Apparently, there's no substitute for it

A pattern is emerging at World Cup 2006. As we have already established, the days of minnows finishing on the receiving end of cricket scores are all but behind us. Yet it seems the underdog is still destined to suffer, only in a different, much crueller, fashion. Trinidad & Tobago's heroics aside, those that kicked off as clear second favourites have so far failed to register any points. No team has been embarrassed by failing to compete, or cause their opponents any problems, indeed the basics are being well covered, even by the most unfancied sides. Instead, matches are continually being decided by subtle differences at the business ends of the pitch. A touch of quality, even genius at times, is consistently making the vital difference.

A slight feeling of deja vu could be detected today when watching the introductory performances of Ghana and, to a lesser extent, the US of A, whose efforts appeared to replicate those of Ivory Coast, Iran, and Angola. Both sides attacked with purpose, passed the ball with confidence, were well organised at the back... and could have played for a fortnight without creating a single goalscoring chance. The only way either would have found the net would have been from a long range shot, or from 50/50 penalty decisions had they been lucky enough to get a more generous referee. At the same time, both looked like they could have conceded with every Italian or Czech attack that came their way.

Ghana actually looked a very decent outfit in the middle third of the pitch, very powerful and pacy, which helped move their counter attacks forward rather menacingly. Yet they were continually let down by their final ball, and lack of ability up front. Add to that the dodgiest keeper so far, and a tendency to treat the award of an Italian corner as a drinks break, and I'm afraid trouble is a-brewing. What they lacked was just a bit of class where it was needed most. It may be the epitaph of many a team in this World Cup. Many a team, but not their opponents, who gave an exemplary display. The Azzuri, supposedly troubled (stop me if you think you've heard this one before...), looked glorious at times, the passing and movement around the box of Pirlo, Toni, Gilardino, and, incredibly, Totti would have been the most inventive and incisive seen in the tournament so far - if the Czechs hadn't got there first a couple of hours earlier. More impressive still it was all done at pace, and with a bit more luck the first half hour might have seen 3 or 4 goals. I say 'incredibly' in reference to Signor Totti because just 4 months ago the man broke his leg. And apparently did some ankle ligaments for good measure. To make it on to the pitch for the first game was unbelievable, to look like he'd never been away was nothing short of miraculous. Makes Rooney look a bit slack for missing the Paraguay game really doesn't it?

If Italy's attacking first half tactics left (gasp!) a few gaps at the back, which Ghana exploited (but didn't punish), the second half saw a return to more a traditional form of Italian football. Namely, defence. That's not a criticism at all, far from it. I think Italy have a way of defending which is actually enjoyable to watch. No, I'm not taking the piss! I'm being sincere! Italy are able to wipe all thoughts of scoring a goal from the opposition's mind without ever resorting to the kind of negativity which ends in 10 men behind the ball, and clearances being booted downfield. The reason for that is that they don't need to pull their attacking players back to help out in defence, because their defenders know how to defend properly. Besides, the Italians broke regularly in the second half, and still looked superb in attack. Some may try and say I am trying to convince myself a bit here, because, yes, Italy were my pre-tournament choice to win this thing, but so confident was I in the inevitable clean sheet that I actually won a fiver off a mate who told me after 10 minutes that Ghana would definitely score. You'll never learn David.

Even more impressive than the boys in blue though, were the Czech Republic. To call them dark horses is a bit of a cliche, and I don't think they'll win it. What they are, without any doubt, is criminally undervalued. Their games should receive top billing because they are always a wonderfully attacking, exciting side to watch, with some top players, and one bonafide genius in Nedved. To think of the column inches and TV coverage the over the hill and tediously negative France will get in this tournament, when they don't even deserve to have qualified, it angers me that such a talented team as the Czechs gets ignored. I guess if your face doesn't fit...etc. Still, those of us in the know can make a date to sit back and enjoy the kind of stuff we saw today; interplay of the highest calibre between a midfield triangle out of the top drawer combined with an added directness, an extra dimension given to them by their giant centre forward Koller, making them very dangerous. It's very difficult to criticise the Americans, who really did very little wrong. In fact they looked a useful unit for a lot of the game, very fit, well organised...we've been through this. They were just well beaten by a team that showed that bit of class. Didn't they just show it by the way? The two best goals so far from Rosicky, one all down to himself (and that includes the ball), and the other a glorious team effort. So unlucky that big Koller picked up a bad injury, meaning we may not see him again, and you wonder whether they'll be the same proposition without him against tougher opposition.

One thing they won't be lacking however, is that bit of class.