Euro 2012

[future heroes]

Bossa: I know the football history so you do not have to break it down for me.

There is a question that needs to be answered - what is the probability that a South American team peaks when the World Cup is hosted in South America and that a European team peaks when the World Cup is hosted in Europe EVERY time with only one exception in 13 relevant World Cups?

I tell you what - it is extremely low.

You mentioned home advantage as a factor, so why could there not be a continental advantage?

 

[Bossa]

Bossa: I know the football history so you do not have to break it down for me.

There is a question that needs to be answered - what is the probability that a South American team peaks when the World Cup is hosted in South America and that a European team peaks when the World Cup is hosted in Europe EVERY time with only one exception in 13 relevant World Cups?

I tell you what - it is extremely low.

You mentioned home advantage as a factor, so why could there not be a continental advantage?

Because an American does not care about a Mexican. A Brazilian does not care about a Argentinean. A Dutchman does not care about a German. I think that it was all a big coincidence that a South American team has never won an EC in Europe and a Europeans team has never won a WC in (South) America.

If Spain played their WC2010 in Mexico they still would have won. If Brazil played the WC1970 in England they still would have won. Sometimes stats just does not say a lot.

But I gotta give you that early on especially in the 80's and before. Travelling wasnt very common and you had Brazilians who only played in Brazil and Germans who only played in Germany. Nowadays footballers travel all around the world and South Americans also play and live all around the world. So it wont be a big deal in which continent a team plays. Probably the whole Argentina XI live in Europe nowadays so there won't be a continental advantage for them when the WC 2012 is hosted in Brazil.

 

[AnthonyG]

@Bossa - I won't do them all, but Brazil was a red-hot favourite for 2006. Spain was a favourite for 1998, heck even in the final Brazil was still picked. Too many of your 'best sides' are pure revisionism based on them having won the thing.

 

[Le Professeur]

WC 2014

Spain

Fabregas
Iniesta Xavi Silva
Javi Martinez Busquets
Alba Ramos Piqué Arbeloa
Casillas

Xavi at 34 is still capable to play the rest will only just become better. Martinez will replace Alonso



Argentina

Higuain
Aguero Messi Di Maria
Banega Mascherano
Insua Otamendi Garay Zabaleta
Romero



Brazil

Moura Neymar Hulk
Ganso
Ramires Lucas
Marcelo Luiz Silva Danilo
Julio Cesar



Germany

Gomez
Reus Özil Gotze
Khedira Schweinsteiger
Lahm Badstuber Hummels Boateng
Neuer


Spain can still easily win this in 2014. If Argentina want to win then they need some better defenders. Brazil look pretty young but they have home advantage. The Germans are all young so they can also easily improve. Of course everything can change in two years.

Belgium

Lukaku
Mertens Witsel/Dembele Hazard
Fellaini Defour
Lombaerts Kompany Verm/Vert Alderweireld
Courtois


Portugal

Ronaldo Oliveira Nani
Moutinho Veloso Meireles
Coentrão Alves Pepe Pereira
Patrício



Congrats to Spain, thoroughly deserved it tonight. At last they played to their abilities, the cowards.

Also Cesc Fàbregas is world ****ing class and I'd ask Barça like reaaaaaaaaaaally kindly to maybe get him back.

 

[Rain Dance]

deleted.

where's the delete post button?

 

[Rain Dance]

1990: Germany(Italy): Best side won, Argentina and Brazil were in decline
1994: Brazil(USA): Best side won, remember Romario and Bebeto
1998: France(France): Legendary French side(also won the EC in 00) also had home advantage
2002: Brazil(Japan/Korea)Best side by far won. There was no side that could challenge them. That Germany side was very mediocre and they were the 2nd best team.
2006: Italy(Germany) Best side won, Brazil were already in decline(remember fat Ronaldo). Argentina were a mediocre side
2010: Spain(South Africa) Best side by far won

Every one of these countries deserved to win the Cup(apart from Italy 1982, Brazil should have won with their generation)

Brazil had a great generation in the beginning of the seventies and the beginning of the 80's.
Argentina had their Maradona generation.
Then Brazil had a great generation again between 98 and 2002.

These national sides won their WC's not because of their home continental advantage which is probably irrelevant. They just had a great generation.

It doesnt matter where you play the best team will win the Cup unless if you're playing against a team with home advantage. I mean why would Brazil have an advantage over Spain or France or another European side when they are playing in Mexico or USA. Time zone doesn't really matter. The climate doesn't really matter either.

1st. completely disagree with climate doesn't matter,
the climate between Brazil and USA wasn't that far apart and the games was played at 3 pm in the afternoon so the European TV viewers don't watch the games at late night.

on the simpler example : arsenal suffers from cold environment when we played CSKA moskow in winter.

Climate matter, a LOT.

2nd. your list of best team wins is adjusted to who wins afterwards not the best team before the WC actually began.
I'll comment from the WC I actually watch.
1990 - Dutch still has the trio Rijkaard, Gullit and van Basten who won EC 88. it arguably better than Mattheus, Klinsmann, and Brehme.
and let's not forget Yugoslavia all star team Stojkovic, Savicevic, Prosinecki and co (which I almost forgot too)
Cameroon was also arguably the best team of the tournament btw..

1994 - Italy was also a good side remember Baggio and the back four, labeling them 2nd best cause they lost the penalty shoot-out is just unfair.

1998 - everyone remember how suddenly Ronaldo got a mysterious illness on the night of the final, making his team choke at the last hurdle.
before the opening whistle starting, everyone was betting on Ronaldo on winning the WC 98. so NO France was not the best team as you stated. Ro-Ro combo and their midfielders were a reminiscent of the 70's squad. FIFA rank them number 1. while France needed a silver goal against Paraguay in the quarter.

2002 - I wouldn't call Brazil the favourite before the tournament, but all the favourites was out before the final so I guess it's correct. Germany however wasn't a favourite before the WC begun cause their squad is too old (all of them are 30 or around them), Italy, England and Spain were the favourites actually.

2006 - dude, Zidane headbutted Materazzi... and the match went to penalties. how can you say the best side won? just because they won they are the best side? and you didn't say anything about the regeneration of Germany who only lost in extra time cause of a wonder goal by Alex Del

2010 - again, why Spain by far the best team? cause they won?
I take it this time by far is just hyperbole. they are the best team I give you that. but not by far.

every team had their golden generation, many of these golden generation didn't win anything though, it's not that easy to simplify things by saying

Every one of these countries deserved to win the Cup(apart from Italy 1982, Brazil should have won with their generation)

Brazil had a great generation in the beginning of the seventies and the beginning of the 80's.
Argentina had their Maradona generation.
Then Brazil had a great generation again between 98 and 2002.

These national sides won their WC's not because of their home continental advantage which is probably irrelevant. They just had a great generation.

Spain could win Brazil 2014 but that's on paper, on the field is a different issue.
*dang, that made me remember Germany fate *

 

[Anzac]

Didn't Spain win the WC with the least amount of goals scored by the winner over the comp???

Glad to see them score a handful in the Final.

Also of note that 2 goals were scored attacking the front of the area (Alba & Torres), whilst the other 2 were scored around the edges by turning the defence towards their own goal - something we've failed to appreciate in recent seasons as we've passed the ball to death across teh front of the area.

I also thought their use of the FBs to provide width & switch play options was brilliant & kept the Italian defence always eeding to scramble.

 

[jerome2158]

here's something to contemplate...


are golden generations deemed as such as the result of tournament wins, or do tournament wins come from golden generations?

Take France for example, would anyone consider 1998 to be their golden generation had they lost the final? It seems that moniker is always applied after they win.

Just a thought.


I'm predicting France to knock out Brazil in 2014, once again, causing mass suicides and anti-french sentiment in Brazil.

 

[Rain Dance]

golden generation is called before the tournament mate... not the other way around.

ex: the current Germany team is called their golden generation after Mattheus and co. (by their own media and German populace as a whole) but ironically it was the relatively weaker generation who won Euro 1996.
Cue: 96' star player - Thomas Hassler, Jurgen Klinsmann, Matthias Sammer - all either constantly injured or aging player.

and there are other golden generations who didn't win anything.
Ex: the Czech at 96' Euro.

 

[jerome2158]

true, but how can you have a true golden generation that proceeds to win nothing? Wouldn't that just make it like every other generation that hasn't won anything?

I think it's a term thrown around too easily, like calling a player a legend.

 

[Rain Dance]

well, look at Czech at 96'
Czech Republic squad – UEFA Euro 1996 Runners-up

1 Kouba
2 Látal
3 Suchopárek
4 Nedvěd
5 Kadlec (c)
6 Němeček
7 Němec
8 Poborský
9 Kuka
10 Drulák
11 Frýdek
12 Kubík
13 Bejbl
14 Berger
15 Horňák
16 Srníček
17 Šmicer
18 Kotůlek
19 Rada
20 Novotný
21 Kerbr
22 Maier
Coach: Uhrin

it's the Czech golden generation as comparably they are better than the generations of their respective country players.

I think we all agreed Puskas generation was the golden generation of Hungary football, but what did that team win? only the Olympics.
the term is used based on country so yes, its thrown around a lot but I think the comparison is quite clear.
that is mainly : how much better this generation of our NT players than the past ones?

ex: Portugal's golden generation is still Figo's

 

[Glovegun]

The scary thing is, the bulk of this Spanish side will be around for years to come.

Puyol is already 34, so you'd have to think that he won't be there for Brazil 2014, but Xavi could conceivably still be playing. Xabi Alonso and David Villa will both be 32, so again, it's not impossible that they'll make the tournament.

Most of the Bilbao crop are still in the early to mid-twenties, Alba is only 23 and the Barcelona academy is just frightening. Pedro still only 24, Thiago coming through as well. And you'd imagine there will be a couple more over the next few years. How far could Cuenca and Tello go?

 

[Armor for Sleep]

So because Spain are playing exciting football tonight, in which they've been joyous to watch, people are claiming that all were wrong to claim they've been boring in their previous games?

Yep that seems to be the way this works.

Oh well, can't wait for the season to start now.

 

[SomGooner]

The most boring Euro I've ever watched and Torres being the top goal scorer with a mere 3 goals is a testament to how dire the whole show was. Glad it's over.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/euro2012/article-2167397/Euro-2012-Fernando-Torres-wins-golden-boot.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/euro20 ... -boot.html</a>

By the way it's not a coincedence that the best strikers in the world come from South America & Africa.

 

[DJ_Markstar]

The most boring Euro I've ever watched and Torres being the top goal scorer with a mere 3 goals is a testament to how dire the whole show was. Glad it's over.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/euro2012/article-2167397/Euro-2012-Fernando-Torres-wins-golden-boot.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/euro20 ... -boot.html</a>" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

By the way it's not a coincedence that the best strikers in the world come from South America & Africa.

Just not true, the best strikers in the world tend to come from Europe and South America, with the odd African sneaking in.

 

[wishful_llama]

I think it's more a testament to just how ****e Torres is that even with all that fire power putting chances on a plate for him he still finished level with 5 other players. Villa would of scored 6 or 7 if he'd been fit

 

[Hunta]

Torres should have had a hat-trick in the first game against Italy, he's still not a patch on the player he was a few years ago.

 

[eye4goal]

Spain's first half vs Italy is probably the best they've ever played. I wish they gave us a couple of performances of similar quality throughout the competition. They've lacked cutting edge this time but they've added a new dimension to their team in Alba(problem area for them). The gap between them and the rest is even bigger now than it was in 2008 I think, as they've more or less cruised to this title.

 

[SomGooner]

Just not true, the best strikers in the world tend to come from Europe and South America, with the odd African sneaking in.

But that odd African 'tends' to out perform the best Europe can offer! The only thing going for the current European strikers is quantity and not quality as very few of them are capable of reaching the height of their predecessors.

 

[GG8]

Sergio Busquets has won everything there is to win. At 23.

Some people get very lucky.

He played nearly every minute of every game in a EC and WC winning side as well as being an integral part of a multiple La Liga and CL winning club side.

That doesnt happen with a bit of luck.