Fourth time lucky for record-breaker Klose

Although I was pleased with my decision to choose the BBC’s coverage over ITV’s, there was one glaring omission from their post-match analysis. Whilst Gary Lineker focused upon plugging the brilliantly-named ‘Rio in Rio’ show that’s airing tonight and saying an emotional goodbye to Alan Hansen, I was a little disappointed by his failure to give a real star of this World Cup a similarly significant send-off: Miroslav Klose.

The World Cup’s all-time leading goal-scorer (presumably) signed-off from international football in fitting style, making way for match-winner Mario Gotze in the 88^th minute before lifting the trophy on the greatest stage of all. Having finished runner-up in 2002 and in third-place twice, there are few footballers in the history of the competition so deserving of a winner’s medal.

Miroslav Klose: World Cup winner at the fourth time of asking

Which is why it was a shame to see the BBC fail to acknowledge one of the finest goal-scorers of his generation. There is a lot to be said for the idea that Klose doesn’t deserve to be raised up to the levels of World Cup legends such as Pele, Maradona or even Ronaldo, the man whose record Klose broke with his strike in the semi-final demolition of – fittingly - Brazil.

These figures are so revered for qualities that Klose simply doesn’t possess – the ability to raise the volume within a stadium simply by receiving the ball. Germany’s all-time leading scorer will never be considered on the same level as these men, and perhaps fairly so. But football is a simple game, with its most basic objective being to put the ball in the back of the net. No other player has done it on football’s biggest stage as often as Miroslav Klose.

What Klose does possess is longevity, a quality that allows him to write himself in the annals of football history in a different way to these players. At 36, he continues to find himself in dangerous positions, not relying upon pace or luck but an innate knowledge of the game. In Britain we have seen players such as Michael Owen be beaten into retirement by age and injury, whilst arguably our greatest goal-scorer, Alan Shearer, had to retire from international football to maintain an acceptable level of performance.

Klose suffers no such problems. Throughout last season, he made 28 appearances for Lazio, his body able to cope with the demands of European and international football on top of his domestic duties. The Polish-born forward was a relative late-bloomer in football terms, not making his professional debut until he was twenty-years-old in 1998. However, 661 appearances and 277 goals later Klose finds himself firmly in the folklore of German football – alongside and even above the likes of Franz Beckenbauer, Gerd Muller and Lothar Matthaus.

His is also a career that has been forged with consistent professionalism. While the careers of some are tainted by scandal or disgrace, Klose has become known for his principled approach to the game, even admitting to using his hand to score for Lazio against Napoli two years ago. There are other, more celebrated figures among football’s legends that cannot boast the same character.

This class was in evidence last night. Once Philipp Lahm lifted the trophy, Klose celebrated quietly with his family, keeping a dignified silence about his future. Last night was about the team and the triumph of a young German side, not his potential retirement.

"I do not know yet if I will carry on with the national team," he said. "I'll take a couple of nights to sleep on it and then make the right decision."

As the BBC and the world focused upon the future – Russia 2018 and Germany’s potential domination – one could forgive Klose for allowing himself a moment of reflection. Finally, he was able to put to bed the ghosts of 2002 and enjoy the crowning glory of what has been a glittering career.

The likes of Pele and Maradona could excite a stadium, but in the end nothing gets the fans on their feet quite like putting the ball in the back of the net. And few have been able to do that quite like Miroslav Klose. 

“Best World Cup ever” still missing key component

There’s an increasing consensus that this World Cup has been up there with the best ever, at the very least the best in living memory. That might be true in my case: none of ‘my’ previous three tournaments -2002, 2006 and 2010 – have been able to contend with the levels of excitement that Brazil has treated us to so far.

I’ve come to tolerate hearing that this World Cup is the best ever – it may a touch premature, but it is a judgement that is ultimately subjective. But I’ve heard its proponents suggest that these finals have “had it all” - have they really? The semi-finals are upon us and we are, in my opinion, yet to see a truly great side.

That does not mean to say that this World Cup hasn’t had plenty going for it. There has been controversy – but dodgy refereeing, dives and bites are to be deplored rather than celebrated. So, too, have there been upsets, but none of the earth-shattering variety to be found in Korea and Japan, or indeed Brazil in 1950.

For many, the joy of this World Cup has been the triumph of the underdog, with the progression of the likes Colombia and Costa Rica giving the tournament flavour and variety. Whilst this may be true, even the most extraordinary of underdogs cannot make a tournament great – no-one would suggest the Greeks boring their way to the European Championships in 2004 made it the best tournament of all time, however surprising it was.

Of course, perhaps significantly, there have been plenty of goals. The group stages boasted nearly three a game – almost unprecedented levels of excitement. Goals mean entertainment, of course, but they do not necessarily equate to a tournament of high quality – especially when they come at the cost of decent defending.

That is something that has been scarce at this tournament – just ask England. Costa Rica, perhaps, have been the most organised and adept side defensively, but they have been a refreshing exception. I am by no means a purist, but it is hard to announce a tournament as history’s finest when so few teams have mastered one of the game’s most basic objectives – keeping the ball out of your own net.

It should probably be pointed out that the knockout stages haven’t extended this barn-storming start. In fact, forgetting extra-time, the last 16 and quarter-final stages in Brazil have yielded fewer goals than the same stages in South Africa four years ago – widely perceived to be the worst tournament ever.

Regardless, the point is that goals are not necessarily indicative of entertainment. If they were, as Jonathan Wilson writes in Inverting the Pyramid, there’d be huge queues to watch primary school football. It might be a little simplistic but there can be average 3-3 draws in the same way that there can be great 0-0s.

I am probably being overly critical of what has undoubtedly been the finest tournament I have experienced. Perhaps I sound ungrateful for the hours of entertainment Brazil 2014 has brought, but I find it hard to refer to Brazil 2014 as the best ever as long as it continues to lack a great team.

Although it has been a privilege to see the individual brilliance of characters such as James Rodriguez, Neymar and Lionel Messi, when a World Cup comes around one of the things that excites me most is the opportunity to witness a truly great side.

The World Cup’s history is littered with great champions – teams that have done more than simply win the competition. The Brazilian champions of 1970 epitomise this, with the likes of Pele, Carlos Alberto and Jairzinho capturing the imagination of millions on their way to the trophy.

There have even been sides that have become immortalised despite falling short – the Dutch side of 1974 still managed to make those finals great with their revolutionary Total Football that ultimately saw them beaten in the final.

Even the comparatively dire 2010 tournament could still boast the presence of a brilliant Spanish side. When Iker Casillas lifted the trophy in South Africa you knew you were witnessing the rewarding of excellence.

For all the excitement of these finals, that’s exactly what’s been missing from the tournament. A friend of mine summed it up perfectly on Saturday night when he said that he didn’t want any of the four teams left in the competition to win it. It’s not hard to see where he’s coming from. Despite the 21 finals the four sides accumulatively boast, each has flattered to deceive.

The Netherlands and Germany both started with a bang, but have petered out as the weeks have gone on to the point where both, and the Dutch in particular, have had to ride their luck on their way to the semi-finals. Outstanding victories over Spain and Portugal respectively have proved to be false dawns.

Meanwhile, the Argentinians are in the final four by virtue of the excellence of Lionel Messi alone. Against Bosnia, Iran and indeed Switzerland, it took a moment of brilliance from the Barcelona magician to carry them through to the quarter-finals where they struggled past a lacklustre Belgian side.

And although I am a fan of this Brazilian side for their spirit and ability to cope with the expectations of a nation, they have hardly lit up their own tournament. Their only creative influence sadly leaves the tournament with a broken back, leaving us with a team that spent the majority of their quarter-final attempting to kick the apparently insatiable James Rodriguez out of the game.

In the event, it was France that came closest to this ideal. It was the first time I’d seen them come into a tournament and play with so much verve and drive. A solitary German goal saw them leave Brazil with a whimper, however, as they failed to produce with their backs against the wall.

Instead we are left hoping that one of the remaining sides can take a leaf out of the French book and produce some football worthy of a World Cup semi-final. The frustrating reality is that each of these sides has it in them. We’ve already seen it from the Dutch and Germans, and any side with Lionel Messi in their ranks is capable of the extraordinary.

It is not inconceivable that the eventual champions will dazzle their way to the World Cup with two quality performances at this late stage, but if they don’t, in the words of Brian Clough (albeit in a different context), they’ll be champions, but they won’t be good champions.

And if that occurs, then the “best World Cup of all time” will be missing one key component.

The Americans can't afford another missed opportunity

Amid all of the buzz from Tuesday night, it’s easy to forget that the US have done better.

Although I was not yet nine years old, moments from the 2002 World Cup stuck in the memory. Beckham’s penalty was one, Ronaldo’s haircut was another, whilst I remember the controversial but impressive run to the semi-finals South Korea enjoyed.

When I look back at those finals, the fact that the United States made the quarter-finals should be equally as memorable. Victory over Portugal in the group stage set them up for progression into the round of 16, where they achieved their first World Cup clean sheet since 1950 with a 2-0 win over rivals Mexico. Their journey was only ended by a contentious 1-0 defeat to Germany, when Thorsten Frings appeared to prevent an American goal with the use of his hand. 

Presumably I hadn’t got my nine-year-old head around the fact that being a large nation didn’t necessarily equate to footballing success, or that ‘soccer’ didn’t dominate American sport in the way that it does in the UK. So, the considerable achievement of Brian McBride, Landon Donovan and Claudio Reyna went over my nine-year-old head, and I wasn’t the only one. After the Americans sealed their passage into the last-eight the US media reaction was one of surprise – “The World Cup is still going on right now?” was one response.

Among those die-hard soccer fans, though, the achievement remains a highlight in the history of the USMNT, up there with their famous 1-0 victory over England in 1950. The ten-year anniversary of the win over Mexico was celebrated loudly in some quarters, and fans of the team point to the victory as evidence of the American superiority over their neighbours.

Sadly, that appears to be the only legacy from the tournament (and a false one at that). Copious amounts of money continued to be pumped into the sport without direction, and the MLS began to grow at a faster rate than public interest.

Even the arrival of David Beckham failed to significantly raise interest in the sport across the pond, and the US’s relationship with soccer remained strained, the team’s achievements even being treated with a degree of ridicule. After a draw with England at the 2010 finals, the New York Post’s headline declared: ‘USA wins 1-1!’, before claiming that ‘this sport is stupid anyway’ after their subsequent exit.

(thesun.co.uk)

The US may have more Gold Cups to their name than the Mexicans since Korea/Japan, but it is their neighbours that can claim more real progress since 2002. Appearances at the Olympics and Confederations Cup, as well as two U-17 World Cups are testament to the strong foundations that Mexican football finds itself built upon.

This time, though, things could and should be different.  Social media was buzzing with American pride on Tuesday night, and Barack Obama’s phone call to the team emphasised the feeling of a sea-change in American attitudes.

In Jurgen Klinsmann they have a serious coach with an interest in the future of the national side complemented by a team with potential. With a few lessons learnt from their experience at these finals and indeed from their Mexican neighbours, the mistakes of 2002 may not be repeated.

Although Tim Howard’s monumental efforts may have proved to be in vain on the night, the national response to his team’s World Cup means that, if the US gets it right, his saves may be even more significant than his country’s record-breaking run twelve years ago.