Gotze's volley gives Germany its deserved reward

Thank goodness for Mario Gotze's superb volley seven minutes before the end of extra time in the World Cup final last night. It saved us from the depressing spectacle of a penalty shoot-out which would have been an awful way to end an otherwise very good World Cup tournament.

There could be little denying that Germany deserved to win the trophy, although there was never any chance that they were going to put Argentina to the sword as they has done with Brazil four days earlier. Argentina put up a much stiffer test, although their inability to get a single shot on target - even with eventual Balon D'Or winner Lionel Messi in their line-up - suggests that they struggled to make any inroads into the German defence. However, that hides the reality of misses by Higuain, Messi and Palacio, as well as the dominating presence of Manuel Neuer in the German goal.

Gotze's chest control and volley on the turn were worthy of a World Cup final winning goal. It was just a pity a goal didn't come early to potentially spark the final into life. It never quite lived up to its billing.

Germany now join Italy on four World Cup wins and with this young team, there's no doubt at all that they will be challenging again in Russia in four years time. They also become the first country, apart from Brazil, to win the World Cup away from their home continent. Full credit should go to Joachim Low, but also to Germany as a whole for the rebuilding plan they put in place after the failure at the 2004 European Championships.

If only England would do something similar.

Argentina v The Netherlands - an inevitable damp squib

I suppose it was inevitable that the second semi-final would be a damp squib compared with the first. Nothing could match the dramatic happenings of Brazil v Germany on Tuesday.

It is nevertheless disappointing to see another 0-0 draw after penalties and the cop-out of a penalty shoot-out. This time there was no Tim Krul to save the Netherlands and Argentina progressed to their fifth World Cup final, and the third offering of a Germany v Argentina final.

I suppose it will be fitting to see one of the World's top players - Lionel Messi - gracing the occasion, but let us hope that Germany's brand of football prevails.

More importantly, let us hope we don't have to rely on penalty kicks to conclude proceedings. Nothing was as dreadful as the 0-0 final between Brazil and Italy in 1994, eventually ending with a Brazil shoot-out victory.

Argentina have some great players - Messi, Aguero, Mascherano, Di Maria - but their team has not quite come together during this tournament. Despite that, they have managed five wins and a penalty shoot-out victory - and that's a recipe for success.

Onward to Sunday's final, and we want better than this semi-final gave us.

South America has the edge in semi-finals

And so we come to the Word Cup semi-finals.

South America v Europe in each case. As the competition is based in South America and no European team has ever won there, it would surely be foolish to call an all-European final. But are the South American teams good enough to beat their European opposition?

The truth is that no team has glowed consistently brightly throughout the tournament.

Brazil's results have been 3-1, 0-0, 4-1, 1-1 (won on penalties), 2-1.
Germany: 4-0, 2-2, 1-0, 2-1, 1-0.
Argentina: 2-1, 1-0, 3-2, 1-0, 1-0.
Holland: 5-1, 3-2, 2-0, 2-1, 0-0 (won on penalties).

No team has lost a game (which sometimes happens. Spain, for example, lost their first game in 2010, yet went on to win the trophy). But only Argentina have won all their five games. Sometimes late in the game!

Germany and Holland both started the competition with big wins, but have not been quite as impressive of late.

Argentina and Brazil have shown, shall we say, typical South American resilience, and buoyed by huge and loud local support, I'm going to go with them to make the final.

Lenient refereeing backs Brazil's niggling style

I'm not entirely comfortable with the way Brazil have progressed to the semi-final in this World Cup. This is certainly not the 'samba-style', free-flowing football Brazil of old. This team has no qualms about fouling, breaking up the game, niggling, and relying on support from the crowd, and, sadly, help from referees.

In my last point, I don't mean that the referees are 'crooked' in any way, but with 60,000+ supporters roaring at you, you can't help but be a little bit swayed - however much you try. The last Brazil game (v. Colombia) was, however, appallingly refereed by Carlos Velasco Carballo of Spain. He was so lenient that the game became almost a free-for-all, with Brazil being the worst culprits. Fernandinho's treatment of James Rodriguez was scandalous, yet the Brazilian - who should have been sent off - didn't even get a yellow card. To add ironic insult to injury, the referee did book Rodriguez for a contactless tackle.

Brazil were able to complain afterwards about how Zuniga caused the injury to their Number Ten Neymar, but the referee did play an advantage in Brazil's favour and to book Zuniga would have been contrary to his handling of the game.

Incredibly, the referee did book Brazil's Thiago Silva for preventing the the Colombian goalkeeper from clearing the ball and kicking into the Colombian net. Considering the number and type of fouls going on in the rest of this game, that decision was laughable. But it had the very serious effect of banning Silva from the semi-final.

I have no doubt in my mind that FIFA have told referees to book as few players as possible to try and ensure that the 'big players' remain available for the later rounds. Carballo will be in trouble for getting Silva banned.

For the good of football, however, it would be better if referees clamped down on fouling and got the dirty players removed from matches.

Time for the World Cup to catch fire

So we're through the Groups and into the knock-out rounds.

England, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Russia have all gone home with heads bowed, leaving the likes of Greece, Ivory Coast, USA and Algeria to battle it out for a place in the quarter-finals.

We've had 48 games (two-thirds of the total) with 136 goals at an average of 2.833 goals per game. There have been some good games, but some duffers too. It's not quite the mesmeric World Cup the TV pundits would like us to believe.

The next round has thrown up some interesting games, and some not so interesting.

Brazil v Chile will be fascinating as Chile have caught people's imagination. Colombia v Uruguay will set up and all-South American quarter final. Uruguay, feeling sorry for themselves after the Suarez affair, are unlikely to spring a surprise.

France and Germany both face African opposition (Nigeria and Algeria respectively) and will hope to set up a European quarter final. Algeria - who beat West Germany 2-1 in 1982 - will be hoping for revenge after they were knocked out in that tournament thanks to a cooked-up 1-0 win for West Germany over Austria which put them both through at Algeria's expense.

Belgium haven't quite hit their sweet spot, but three wins from three have given them a match against USA, followed by Argentina or Switzerland.

Let's hope the blue touch paper catches and we're not left with a round of nil-nil draws and penalty shoot-outs.

England have sunk and the outlook is bleak

The English team have returned home, landing even before the group phase of the World Cup has finished in Brazil.

On the face of it, it was a dismal showing. One point, two goals, two defeats, bottom of the group. We have also now won only one of our last eight games at World Cup finals:

2014
Costa Rica D 0-0
Uruguay L 1-2
Italy L 1-2

2010
Germany L 1-4
Slovenia W 1-0
Algeria D 0-0
USA D 1-1

2006
Portugal D 0-0 (lost on penalties)

It's a terrible record. I remember that after the 4-1 thrashing by Germany at the 2010 World Cup everyone said, "Ah, things will change now, they have to."

Well, nothing has changed. In fact, things have got worse. Our showing at World Cup 2014 was worse than 2010. We have fewer players playing in the Premier League now than then.

And there are no signs that it will get any better. The pundits talk about players and their abilities and coaches and youngsters being told they must win, etc.

The fact is that there are not enough England players to choose from. But with the Premier League clubs managed by mostly foreign managers and owned by foreign owners, there is no interest in making the England national team any stronger.

The future is bleak. We're already worse than Costa Rica. How long before we're fearing Estonia, Lithuania, Slovenia and San Marino (along with Switzerland, the rest of out Euro 2016 qualifying group).

No surprise at England's failure

The only thing I'm surprised about is that there is any surprise.

Surely we had all lowered our expectations about England in this World Cup?

I thought we had, but then in the week leading up the finals (after our dismal 0-0 draw with Honduras) I noticed people saying things like "quarter-finals at least", and "we'll get through the group and see what happens", and "we'll beat Italy 3-1..."

Surely we've seen this demise coming?

But then, after the thrashing by Germany in the last World Cup (1-4 in the first knock-out round), there were sage noddings of heads to suggest that "it would all change now".

We're blind to our failures, and just because we're England we think we have some sort of right to be good. We don't and we're not.

FA Chairman Greg Dyke has come up with some sort of blueprint for England's future, but the nub of it is to give Premier League Clubs more presence in the Football League ('B' teams). It is doomed to failure.

The ONLY solution is to reduce the number of foreign players in the Premier League. Poor Roy Hodgson has about 60 English players in the Premier League to pick from. It's not enough.

But this solution will never happen because, as I've said before, the Premier League has foreign players, foreign managers, foreign coaches and foreign owners.

Iet used to England failure. It's here to stay.

Spain sent crashing - the end of an era?

Spain were sent crashing out of the World Cup yesterday after a 2-0 defeat by Chile. Spain looked tired and ragged and devoid of ideas up front. It's a far cry from the all-conquering team of the last six years. Maybe it's the end of their era.

But it shows that nothing - no great team - lasts forever.

Chile, however, looked good; defensively strong with some quick, skilful players up front. But surely winning the tournament will be beyond them.

It may be the earliest a World Cup holder has gone out of the tournament - although, of course, Spain still have to complete their group games, with a "wooden spoon" match against Australia.

Australia also went out of the competition yesterday, but they can hold their heads up high after giving it a go against Holland and giving the latter a bit of a scare.

Finally, Cameroon also crashed out yesterday, with a feeble 4-0 defeat against a revitalised Croatia, who now look a good bet to progress with Brazil from Group A.

Germany show the way to do it

The Germans don't mess around, do they?

They may not always win the World Cup, but they don't muck up their first round games. Four-nil (against Portugal yesterday) and an opponent sent off to make it easier. That's the way to do it!

No stress about reaching the second round, and they'll probably win the group in their second game, thereby enabling themselves to rest players in the third group game (against USA). Relaxed, they can approach the knock-out stage fresh and confident.

This is why they always do well at World (and European) Cups.

Contrast this with England who are usually left clutching at a last-ditch third match victory in the group to ensure progress. Thus, the players are stressed and tired and - inevitably - fall just short (usually on penalties).

And that is what is happening again. A 1-2 loss to Italy leaves us desperate to beat Uruguay on Thursday. And with Luis Suarez back in their line-up (as he is bound to be), that will not be easy.

A good start to the World Cup

The World Cup is going pretty well!

Thirty-seven goals in 11 games has given us an average of 3.4 goals per game so far.
Goal-line technology worked - although BBC commentator Jonathan Pearce seemed to be confused by it!

The disappearing spray to mark ten yards has also been a success, although why the referee allowed Ecuador to put the ball outside the area marked for the ball was a mystery - and almost inevitably led to a goal. I still wonder what will happen when a player or two step over that line. I suspect - rather like warnings against holding at corners which are actually a green light for holding when the corner is finally taken - nothing. Nevertheless it is a good step forward (no pun intended).

I am less happy that it means that each free kick now takes at least a minute - time which we never retrieve.

I was also disappointed when one referee allowed a substitution during four minutes of added time, and then blew up at precisely ninety-four minutes. Time wasting substitutions should not be allowed to deny us the football we deserve.

Overall, though, a good start.

Poor refereeing decisions give Brazil a flying start

Oh dear, just what we didn't want - controversial decisions and a dubious refereeing performance. Mr Yuichi Nishimura got two key decisions wrong - the penalty gift to Brazil and Croatia's disallowed goal - which made it 2-1 to Brazil when it might have been 2-1 to Croatia. I'm not convinced Neymar's swinging arm was worth a red card, but got the yellow it deserved.

Of course, in a few days' time - when most teams have played and the tournament has other talking points - these decisions in the opening game will be largely forgotten. Croatia will probably qualify from Group A - they looked more than capable of doing so - and things will quieten down.

BUT, these poor decisions have given Brazil lift-off. Imagine if they had only managed to claw back to salvage a 2-2 draw. Imagine if Neymar had been sent off - and banned from the next game. That would have put a whole different complexion on proceedings.

We have had a whole lot of punter reaction to the decisions, but what do FIFA say? Nothing. Their website has a quote from Brazil boss Felipe Scolari and their 'match report' contains only facts and figures.

We don't want a tournament ruined by poor refereeing.

I did like the shaving foam sprayed down for ten yards at free kicks, though!

England's win did nothing to raise expectations

England beat Peru 3-0 in their last warm-up game on home soil before the World Cup. Frankly the scoreline flattered England.

The highlight was undoubtedly Daniel Sturridge's left-foot beauty to open the scoring. A touch of class in an otherwise low-quality encounter. Sturridge got the man of the match award for his goal, but apart from that he was unimpressive.

England's insipid display was typical of their thrustless, sideways, stumbling performances. Without a Townsend, a Walcott or an Oxlade-Chamberlain, there is no one who is willing to carry the ball forward 20 or 30 yards and make the opposition start to worry. When Raheem Sterling came on in the second half, he DID show some of that forward thinking that is required. Passing it around the back four, the goalkeeper and the two holding midfielders will not worry the opposition. Neither will chipping the ball forward to tightly-marked attackers.

There were also troubling signs of defensive problems with several unforced errors. A weak Peru team was unable to punish them, but don't expect the same profligacy from Italy, Uruguay or even Costa Rica.

The only good thing about England's performance was that it will do nothing to raise expectations!

How the World Cup groups compare

With the Brazil 2014 World Cup just over two weeks away, it is time to assess the groups by FIFA rankings.

By adding up the ranking positions, the group with the lowest total would seem to be the toughest, etc, all the way down to the group with the highest points total being apparently the easiest.

Group G scores the lowest points and would therefore seem to be the hardest. With Germany (ranking 2) and Portugal (3), it is incredible that one group has two of the top three ranked teams in the world. (FIFA seedings committee - how can this happen?). USA (14) and Ghana (38) make this the Group of Death (total score 57).

Inevitably, England are in a group not far behind (we're never in the easiest group, are we?). Uruguay (6), Italy (9) are ahead of England (11), with Costa Rica at 34 in Group D. Total score 60.

Group E (total score 82) is headed by Switzerland (8) (yes, really), with France (16), South Americans Ecuador (28) and Honduras (30).

That group just pips Group C (total score 83), headed by Colombia (5), Greece (10) (how did they get there?), Ivory Coast (21) and Japan (47).

Spain (1) lead Group B, with the lowest ranked team, Australia (59), weighing it down. Otherwise, it looks tough, with Chile (13) and Holland (15). Total group score 88.

Group A is the sixth hardest, headed by hosts Brazil (4), followed by Mexico (19), Croatia (20) and Cameroon (50). The hosts should make easy progress from this group with a total score of 93.

The second easiest group is H, with the lowest ranked best team of any group - Belgium (12), leading Russia (18), with Algeria (25) and South Korea (55) making the four and a group score of 110.

The apparent weakest Group is F, where Argentina (7) will be favourites to progress, with Bosnia-Herzegovina (25), Iran (37) and Nigeria (44) fighting to join them.

How deadly is England's Group of Death?

So apparently England find themselves in another "Group of Death" in Brazil 2014. But just how deadly is it?

Group D consists of England (13th in the FIFA rankings), Uruguay (6), Italy (7) and Costa Rica (31). If we use a simple addition of the ranking positions to get a total for the group, this comes to 57, and is the second toughest group in these terms.

The hardest group of all is Group G, consisting of Germany (2), Portugal (5), USA (14) and Ghana (24). I can't imagine Germany being too fazed, though, can you? 45 points.

Next is Group C (perhaps surprisingly), consisting of Colombia (4), Greece (12), Ivory Coast (17) and Japan (48). 81 points.

Fourth hardest group is B, with Spain (1), Netherlands (9), Chile (59) and Australia (59 - currently the lowest ranked team in the competition). 84 points.

Fourth easiest group is E, with Switzerland (8), France (19), Ecuador (23), Honduras (41). Total 91 points.

Next is Group A, consisting of Brazil (10), Croatia (16), Mexico (20), Cameroon (51). Total 97 points.

The second easiest group, by rankings, is Group F, with Argentina (3), Bosnia-Herzegovina (21), Nigeria (36), Iran (45). Total 105 points.

And, presumably, the Group of Cruise is Group H, with: Belgium (11), Russia (22), Algeria (26), South Korea (54). Total 113 points.

It is interesting to note that England are the highest third ranked team in any group. and four groups have a second best team that is lower ranked than England. England's group also has the second best fourth ranked team.

Also, by World Cup Winners (by descending order of total rankings);
Group G has one (Germany) with three wins in total.
Group D has three winners (Uruguay (2), Italy (4), England (1)) for seven wins in total.
Group C: Nil wins.
Group B: One winner, Spain (1).
Group E: One winner, France (1).
Group A: One winner, Brazil (5 times winners).
Group F: One winner, Argentina (2).
Group H: Nil wins.

England's group is indeed a killer.

I know that FIFA don't actually "seed" teams, but put them in pots according to Confederation and other political considerations. It doesn't always lead to the most level of playing fields.

World Cup seedings mystify us again

It is now just over six months until the World Cup begins in Brazil and we are just a few days away from the draw.

The recent collapse of part of the stadium under construction in Sao Paulo was very sad, and has brought the usual doubts about whether the venues will be ready in time. Indeed, Brazil has admitted that six stadiums might not be ready in time. FIFA have announced that there are no plans to move the World Cup to a different country, despite the problems. I hope Brazil works through the difficulties and is ready in time.

As for the draw, there is the usual scare-talk of England being in a potential "Group of Death" with the likes of Brazil, USA and France.

However, with the likes of Switzerland in Pot One, how about a group with Switzerland (World Ranking 8), Australia (59) and Cameroon (51). We couldn't complain at that!

The Pots will NOT be organised by World Rankings alone, but I am mystified as to why Switzerland (8) and Belgium (11) are said to be top-seeded, whereas Portugal (5) and Italy (7) are not. Other Pots will hold teams from the same Federations as far as possible.

If the teams were grouped by the latest rankings the Pots would be:

One: Spain (1), Germany (2), Argentina (3), Colombia (4), Portugal (5), Uruguay (6), Italy (7), Switzerland (8).

Two: Holland (9), Brazil (10), Belgium (11), Greece (12), England (13), USA (14), Chile (15), Croatia (16).

Three: Ivory Coast (17), France (19), Mexico (20), Bosnia-Herzegovina (21), Russia (22), Ecuador (23), Ghana (24), Algeria (26).

Four: Costa Rica (31), Nigeria (36), Honduras (41), Iran (45), Japan (48), Cameroon (51), South Korea (54), Australia (59).

Incidentally, with talk of cutting Europe's representation in future World Cups, the top eight teams not to qualify for next year's tournament are: Ukraine (17), Denmark (25), Sweden (27), Czech Republic (28), Slovenia (29), Serbia (30), Romania (32), Scotland (33). ALL are European.