Furball
Evil Scotsman
Never watched Braveheart tbh.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Spain vs France: World & European Champions.
- Thread starter aussie
- Start date
Furball
Evil Scotsman
I'd line them up the way Wenger's Invincibles lined up, with Zidane playing the Bergkamp role.
Encourage Henry to drift left, so that he and Pires double up on Ramos, and have Wiltord on the right to give Capdevila problems with his pace.
I'd line up with Vieira and Desailly as the holding players to boss the midfield physically, with Sagnol and Lizarazu as attacking fullbacks to further cause Spain problems down the flanks. Thuram and Blanc as the centre halfs, with Thuram lining up against Torres and Blanc sweeping. In possession, Desailly can drop back, allowing Thuram to shift right and pick up Villa should the need arise.
Scaly piscine
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
France would win 70-80% of the time. Spain made themselves underdogs in most of the games they fluked during their jamfest earlier this year. They would be an even bigger underdog against a top side.
L Trumper
State Regular
Spain's dominance not yet ended, so its better to wait till it happens.
As of right now I don't think spain has all round game the way france did. France virtually won worldcup without a striker and they are admittedly poor in 98 compared to 2000. But same can be said of spain, without marcos senna in the middle, team really look thin in the midfield.
But more importantly though spain doesn't really have wing play in case their passing doesn't work. Which is prominent against paraguay ( a match I still believe spain are extremely lucky to win in 90 mins). Something that really hurt them in WC.
Also comparing defences france look a class apart. But ramos, pique have lot of future ahead of them though. But that french defence is one of the greatest defences ever assembled in game's history. Through out those days it seems one of those 4 will score or create a goal more often than conceding one. Spain has better GK though.
Spain's and barca's winning formula as pointed out, depended on keeping the ball but that france side had one of the best midfield distributors in deschamps, and to certain extent viera. Also with the likes of pires, henry they can dominate the flanks. More than anything else though a side with zidane always gonna cause more problems than one with xavi. Besides when it really matters zidane, desailly and even thuram raise their games to new levels.
But its still early days though, spain can still achieve lot more and make me eat my words. I want to see them surpassing or at least equaling those west german (in trophies) and holland (in style) of 70s.
On other curious note how do you guys rate european teams since WW2:
Hungary 52-55
West Germany 72-76
Holland 74-78
France 98-02
France 82-86
Spain 08-10
England 66-70
Holland and West Germany in late 80's early 90's
As of right now I don't think spain has all round game the way france did. France virtually won worldcup without a striker and they are admittedly poor in 98 compared to 2000. But same can be said of spain, without marcos senna in the middle, team really look thin in the midfield.
But more importantly though spain doesn't really have wing play in case their passing doesn't work. Which is prominent against paraguay ( a match I still believe spain are extremely lucky to win in 90 mins). Something that really hurt them in WC.
Also comparing defences france look a class apart. But ramos, pique have lot of future ahead of them though. But that french defence is one of the greatest defences ever assembled in game's history. Through out those days it seems one of those 4 will score or create a goal more often than conceding one. Spain has better GK though.
Spain's and barca's winning formula as pointed out, depended on keeping the ball but that france side had one of the best midfield distributors in deschamps, and to certain extent viera. Also with the likes of pires, henry they can dominate the flanks. More than anything else though a side with zidane always gonna cause more problems than one with xavi. Besides when it really matters zidane, desailly and even thuram raise their games to new levels.
But its still early days though, spain can still achieve lot more and make me eat my words. I want to see them surpassing or at least equaling those west german (in trophies) and holland (in style) of 70s.
On other curious note how do you guys rate european teams since WW2:
Hungary 52-55
West Germany 72-76
Holland 74-78
France 98-02
France 82-86
Spain 08-10
England 66-70
Holland and West Germany in late 80's early 90's
Last edited:
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Somehow i think WG 72-76 was the best of the lot.
L Trumper
State Regular
Yeah, westgermany won things while hungary and holland didn't. Probably interchanging the first two in the list,
1 .West Germany 72-76
2. Hungary 52-55
3. Holland 74-78
4. France 98-02
5. France 82-86
6. Spain 08-10
7. England 66-70
8&9.Holland and West Germany in late 80's early 90's
Can't really think of 10th one, may be denmark in mid80s?
Furball
Evil Scotsman
By that token, Spain should be in front of the 80s France side.
I also have reservations with lumping the French sides which won the World Cup and European Championship together. France's team in Euro 2000 would skelp the 1998 side for fun, they were 2 vastly different teams.
For the 10th side, Holland c.1988-92 should be up there.
edit: the Hungarians won the Olympics. The only game they lost in 4 years was a World Cup final, thanks to a Puskas injury and an extremely dubious offside decision.
Last edited:
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Sounds good. I know Desailly played DM for AC Milan early in his careers. But did Desially ever play defensive-midfield for France during the 98-2002 period?.
L Trumper
State Regular
Got both holland & german sides from 88-92 at 8th & 9th.
Knew about hungary they are the best european side since WW2 in my opinion too. Not sure whether that will be general consensus.
Regarding france 1980s and current spain side, i think this spain side has the potential to better that one but not yet. That french team probably has the game's greatest attacking quartet, won a euro two semi final penalty shootout losses.
Agree with france 98 and 2000 but core of the team is still there, in fact one of the reasons they bundled out of 02 WC is still having the some of the 98 guys in their side who are clearly passed it.
France squad – UEFA Euro 2000 Winners (2nd title)
1 Lama • 2 Candela • 3 Lizarazu • 4 Vieira • 5 Blanc • 6 Djorkaeff • 7 Deschamps (c) • 8 Desailly • 9 Anelka • 10 Zidane • 11 Pirès • 12 Henry • 13 Wiltord • 14 Micoud • 15 Thuram • 16 Barthez • 17 Petit • 18 Leboeuf • 19 Karembeu • 20 Trezeguet • 21 Dugarry • 22 Ramé •
98 Winners
1 Lama. 2 Candela 3 Lizarazu 4 Vieira 5 Blanc 6 Djorkaeff 7 Deschamps 8 Desailly
9 Guivarc'h 10 Zidane 11 Pirès 12 Henry 13 Diomède 14 Boghossian 15 Thuram
16 Barthez 17 Petit 18 Leboeuf 19 Karembeu 20 Trézéguet 21 Dugarry 22 Charbonnier
They are hardly two different teams. But euro side is more experienced, with both young strikers and pires coming through ranks. It is not completely different.
In fact by the same token spain in euro 08 is superior to current team, although players are more experienced without senna in the middle they do not have the same balance. And i'd think euro 08 spain will win against WC10 spain.
L Trumper
State Regular
If its my choice, then i rate in following order
1 .Hungary 52-55
2. West Germany 72-76
3. Holland 74-78
4. France 98-02
5. France 82-86
6. Spain 08-10 [ May achieve lot more, have to see]
7. England 66-70
8. Germany 88-92
9. Holland 88-90
10. Denmark 84-86
WestGermany 1980 euro winners are the ones to miss out.
Not having any italian team seems a little bit surprising. But italy generally produce when chips are down. May be italian side of early 90s is a good side but i don't think they captured anyone's imagination or won anything though.
1 .Hungary 52-55
2. West Germany 72-76
3. Holland 74-78
4. France 98-02
5. France 82-86
6. Spain 08-10 [ May achieve lot more, have to see]
7. England 66-70
8. Germany 88-92
9. Holland 88-90
10. Denmark 84-86
WestGermany 1980 euro winners are the ones to miss out.
Not having any italian team seems a little bit surprising. But italy generally produce when chips are down. May be italian side of early 90s is a good side but i don't think they captured anyone's imagination or won anything though.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Ah yes the famous "the Magic Square" (le Carré Magique). Platini, Fernandez, Giresse, Tigana.
I remember watching some highlights of their 1986 WC campaign on a video "Boys from Brazil' & that France team, especially those 4, looked superb.
L Trumper
State Regular
They used to call france "european brazil" during that time. That team make an impression on whole generation same way holland of 74 did. Lots of love for magic square.. Too bad though two penalty shootouts.. Still they produced two of the greatest games against westgermany in 82 and against brazil in 86... And an unforgettable euro 84 to boot. (Fernandez was not in 82 i think)Ah yes the famous "the Magic Square" (le Carré Magique). Platini, Fernandez, Giresse, Tigana.
I remember watching some highlights of their 1986 WC campaign on a video "Boys from Brazil' & that France team, especially those 4, looked superb.
Last edited:
Ausage
Cricketer Of The Year
If winning things is actually important on this list I don't see how a 4 times winner of the World Cup can not have a single team in the top 10.
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
You must have just missed out on it becoming compulsory viewing in schools as part of 'Pathetic Reasons to Hate the English Studies' although given your strange affection for our cricket team you may well have failed that subject anyway
L Trumper
State Regular
Erm.. european sides? 4 times? Not after WW2
Furball
Evil Scotsman
I don't hate the English, far from it.You must have just missed out on it becoming compulsory viewing in schools as part of 'Pathetic Reasons to Hate the English Studies' although given your strange affection for our cricket team you may well have failed that subject anyway
I've already explained why I support England at cricket (and if England and Scotland were to meet at a World Cup, I'd be genuinely torn and would probably support England).
grecian
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I always preferred Genghini to Fernandez myself. The Dutch team of the late eighties should of been the greatest, if they weren't busy falling out with each other.
L Trumper
State Regular
They played in group stage didn't they? Holland won.
Holland always seems to has great side but players more often than not act like petulant children; some temperament, mental issues i think
Furball
Evil Scotsman
They did, but both teams had won both their opening group games, so France definitely rested players (iirc Holland didn't) Zidane was rested for Johann Micoud, who was awesome, Bernard Lama also made a completely lolworthy attempt at saving a Frank de Boer free kick, which iirc was the winner.
I'd have backed France to win but it would have been a final for the ages, 2 great teams at their absolute peaks. Easily the best finals tournament in living memory, so much talent spread around so many great sides, playing wonderful attacking football, almost all of whom peaked at the same time. Even the diddy sides like Slovenia had their best sides out, only let downs from a neutral POV were Germany and England (well, sort of) who were utterly dire and deserved to go out.