Were Greece that bad?

[adexkola]

I can't remember much of the Greece team in Euro 2004, I just recall their matches were really dull. Only the final sticks out, and I remember Ronaldo crying, with his weird earrings, that's about it.

But they shut out France, Czech Republic, and Portugal in the final. Scoring goals too (at most once every match). If that isn't worthy of being crowned European Champions, I don't know what is.

They get a bad rep on here, with numerous references to them after Chelsea won the Champions League weeks back, but were they that bad?

Obligatory picture:

 

[ArmchairCritic]

They were excellent, defended absolutely superbly, not much fun to watch but got the job done with very limited resources. I still maintain that had Rooney not got injured England would have won that tournament.

 

[Gazza]

I was at two of their games, against France and the final vs Portugal. They really were experts at restricting the opposition. Both winners in those games were headers and their only chances of the game.

 

[Neutral]

Yes, they were fecking abysmal. No Greek fan will give a damn(nor should they), but they were wretched to watch.

I was in Australia at the time, and the Greek community there is f-ing mental, and joined in the fun with them...it was a great story, a completely unfancied side, putting together a dream run. But the football was dire.

I forget what the odds were, but they were given absolutely no hope at the start of the tournament.

 

[kouroux]

Yes they truly were shit.What hurt the most is the fact that Czech Republic clearly out classed them but still lost to them.I hate it when a team that clearly deserves to win doesn't in the end

 

[crappycraperson]

Thing is you have to ask which teams were better than them in that tournament.

I would say the Czech were the best team for me followed by England with Rooney (without Rooney they drop down a lot). After that it is between Greece and Portugal.

 

[Suedesi]

Thing is you have to ask which teams were better than them in that tournament.

I would say the Czech were the best team for me followed by England with Rooney (without Rooney they drop down a lot). After that it is between Greece and Portugal.

The Czech were amazing (Nedved was a star in 2004), that game against the Dutch was the game of the tournament!

 

[Gazza]

I remember their right-back Seitaridis had a good tournament and Karagounis had his moments.

 

[ArmchairCritic]

Didn't Zagorakis get player of the tournament? I remember Dellas having a cracking tournament too. In fact if look through that squad, you have Sheffield United, Leicester City and Newcastle rejects. I don't think the Greeks get enough credit for what they achieved in that tournament.

 

[ArmchairCritic]

Looking back Sven took off Scholes in the 57th minute to protect a 1-0 lead in the Quarter Finals against Portugal, he brought on Phil Neville, FFS. He also took off Gerrard in the 81st minute as he was on a booking, they equalised in the 83rd minute. Vassell came on for Rooney and Terry scored a penalty, not to mention Campbell's disallowed goal and Beckham's penalty miss. Christ that must have been a painful game to watch, good thing I was only 11.

 

[crappycraperson]

Looking back Sven took off Scholes in the 57th minute to protect a 1-0 lead in the Quarter Finals against Portugal, he brought on Phil Neville, FFS. He also took off Gerrard in the 81st minute as he was on a booking, they equalised in the 83rd minute. Vassell came on for Rooney and Terry scored a penalty, not to mention Campbell's disallowed goal and Beckham's penalty miss. Christ that must have been a painful game to watch, good thing I was only 11.

Eng were good in the tournament till Rooney got injured. It was surreal thing to watch them completely flip to being clueless once Rooney was off in the Portugal game. Then cold not even muster a single attack.

Even the French game was lost for bringing on Heskey for Rooney, who in turn gave away a mindless FK.

 

[kouroux]

Zagorakis is the one that impressed me the most.Specially how he owned Lizarazu for the goal Charisteas scored and eliminated France

 

[ArmchairCritic]

Eng were good in the tournament till Rooney got injured. It was surreal thing to watch them completely flip to being clueless once Rooney was off in the Portugal game. Then cold not even muster a single attack.

Even the French game was lost for bringing on Heskey for Rooney, who in turn gave away a mindless FK.

fecking Zidane, Sven was clueless, very fortunate he had such good players at his disposal in the First XI. Phil Neville on for Paul Scholes, to protect a lead? Might as well have gone 4-2-3-1 when Rooney got injured and plonked Scholesy into midfield and popped Gerrard in behind Owen with Cole on the left. Could have even moved Scholes behind Owen, a role which Scholesy excelled in for us in the 2002-03 season. Anything is better than bringing on Vassell or Heskey.

 

[Gio]

England's problem that was beyond the first XI there was a lack of quality. The gulf in class between Rooney and Vassell, or Scholes and Neville, was fundamental in Portugal wrestling control of that quarter final.

As for Greece, tactically they were very good, adaptable and scored the same type of goal again and again. A number of players had strong tournaments - Dellas, Basinas, Zagorakis, Seitaridis and Karagounis - but ultimately their football brought to mind the classic Blanchflower quote about "waiting for them to die of boredom."

 

[Sarni]

They were good against Portugal in the first game and caused a shock with that 2-1 win, I doubt anyone seriously thought they'd have gone that far. They were very disciplined even if unattractive, and deserved to win the whole thing for that.

They lost 1-0 to Poland in a pre-tournament friendly and I didn't understand how such an awful side could be going to Euros. Turned out to be not that bad.

 

[Canuckred64]

Good Article in Zonal marking regarding the 2004 Greek team.
http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/03/29/greece-euro-2004-tactics/

One think I would say about that Greek team, is that they had a lot of players who played for top European teams. Not many of them were starters, they were subs and reserves but they trained with the top players and had good coaching. The Greek players came into the 2004 Euro's healthy and well rested since not a lot of them had played a lot of football. You have to wonder how big a factor team health and how much football they have played over the course of a season is.

 

[Anderson's Cat]

Greece were anti-football. Just horrible.

 

[Sewelly The Geordie]

They were horrible. Fair enough it worked and you must pay credit to the fact that it was an incredible ahcievement to win it with that squad, but I never want to see something similar happen again.

I backed the Czechs pre-tournament and they didn't disappoint, being far and away the most entertaining side in the tournament. Nedved the Ballon Dor holder, Rosicky at his effervescent Dortmund best, Paborsky still going strong, great strikeforce in Koller/Baros and on top of it all two marauding full-backs on either side.

Karel Bruckner the coach was completely and utterly committed to attacking football. To see it foiled by the anti-football of that Greece side in the semis was very depressing.

 

[Aboutreika18]

Nedved's injury took that semi-final away from the Czechs.

 

[Maajid]

How the Czechs didn't score at least 4 against them I will never understand. Koller and Barros were incredibly profligate that night.

 

[Still ill]

Always difficult to watch beautiful football defeated by containment but the Greeks deserve massive credit. You do what you can, don't you? Organise your meagre resources as best you can and challenge the best to come and break you down. Some people (not on here, I hasten to add) seem to feel that this is cheating of some description, that everybody should play an open, expansive game regardless of the shitness of your players to enable the rest of us to view Ronnie, Leo et al in full flow. Jose and Arsene would be 2 clients that come to mind. This, of course, is bollocks.

 

[dumbo]

They weren't great but Portugal certainly weren't either, Greece beat them twice. The Czech's were the best team but Nedved's injury and the golden goal did for them.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Horrible, but it was still hilarious to watch them beat France. The looks on their little faces..c'est dommage petits visages!

 

[Grinner]

Awful...oily and hairy too. Do not want.

 

[crappycraperson]

They weren't great but Portugal certainly weren't either, Greece beat them twice. The Czech's were the best team but Nedved's injury and the golden goal did for them.

It was the SIlver goal thing in that tournament IIRC

 

[Wonder Pigeon]

They were pretty bad to watch. Yes, it was a great story and they played well and all, but they were still very dull.

 

[Crustanoid]

Greece were abysmal but wait until you see England this year

 

[Canuckred64]

Greece were abysmal but wait until you see England this year

So do you think I should get a bet down?

 

[CassiusClaymore]

Yes they were bad. But iirc I was on holiday in Zakynthos at the time so didn't have the heart to tell them. Plus, free drinks so....

 

[Eriku]

Nedved's injury took that semi-final away from the Czechs.

That's what I came in to say. Totally true... After Nedved's injury they looked clueless.

 

[Berlinknives]

They were excellent, defended absolutely superbly, not much fun to watch but got the job done with very limited resources. I still maintain that had Rooney not got injured England would have won that tournament.

Exactly, best TEAM won, as always.

 

[Berlinknives]

Greece were abysmal but wait until you see England this year

Greece beat Portugal twice in open play, England lost to Portugal on penalties.

Remind me what matters in the game of football?

 

[Berlinknives]

Greece beat Portugal twice in open play, England lost to Portugal on penalties.

Remind me what matters in the game of football?

Also let's remember Spain lost to Portugal and Drew with Greece, Germany couldn't even win a game, Italy couldn't get through the groups and the Greeks knocked out the fancied French who beat the English and the Czechs who beat the Dutch.

 

[Berlinknives]

They weren't great but Portugal certainly weren't either, Greece beat them twice. The Czech's were the best team but Nedved's injury and the golden goal did for them.

Oh my god, they had an injury and they conceded a special type of goal they knew about when they entered the competition ... bloody excuses.

How's about having a good enough squad to not concede more goals against the Greeks than you can score against them? How's about realising the other side may not always play the open type of football that might let you score.

If you rely on complacency and rigidity you don't deserve to win tournaments.

Czechs got what they deserved.

 

[apotheosis]

I can't remember much of the Greece team in Euro 2004, I just recall their matches were really dull. Only the final sticks out, and I remember Ronaldo crying, with his weird earrings, that's about it.

But they shut out France, Czech Republic, and Portugal in the final. Scoring goals too (at most once every match). If that isn't worthy of being crowned European Champions, I don't know what is.

They get a bad rep on here, with numerous references to them after Chelsea won the Champions League weeks back, but were they that bad?

Obligatory picture:

Depends what you mean by bad. they performed all the basics brilliantly, but were hardly Brazil of course. But that is how the vast majority of teams win tournaments, and the only realistic way for a team like Greece to ever win one. Very few win with attacking football, especially in modern times.

If there is any hope for England it is that you don't have to be brilliant, just effective, determined and carry a goal threat. Take your chances when they arrive and don't concede, and you will progress in tournaments.

 

[Nobby style]

Greece's gray haired keeper was massive. Made the difference.