Italy wins the WC'2006. There are so many aspects of the game, which came to forth in Germany this summer.
One prominent aspect was the player fatigue. It was disheartening to see Patrick Viera, Thiery Henry go out in the finals due to unforced injuries. With France down to 10 men, one would expect Italy to charge. The players though seemed tired, almost unable to draw that extra bit of energy. Most of the player had played a complete season of league soccer, Champions league, and International friendlies. The better the player, the more he plays. Rarely do players opt out of, say league soccer, because World cup is coming up. So by the time the world cup arrives, the players are off their peak.
The game is played over 90 minutes, with the players having to run 100 meters to attack and then fall back to defend. This is grueling, especially in the hot daytime. Then the additional 30 minutes, with little breaks means that the players are exhausted towards the end.
Also with the average age of the French team being more than 29, the age becomes a factor. It is interesting to contrast this with games like tennis, where players as young as 15 compete with the top players. Also we have players as old as 35 competing with the top guns, or being the top guns.
Allowed substitutions are too few. The coach has to manage, change of strategy, injured players, and send-offs with the three allowed substitutions. It seems to be a good idea to allow the number of substitutes to be higher. I would rather see fresh Italian players go for the kill, rather than tired souls, waiting for the whistle.
Weather plays a big factor, as the sun beats down even the fittest of the athletes. I know that athletics has a wind factor to categorize the 100-meter sprints, as the wind can assist, slow down athletes. I wonder if we need to have a sun factor too.
The repartee one expects to all these theories is just one; the best players always adjust to the playing conditions. This will always separate the cribbers from the winners.
