Other things do change: Since around 2000 the once mighty Germans are feared no more. Respected, sure, but so is the Czech Republic. Yes, one still pays lip service to
Now, is this change in perception justified? Well, the 2000s saw five tournaments of which "the Mannschaft" (a misnomer, of which the English-speaking media never seems to get tired) didn't win a single one. The last title-less decade before the 2000s for the "DFB-Elf" was the 1960s. Yet, they reached two finals without playing particularly well (they were actually quite pathetic in 2002, and pretty decent in 2008), and finished third in 2006 (playing great football). On the other hand, the Euros 2000 and 2004 were utter disasters.
So, the overall record actually still speaks for the Germans, compared to, for instance, England, France, or Holland, who tend to be treated much more favorably by the international media. More importantly, however, there has been a definitive change in the German way of playing the game since much maligned J. Klinsmann took over in 2004. Germany now (under J. Löw) plays much more like other European teams, relying more on speed and passing than ever before. In fact, there's now so many young and skilled players of slight build (Marin, Özil, Kroos, Trochowski, etc.) on the German team that some are afraid, particularly in the absence of Ballack, that Germany might even be at a physical disadvantage. Now that's what I call real change!
While the 2008 team was considered a tournament favorite (de facto playing at home), the current squad is by many pundits seen as weaker than, for example, the Serbian team. This is, of course, a great example of the difference between external and self-perception. The German media actually celebrated the team's "lucky" draw while many non-German journalists consider the German group to be the second toughest overall. Also, many German players and, of course, Franz Beckenbauer declare that the team will at least (have to) reach the quarter- or semi-finals while many outside observers see them lose to England in the first knock-out match.
Finally, a real difference between the current team and the German squads of the past is the factor of multiculturalism. The 2010 squad includes eleven out of 23 players with a “migration background” whereas only three such players were part of the 2002 squad, and none in 1998. In the run-up to the 2010 World Cup, the DFB also used the themes of diversity and integration in advertisement campaigns (funny in its lameness, see below). However, this is still a momentous change for one of the country's foremost national symbols.
As to Australia: Germany has the better team, no question, and needs to approach the match with the necessary cockiness. Anything but a clear victory would be a big disappointment.
Posts
Although I doubt that too many pundits - German or non-German - in fact rate Serbia higher than Germany, Germany has indeed pretty much lost its reputation as an elite side. But again, this is true inside as well as outside of Germany.
ReplyDeleteThe differences can apparently be found in the evaluation of where the team is headed. While most insiders and informed observers acknowledge that the current team produces the technically best football since the early 90s, the foreign (i.e. first of all the British) press highlight its lack of "German virtues". Having lost these, there is seemingly nothing left to be afraid of.
And possibly they will be proven right. Having adopted a style that in tendency resembles that of the other big 5-6 nations (bar England?), but with all in all worse (also read very young and inexperienced) players, may well lead to further "men vs. boys" displays as in the recent Argentina friendly. In the long run, though, Germany seem to be on track.
On the other hand, I believe Khedira's game is no less physical than Ballack's - I can see him boss the central midfield together with Schweinsteiger.
Klose to score a brace tonight (even though I hope Löw plays Cacau). Btw, at least in the first half, Stevie G. was pretty "real" last night.