One of the positive things about the recent final was that it seemed to return to the pre-1990 phase of good final games.
In 90 the final was very disappointing with few chances and just one penalty goal.
94 was even worse with the game decided on penalty kicks; probably the worst final of all time.
98 had lots of goals but it was completely one-sided and the goals seemed to come from defensive lapses more than anything else.
One theory I have heard is that the finalists have become so jittery about screwing up that they simply don’t take any chances. The first 40 minutes seemed to be a repeat of recent history but the match really came alive in the last few minutes of the first half and after the interval.
Though Brazil won comfortably in the end, Germany created some good chances and with a little luck could have made it much closer.
So overall not a great final (like 74 or 86) but a pretty good one and the best since 86.
How do you rate it?
It was the best one I can remember seeing. Both sides played well and looked to attack and win the game in normal time.
1998 was horribly one-sided and just felt wrong (I don’t mean to belittle France’s achievement, but I expected Brazil to put up more of a fight).
1994 was just dreadful. I can’t remember anything other than Baggio’s penalty.
1990 was poor just because of Argentina’s aggressive, negative tactics.
I watched the 1986 final but I can remember much more of games from '82 such as Northern Ireland v Spain, as well as games from earlier in the '86 tournament. I would say this year’s final at least equalled the '82 and '86 finals. Sure, fewer goals, but 2 very evenly matched teams with sharply contrasting playing styles; the more flamboyant style won through on the day but not before they’d shown they had some real grit and determination. At the same time, Germany were exciting to watch as well at times. I think the joy of our type of football is greatest when a team finally breaks down a stubborn defence after an hour. They can then play some good football and add a second. It was the classic 2-0 victory.
For other examples, look at Scotland v Australia in 1985, but not England v Scotland in 1996 :).
Clearly the best since '86. That is hard to dispute.
Probably not as exciting as '86. Perhaps not even as exciting as '82. Much better played than '78. You really have to go to the '58 to '74 era for consistently better games, keeping in mind that the football of that era is far different from the football of our current era.
I had fun watching the game. I agonized with Neuville, couldn’t believe it when Ronaldo missed early, and was speechless when Kahn muffed the Rivaldo shot. (By the way, am I the only person who gives Kahn some credit for the fact that ball was dipping and swerving, making it a hard ball to handle?)
I won’t even discuss the sterile affair in '94. Thank god that year we had the much better quarterfinal between Brazil and Holland (sorry, Coldfire for bringing up bad memories…)!
Re Kahn: I was wondering about that as well. I am not enough of a football expert to judge but the TV commentators did say that the Rivaldo shot wasn’t as easy as it looked. Plus it was raining and I think Kahn had injured his hands in some manner a little earlier. If you add all that up perhaps it wasn’t a serious mistake.
BTW there are some interesting parallels with 86. Then also Germany was not rated highly but somehow made it to the final where they faced a better Latin American side; they fought hard only to lose in the end.
If you follow that parallel to the next world-cup that could be good news for Germany next time, since they won in 90.