• 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.

1996 - 2006 (a decade of French football domination) ?

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Samuel_Vimes said:
Yeah, but the French system creates such huge amounts of losers it's unbelievable. They're nurtured from 13 into believing football is their future - then for those who fall flat on their faces...

To the thread topic: France 1996-2006 can't measure up to Brazil 1958-1970. Brazil revolutionised world football - with special pace, technique and tactics - France relied on exceptional talent at doing exactly the same Pelé and Garrincha perfected 40 years ago, though at a higher pace. Also, Brazil's only failure came in 1966, when German and English referees (hands up anyone who think it was a coincidence that they were allotted to Brazil's group...) allowed Bulgarian defenders to slaughter Pelé in the first match, and Eusebio's Angola/Mozambique United pounced on the opportunity, hacking Pelé out of the Cup and winning 3-1 to knock Brazil out.

Admittedly they were never that good in Copa America, but they didn't really bother with that cos it gave them too many bad memories about losses to Uruguay. :D

By contrast, France were nowhere to be seen in Euro 96 (Czechs dominated but Germany won), needed penalties and a sick Ronaldo to win WC 98, were solid in Euro 2000, got shown up by Senegal, Denmark and an off-colour Zidane at WC02, and then by Greece in WC04. They had about three years where they could genuinely be said to be best in the world (France 2000 would have beaten Brazil 2000 rather easily tho).
Semi-finalists IIRC. Czechs needed pens to beat them too.
 

Magrat Garlick

Rather Mad Witch
BoyBrumby said:
Semi-finalists IIRC. Czechs needed pens to beat them too.
Yes, but did they make their mark on the tournament? Nup. Got a couple of workmanlike wins over Bulgaria and Romania, eked out a point against Spain, dispatched Netherlands on pens, got out to Czechs on pens, and played the dullest football imaginable. Even England played better footy than France in 96.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Samuel_Vimes said:
Yes, but did they make their mark on the tournament? Nup. Got a couple of workmanlike wins over Bulgaria and Romania, eked out a point against Spain, dispatched Netherlands on pens, got out to Czechs on pens, and played the dullest football imaginable. Even England played better footy than France in 96.
Well possibly, but arguably Germany & Argentina made more of a mark in the last World Cup than France or Italy, but look who the finalists were... In football, much like life, the deserving seldom triumph. It's why it's such a great metaphor for the quotidian grind.

& "even England"?! That tournament was the highwater mark of our success post 1966! :@ :p
 

Magrat Garlick

Rather Mad Witch
BoyBrumby said:
Well possibly, but arguably Germany & Argentina made more of a mark in the last World Cup than France or Italy, but look who the finalists were... In football, much like life, the deserving seldom triumph. It's why it's such a great metaphor for the quotidian grind.
Yes, but they didn't win :)

You can't say they were a world top class side in 1996 though, which is my main argument. In 1996 France were a team among 8-10 Europeans (Germany, Spain, England, Netherlands, Czech Rep, Italy, Portugal, Croatia, Bulgaria, Norway) with remarkably similar qualities - namely a rock-solid defence and (possibly as a result of the former) a complete lack of skill to create goals. France's period of world domination was about three years long, which is why I say it pales in comparison to Brazil.
 

steds

Hall of Fame Member
Salamuddin said:
1996 - France reach semis Euro 96
1998 - France win the FIFA world cup 1998
2000 - France win Euro 2000
2001 - France win Confederations Cup
2001 - France win FIFA u-17 World cup
2001 - France reach semis of FIFA u-20 world cup
2003 - France win Confederations cup
2006 - FRance runners up FIFA world cup 2006.
Being also rans != dominance.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Cloete said:
Holland and France have the two best youth systems in the world IMO. But Brazil is unmatched in numbers. I shudder to think what they'd be like if they had the right infrastructure and coaching at a young age. Sure you can't coach some of it but if you look at England, Italy, Germany etc. players like Ballack, Gascoigne and Totti are massive exceptions. Whereas Holland and France continue to produce bucketloads of players with flair and creativity. Similarly to Brazil, but if they recieved the same coaching as in Holland and France I have a feeling they'd be even better.




Of course that's all contentious but it's definitely how I think football is the way it is today in certain countries.
Im not sure Brazil would make more great footballers as the currrent structure in Brazil is atleast part of the reason its produces such great footballers. Street Football is a vital part of what makes Brazilian players as special as they are. Equally important is poverty, for a huge amount of people football is the only way out of their current situtation. A structured academy would certainly make players more physiclay prepared for european football but they may lose that creative magic which infact in many ways is being lost in football. The likes of Riquelme and Zidane are a dying breed.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Matteh said:
I'd have said the fact England has 'Gerrard, Lampard, Cole and Rooney' now is an even bigger jump that it might seem. The English game has changed style massively in the last 10-15 years, which is essentially down to more foreigners in the Premiership.
I personaly see Gerrard, Lampard and Rooney as traditional English players. Gerrard and Lampard are traditional English style midfealders they are just especialy in the case of Gerrard very good at it.
The Premiership clearly has changed football with foreign managers bringing different styles of play but its still English and has English charactersitcs.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Can't think of anyone remotely like Rooney we've had since I've been watching. 17 year olds just never used to play for us.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I dont think you could stay that France have dominated world football in the last 10 years. As has been said by others they dominated for a short time after they won the world cup. They would possibly go down as overall the most sucessfull of the decade but they never really achieved and air of invincibility. They won the World cup at home and won a very close final in 2000. Then for the last 4 years they have really been written off as a team living on past glory untill they got to the final of this years world cup. They were good against Brazil and Spain, Vieria and Zidane especialy but in no way did they dominated the tournament or at any stage seem the best side.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
BoyBrumby said:
Can't think of anyone remotely like Rooney we've had since I've been watching. 17 year olds just never used to play for us.
Rooney is a very rare type of player but he isnt totaly foreign to English football culture. I know he isnt English but people have compared him to Kenny Daglish.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Pothas said:
Rooney is a very rare type of player but he isnt totaly foreign to English football culture. I know he isnt English but people have compared him to Kenny Daglish.
Both have/had big backsides, but Rooney infinitely quicker. Dalglish had the far better vision & passing game.
 

Cloete

International Captain
Pothas said:
Im not sure Brazil would make more great footballers as the currrent structure in Brazil is atleast part of the reason its produces such great footballers. Street Football is a vital part of what makes Brazilian players as special as they are. Equally important is poverty, for a huge amount of people football is the only way out of their current situtation. A structured academy would certainly make players more physiclay prepared for european football but they may lose that creative magic which infact in many ways is being lost in football. The likes of Riquelme and Zidane are a dying breed.
But the thing is France and Holland both focus on futsal and small pitch games where the focus is on dribbling and technique. They learned them off Brazil to start with and they were adaptations of street football. Ronaldinho's the perfect example of a great player with a futsal background. If the infrastructure is there but they are still nurtured correctly it'll only be an improvement.

In saying that I'd agree that guys like Riquelme and Zidane are a dying breed, but the thing is players like that would never be seen in English or German teams for example. It's about the coaches style and national "beliefs" if you know what I mean. Bielsa barely gave Riquelme a look-in while Pekerman absolutely loved the guy (as do I :cool:). I'm fairly sure we'll continue to see guys like them coming through but it'll be through countries which focus more on the technique, vision and flair of players than the physical attributes. The thing is Riquelme's not fast, not that strong, doesn't have a great leap and is by no means an athlete. But at the very least his performances highlight the need and use of players like him in today's world. The best example that I can think of from years gone by is Roberto Rivelino. The guy wasn't too quick, wasn't big and wasn't strong but just had an amazing touch and a creative instinct. But again, Rivelino was a futsal player.

The avenues are still there to nurture the creative type players and the mentaility is also there from some countries IMO. However most of the European countries are yet to embrace it because it almost goes directly against their nature and they way they've played football since abotu the 50's. It's what the Champions League has exhibited so well with the Italian domination in the last few years. But English football is changing and that's why I'd agree with Matteh that it's the influx of foreigners in the Premiership that's done it.

Perhaps one of the biggest mysteries that's always plagued me is the reasoning behind Le Tissier's lack of English caps. But once again you look at Terry "I even managed to make Barca boring" Venables, Graham "Long Ball" Taylor and Glenn "I rely on karma and faith but still play 4-4-2's involving boring football" Hoddle (Although he played exactly the opposite to how he coached) and you instantly get your answer. The "lazy" Le Tisser probably worked 100 times harder than Romario, but that didn't stop the little man becoming the world's best player or scoring nigh on 1000 goals including 55 in 70 games for Brazil. Meanwhile Le Tissier managed 0 out of 8 games. I hate the English mentality TBH and it's what Australia (Like appointing Terry ****ing Venables) has naturally adopted, but we're finally moving away from it. Although I can't say Sven was an improvement and I'm not sure if McClaren will be (I have my doubts).

It's not a shot at England or the English people, it's a shot at the English Football mentality which has been instilled over the years (and who knows, maybe it's been the reason for so many failures). Too long have English teams been about bulky strikers, entire backlines with laughably poor technique, punting it forward, crossing and scoring with their head or simply hacking the **** out of each other as opposed to playing "beautiful football". However it's great to see guys like Rooney and Cole coming through and not getting screwed around. Gazza was a right **** but he still didn't play for England nearly as often as he deserved to for example. I certainly hope Australia keeps moving towards the Dutch and Brazilian style youth schemes though and as far away from the English (although it's improving) as possible.
 
Last edited:

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Cloete said:
But the thing is France and Holland both focus on futsal and small pitch games where the focus is on dribbling and technique. They learned them off Brazil to start with and they were adaptations of street football. Ronaldinho's the perfect example of a great player with a futsal background. If the infrastructure is there but they are still nurtured correctly it'll only be an improvement.

In saying that I'd agree that guys like Riquelme and Zidane are a dying breed, but the thing is players like that would never be seen in English or German teams for example. It's about the coaches style and national "beliefs" if you know what I mean. Bielsa barely gave Riquelme a look-in while Pekerman absolutely loved the guy (as do I :cool:). I'm fairly sure we'll continue to see guys like them coming through but it'll be through countries which focus more on the technique, vision and flair of players than the physical attributes. The thing is Riquelme's not fast, not that strong, doesn't have a great leap and is by no means an athlete. But at the very least his performances highlight the need and use of players like him in today's world. The best example that I can think of from years gone by is Roberto Rivelino. The guy wasn't too quick, wasn't big and wasn't strong but just had an amazing touch and a creative instinct. But again, Rivelino was a futsal player.

The avenues are still there to nurture the creative type players and the mentaility is also there from some countries IMO. However most of the European countries are yet to embrace it because it almost goes directly against their nature and they way they've played football since abotu the 50's. It's what the Champions League has exhibited so well with the Italian domination in the last few years. But English football is changing and that's why I'd agree with Matteh that it's the influx of foreigners in the Premiership that's done it.

Perhaps one of the biggest mysteries that's always plagued me is the reasoning behind Le Tissier's lack of English caps. But once again you look at Terry "I even managed to make Barca boring" Venables, Graham "Long Ball" Taylor and Glenn "I rely on karma and faith but still play 4-4-2's involving boring football" Hoddle (Although he played exactly the opposite to how he coached) and you instantly get your answer. The "lazy" Le Tisser probably worked 100 times harder than Romario, but that didn't stop the little man becoming the world's best player or scoring nigh on 1000 goals including 55 in 70 games for England. Meanwhile Le Tissier managed 0 out of 8 games. I hate the English mentality TBH and it's what Australia (Like appointing Terry ****ing Venables) has naturally adopted, but we're finally moving away from it.

It's not a shot at England or the English people, it's a shot at the English Football mentality which has been instilled over the years (and who knows, maybe it's been the reason for so many failures). Too long have English teams been about bulky strikers, entire backlines with laughably poor technique, punting it forward, crossing and scoring with their head or simply hacking the **** out of each other as opposed to playing "beautiful football". However it's great to see guys like Rooney and Cole coming through and not getting screwed around. Gazza was a right **** but he still didn't play for England nearly as often as he deserved to for example. I certainly hope Australia keeps moving towards the Dutch and Brazilian style youth schemes though and as far away from the English (although it's improving) as possible.
Wow. Romario's England career totally passed me by. :p

TBF to English coaches we're now playing more football under an Englishman than we ever did under a Swede. & Gazza was generally a first choice for us when fit except for the 1998 WC when he was basically a semi-functional alcoholic beforehand. Much as I dislike Glenda (the worst man-manager of all time, but tactically astute) he really had no choice but to leave him out.

Le Tiss (big cricket fan, BTW) is another matter; it's sad that English football couldn't use the most gifted ball-player of his generation. he would probably have had a more fruitful career if he'd exercised his option (as a Channel Islander) to play for France.
 

Cloete

International Captain
BoyBrumby said:
Wow. Romario's England career totally passed me by. :p

TBF to English coaches we're now playing more football under an Englishman than we ever did under a Swede. & Gazza was generally a first choice for us when fit except for the 1998 WC when he was basically a semi-functional alcoholic beforehand. Much as I dislike Glenda (the worst man-manager of all time, but tactically astute) he really had no choice but to leave him out.

Le Tiss (big cricket fan, BTW) is another matter; it's sad that English football couldn't use the most gifted ball-player of his generation. he would probably have had a more fruitful career if he'd exercised his option (as a Channel Islander) to play for France.
Yeah he played a few years after Maradona handballed in the area to give the Argies a penalty against you lot. Boy was he hated for the handball, the penalty cost England the World Cup IMO. Anyway, just filling you in :angel_not
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Cloete said:
It's not a shot at England or the English people, it's a shot at the English Football mentality which has been instilled over the years (and who knows, maybe it's been the reason for so many failures). Too long have English teams been about bulky strikers, entire backlines with laughably poor technique, punting it forward, crossing and scoring with their head or simply hacking the **** out of each other as opposed to playing "beautiful football". However it's great to see guys like Rooney and Cole coming through and not getting screwed around. Gazza was a right **** but he still didn't play for England nearly as often as he deserved to for example. I certainly hope Australia keeps moving towards the Dutch and Brazilian style youth schemes though and as far away from the English (although it's improving) as possible.
One thing in defence of the English game is that atleast people try and score goals unlike Italy which plays Football in the worst way possible. Brazil, Holland and Argentina have got to the best to watch. Argentina the kings of possesion and Brazil with so much flair and creativity although they have aquired a god like status which understanably they dont always live up to.
 

Matteh

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Pothas said:
I personaly see Gerrard, Lampard and Rooney as traditional English players. Gerrard and Lampard are traditional English style midfealders they are just especialy in the case of Gerrard very good at it.
The Premiership clearly has changed football with foreign managers bringing different styles of play but its still English and has English charactersitcs.
But all these players have a certain amount of flair about them, and to have 3/4 at once in a team is very unusual for England.

Joe Cole for instance has so many comparisions with Arjen Robben who is clearly a Dutch flair player.
 

Matteh

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
BoyBrumby said:
Wow. Romario's England career totally passed me by. :p

TBF to English coaches we're now playing more football under an Englishman than we ever did under a Swede. & Gazza was generally a first choice for us when fit except for the 1998 WC when he was basically a semi-functional alcoholic beforehand. Much as I dislike Glenda (the worst man-manager of all time, but tactically astute) he really had no choice but to leave him out.

Le Tiss (big cricket fan, BTW) is another matter; it's sad that English football couldn't use the most gifted ball-player of his generation. he would probably have had a more fruitful career if he'd exercised his option (as a Channel Islander) to play for France.
Thing is with Le Tissier is he demands a certain respect for staying with Southampton the entireity of his career, because that sort of thing just doesn't happen these days. Arguably if he'd moved to Man Utd he'd have been more in the firing line and become a bigger name.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Matteh said:
But all these players have a certain amount of flair about them, and to have 3/4 at once in a team is very unusual for England.

Joe Cole for instance has so many comparisions with Arjen Robben who is clearly a Dutch flair player.
Wouldnt really say Lampard has much flair, England have always had some flair players. I do agree that England have a lot of very good footballers at the moment and that foreign influence has changed the Premiership.

Joe Cole and Robben are actualy pretty different. Robben is far more of a winger and has an awful lot more pace.
 

superkingdave

Hall of Fame Member
Didn't England's women secure WC qualification last night at the expense of the French? I'm sure Sean can confirm, IIRC he has a thing for the keeper
 

Top