of the best teams in the world historically. You seem to suggest that a combined British team would be better than Germany historically, which I think is false. First off, I'm pretty sure Germany has produced better players than all of Britain combined for a while now. Also, the list of Champions League winners does not really support your point since there are not players from just one country on a club team, meaning a country with more successful clubs does not necessarily have a more successful national team. English teams have more Champions League wins than German ones, yet the German national team has been more successful than the English one for decades. By the way, you said that both Nottingham Forest and Liverpool won in 1979, which is impossible. British teams have only 13 Champions League wins, and 12 of them are English.
I did not focus on club football simply because I did not want to talk about it. Why would I? We are talking about national teams here. That's all my first comment was about. So I don't see why you want to bring clubs into this. If I had wanted to talk about club football, I would have. Also, I did not see anything I disagreed with regarding club football in your original comment (although it must be noted that I did not read the whole thing), so there was no reason for me to bring up this topic. By the way, in reply to your question, my favorite team is Bayern.
I cant believe Lampard's goal didn't count, which clearly shows it went behind the line. It wasDEFINITLEYa goal.
I 'm german the 4-2
Funny how England is always put up by the English media as something in the very top end of football nations. They really do not have the greatest players, they usually have a totally wacked tactic and play dull and with no nerve. I am not British or German, but I think Germany is by far better both now as in general – plus play a lot better football. Even where I come from, Scandinavia, there have been several victories over England by both Sweden, Norway and still remember sometimes when Denmark have outclassed England. So sorry England….
muller is a class player……
I love how England fans whine about that call but you don't hear them whine about 1966
it's just karma that bit you in the ass in the end, and it's not Germany's fault the goal was discounted. Germany were just plain better, no excuses asked
Germany vs England 4-1 World Cup 2010 Highlights & Goals 06_27_2010: https://youtu.be/k1Iurqc1C9k
Klose is such an outstanding sportsman. In the scene leading up to the 1-0, had he gone to the floor, it would have been a penalty for Germany and a red card against England. Instead Klose stayed on his feet, and gifted his English competitor witha chance to continue.
Anyway, against England Germany doesn't need a man more – it winsthese matches easily anyway. Maybe this went through Klose's mind.
Yo creo que en este partido Inglaterra merecía más.
Natürlich war Lampards Lattenschuß drin und es hätte 2:2 stehen müssen, sorry England, aber dafür habt ihr 1966 das Wembley-Tor geschenkt bekommen und damit auch den WM-Titel damals. Ich sage nur: ausgleichende Gerechtigkeit!
das 3-1 war dann der k.o. aber England war dicht dran
Had Lampard's goal been allowed to stand, the result could have been much more different
Even if lampards goal was allowed germany would have still won 4-2
Has anyone else noticed that a commentator is Arnold Schwarzenegger? ;0)