even i have to admit that the germans played a much more watchable football than ever before. it’s still mostly fast counter attacking football, which in and off itself i find lame, but it is executed really quite well. or am i just soooo happy, that they didn’t win against spain, that i feel generous?

I can understand how Germany’s play isn’t everyone’s cup of tea (possession and counter-attacking football as opposed to direct attacking), but your 5 reasons seem rather strange. Maybe you just weren’t watching out for it?

1. emotionless
Salto-miro (or that fantastic somersaults he did in the Argentina game) and his 3 fingered salute to his wife and two kids. Captain Philipp Lahm tearing after their 1-0 loss to Spain. Thomas Muller going mad every time he scores a goal (especially after the 3rd minute Argentina one). There are other teams who played without passion or desire (I am looking at you Enger-land), but Germany is definitely not one of them.

2. shock and awe
It is quite strange that you claim Brazil played to impress with skill when they were the exponents of scaring their opponents into submission in this world cup (not the previous editions, mind). But North Korea didn’t back down, neither did Chile and finally the Dutch showed them up. Felipe Melo and Lucio out did Mark van Bommel in the Netherlands-Brazil game in terms of fouls. While Germany does press hard, even Spain have praised them for showing more respect and not fouling them as opposed to the way the Dutch did in the final. And if you were really following the German team, you would notice that in this world cup (with the exception of the Argentina game), they tend to start very slowly and be on the back heel for precisely the first 10-15 minutes, often resorting to last ditch blocks. This is not shock and awe, it is more being shocked and awed by the occasion before slowly settling in.

3. physicality over technique
While previous German sides do tend to value physicality alot, this side lacks it. Not because it is intended, but because injury has robbed them of their more physical players. With Ballack and Rolfes both out, they are left with Schweinsteiger, Khedira and Ozil in midfield. Schweinsteiger used to be more physical but has since mellowed, typified by the high number of fouls he suffered in all their matches as opposed to ones he gives out. Khedira does fit your bill of physicality over technique, but like you mentioned, Ozil is the direct opposite. As for the rest – Podolski and Muller both demonstrated slick passing and dribbling down the wings, Lahm has always used skill more than strength due to his size, and Friedriech is known for choosing short passing over long hacks (sometimes getting his defense into tangles as a result). Yes, there is physicality, but from each of their counter-attacks, it can be seen that slick passing is the reason why they won their games.

4. no stars
No well known ones yet, maybe. But the world cup is just as well known for making stars as showcasing ones already there. And while the ‘old guard’ has fallen flat, it is the individual brilliance of the young Germans that are the talk of all. Mesut Ozil is wanted by every major club. Sami Khedira has just secured a move to ‘galacticos’ Real Madrid. Bastian Schweinsteiger is labelled as the ‘most complete midfielder’. Philipp Lahm reiterates his case for the title of ‘best fullback in the world’. But most tellingly, the cries of foul when Thomas Muller got his 2nd yellow and how many were saying he could have spurred Germany to victory over Spain if not for that mistake.

It is true that Germany doesn’t have a single star – but that may be because (a little like Spain) they have a whole team filled with them.

5. they use black magic
Rumours of Podolski resorting to a traditional healer to find his scoring form may support that, but I have an alternate way of reasoning – they have a tactic genius for a manager. Germany has looked especially good in most of their games simply because they bring out their opponents’ worst flaws. Argentina looked good against the ‘smaller’ teams (shock and awe anyone?) but at the back of most people’s minds, we knew they had a week defense. Germany pressed the point and ripped them apart.

As for blocking out Messi, it was perhaps even simpler. Messi has many good points, but ball-winning isn’t one of them. In Barcelona, he had Xavi and Iniesta to constantly find him in space with defense splitting passes. Yet for all their sparkling forwards, Argentina lacked midfield creativity. As a result, if you control the midfield (as Germany did) Messi wouldn’t be given any chance to demonstrate his magic since the ball wouldn’t be getting to him. And in the occasional time when it did get to him, the packed midfield meant he had no where to go and no angles to create. When you can’t find your teammates, the best thing to do is to have a pop at goal, and in the central positions he was hassled into, Messi could only fire tamely at Neuer.

In fact, England’s better midfield (as opposed to Argentina’s) resulted in them actually scoring against Germany since the midfield battle was slightly more equal. But Germany won both games because they knew to expose the defensive frailties in the other teams.

All that said, I don’t mean to put down your article. I just think better reasons can be found for disliking this Germany, like:

1. A paper defense that Lahm at times almost single-handedly scotch-tapes together. On-the-line clearances against Australia and Ghana, last ditch blocks against Ghana and England… And when Lahm is off with illness in the last match, they immediately concede 2 easy goals. They can’t always score and hope.

2. A top-class XI but a slightly lacking squad since plenty of positions seem irreplaceable. As is mentioned above, their captain is a must-have, as is vice-captain Schweinsteiger. They have also look less sharp when Cacau replaced Klose (in the Ghana game), and Muller’s loss was devastating. I am not sure they can afford to lose Podolski, Ozil and Khedira either.

3. Wasteful in front of goal. 4-0, 4-1, 4-0 yes, but it should really have been 10-0, 8-1, 7-0. Klose especially (when he is chasing a goal-scoring record too!), but Podolski (in the Serbia game!), Ozil (in 1-on-1 situations) and even Muller (should have had a counter-attack hat-trick against England) have been the culprits.

4. Dodgy goal keeping. Neuer is young, and that ‘ghost goal’ acting was top class, but he is no Kahn. May grow to be a Lehmann, though.

5. ‘In-shock’ mentality after decision go against them. Youth may be the factor, but against Serbia they collapsed after the red card and took some time to recover. And again after England scored through Upson. They have improved by the semifinals though, since they didn’t breakdown against Spain (although they couldn’t break Spain down either).

So while I understand how you may not be won over, maybe you could reconsider your reasons? Or clarify them if I understood wrongly.

(btw, I am a German NT fan. But I still think they can improve.)