Brazil had about 70% of the ball possession in the first half and 3 times more passes, they were under pressure for most of the game as the ball was always on their side of the court. Croatia did not score a single goal in the game and the only point they scored was a gift from Brazil, yet they lost 3-1. Clearly they were playing something out of their league.
He's not saying Croatia deserved to win or played better than Brazil, but if everything would've been just, the game would've ended with a draw.
The own goal could just as well have been a normal goal if the Croatian player in front of Marcelo would've touched the ball better. It was definitely not an out of the blue present, it was a proper offensive action (the second solid attack from Croatia at that moment of the game, while Brazil hadn't done anything yet).
Also, Croatia actually scored a legitimate goal, but the referee saw a fault against Julio Caesar, while he actually just let the ball slip out of his hands (to be fair, the referee whistled very early, but if they would've played further, it would've ended in a goal anyway, I think).
Brazil's second goal was a gift from the referee. If the referee didn't call the penalty, it would've probably been a draw, plain and simple, and Croatia would definitely not have stolen it.
Also, ball possession and passes say nothing about the result. Brazil is just a team that likes to play the game with a lot of ball possession, while Croatia's strategy was to organize well in the defence and to set up quick counter attacks. Their strategy worked wonderfully, until that incomprehensible penalty.
I was supporting for Brazil, honest to God, but this wasn't a good game of theirs. I genuinely believe it would've been a draw if the game had been fair and square.