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

[Matteh]

THey may have below par at the start but they played themselves out of it and that's what matters, ultimately.

If you want to play the luck card, well I'll say France were unlucky to lose on penalties in the final.......they played undoubtedly far more enterprising football than Italy.
You can't have it both ways.

The Confed Cup may not be as important as the Euro's or the World Cup but anyone who watched last's years tournament particularly the final between Brazil and Argentina will tell yopu it is a very keenly contested tournament and the French deserve credit for winning both tournaments. How many other countries have won the Confed Cup --- Only Brazil and Argentina if I'm right --- that's not bad company to be in at all.
What have other Eurpoean nations achieved --- it's jealousy pure and simple ---- you guys just can't hack the fact that France have been so much better than overrated England, Holland, Spain and Germany.

Confed Cup Wins: Cameroon 0–1 (AET) France
Japan 0–1 France
Big wins against quality oppposition.

Mexico won it in 1999, Denmark in '95.

As for the luck card, England have been subject to very very questionable refereeing decisions, whereas Zidane did in fact clearly do wrong and you could argue he cost them the WC. They were below par enough at the start to the extent that they scraped themselves out of their group. Hardly the dominant team you're making out they are.

Everyone knows that Spain and Holland are Europe's biggest chokers in major tournaments. Germany are going through a phase where they're rebuilding (even then they were somehow RU in 2002), and it looks like with their 3rd place in the WC they're back.

 

[Matteh]

Yeah I'm sorry....I missed all those Confed Cups where England blew the opposition away ....after all if it's a nothing tournament, Beckham's bozos should have have been able to breeze thru it.

England have never played in a Confederation Cup...

 

[Salamuddin]

As for the luck card, England have been subject to very very questionable refereeing decisions

Oh Please......that's just another pathetic excuse in an endless line of excuses for England not being good enough......

 

[Salamuddin]

England have never played in a Confederation Cup...

yeah, you missed the sarcasm but anyway.......

 

[Matteh]

Oh Please......that's just another pathetic excuse in an endless line of excuses for England not being good enough......

Someone who obviously hasn't seen the games...

 

[Matteh]

yeah, you missed the sarcasm but anyway.......

The Confederations Cup is a joke. The hosts get in, the WC winners, Euro Champ winners, Asia Cup winners, Oceania Cup winners and so on all get in. Which means that say 4 out of the 8 teams are automatically rubbish and of poor quality.

Interesting that you ignored my points about who France beat in the finals...

 

[Salamuddin]

Someone who obviously hasn't seen the games...

I saw England play in World Cups 1998, 2002 and 2006 ....nothing I saw in them suggested that they were anything other than extremely overrated.......you claim France were dull....well England were decidedly worse in the opening rounds of 2006.

In 2002, they were outplayed by Brazil in the quarter, in 2006 yeah they lost on penalties in 1998 and 2006 but they failed to take their chances particularly in the 2006 game....that's not bad l;uck....that's just not good enough.

England had the chance to shut Argentina out of the game at Saint Etienne in 1998 but they couldn't and paid the price.....no point crying about bad luck when you fail to capitalise on your opportunities.

 

[Matteh]

I saw England play in World Cups 1998, 2002 and 2006 ....nothing I saw in them suggested that they were anything other than extremely overrated.......you claim France were dull....well England were decidedly worse in the opening rounds of 2006

In 2002, they were outplayed by Brazil in the quarter, in 2006 yeah they lost on penalties in 1998 and 2006 but they failed to take their chances particularly in the 2006 game....that's not bad l;uck....that's just not good enough.

England had the chance to shut Argentina out of the game at Saint Etienne in 1998 but they couldn't and paid the price.....no point crying about bad luck when you fail to capitalise on your opportunities.

I thought England did alright in 2006 tbh. Playing teams like Trinidad who just completely shut up shop negates any class play. England flew through their group. France looked **** poor and i honestly thought they weren't going through.

England weren't outplayed by Brazil, they were undone by Seaman being in his later more David James-esque years. 06 we outplayed Portugal. 98 we outplayed Argentina but David Beckham was an ****, we even scored, but it got disallowed.

The Euros in 04 against Portugal, dear me, Ulf Meier cost us that game.

 

[Cloete]

Not so good as they are I think...

On what do you base it though? Right infrastructure and early coaching in Dutch, French and Brazilian systems means games like futsal (Robinho, Ronaldinho, Rivelino etc.), which is already prevalent in brazil, being far more accessable to all of the country. Sure, they get coached at it, but futsal is all about quick passing, great techniques and beating players 1 on 1. There's not much else to coach. Then as they start getting into their teens the coaching becomes more formal but the mentality amongs Brazilian coaches will always let the creative player blossom anyway. Say a player's got the ball near the penalty box, he tries to thread an impossible flick pass to find a striker in space, there are 3 defenders in and around the striker and himself. It beats 2 defenders and is easily intercepted by the third.Your typical coach will be grudge a player for taking the wrong option that was never on. Brazilian coaches will applaud the player for tryign something so difficult and having it nearly pay off. As the player improves he starts making those sort of passes under the "creative coach's" teaching. Meanwhile he stops it under a typical coach who will drop him from the team or simply not rate him as a player. Any players like that around the world the typical coach would see as naturally gifted, magical and uncoachable. Go figure...

 

[marc71178]

Err..Marc
2000 - Euro Champions
2001 - Confed Cup Champions
2003 - Confed Cup Champions
2004 - Euro Qf
2006 - WC runners up.

And that's discounting their strong performances at youth level.

Yeah 2002 was the only real blip there........
I detect a lot of jealousy here.....what have England achieved in the same time period.......

The confed cup is the biggest waste of time since the club world championship, 2 wins in something that rates below the Intertoto cup mean absolutely nothing,

And youth levels again mean very little, thus the blip lasted from 2000 to the 2006 World Cup.

 

[marc71178]

On what do you base it though? Right infrastructure and early coaching in Dutch, French and Brazilian systems means games like futsal (Robinho, Ronaldinho, Rivelino etc.), which is already prevalent in brazil, being far more accessable to all of the country. Sure, they get coached at it, but futsal is all about quick passing, great techniques and beating players 1 on 1. There's not much else to coach. Then as they start getting into their teens the coaching becomes more formal but the mentality amongs Brazilian coaches will always let the creative player blossom anyway. Say a player's got the ball near the penalty box, he tries to thread an impossible flick pass to find a striker in space, there are 3 defenders in and around the striker and himself. It beats 2 defenders and is easily intercepted by the third.Your typical coach will be grudge a player for taking the wrong option that was never on. Brazilian coaches will applaud the player for tryign something so difficult and having it nearly pay off. As the player improves he starts making those sort of passes under the "creative coach's" teaching. Meanwhile he stops it under a typical coach who will drop him from the team or simply not rate him as a player. Any players like that around the world the typical coach would see as naturally gifted, magical and uncoachable. Go figure...

Hang on a minute - you're now saying that they are getting training from an early age, the last one said imagine how good they'd be if they got training from an early age.

 

[Cloete]

Hang on a minute - you're now saying that they are getting training from an early age, the last one said imagine how good they'd be if they got training from an early age.

ffs Marc, don't be stupid.

They play futsal and street soccer from an early age. They don't get the right coaching until they're about 16 and playing youths for the professional clubs.

 

[marc71178]

Which therefore makes my initial point remain the same.

I think the lack of formal training enables them to become far more technically skilled then if they were being trained.

 

[Pothas]

I agree, as I said ealier football as a way out of poverty is another reason.

 

[Cloete]

Which therefore makes my initial point remain the same.

I think the lack of formal training enables them to become far more technically skilled then if they were being trained.

Yeah and I'm sayign they wouldn't be

Who cares, the impotant thing is we've established why France have dominated the game, their youth + recruitment (Africa) systems. And not "totally" dominated it but you know what I mean.

 

[marc71178]

Or in fact not really dominated at all.

 

[steds]

Time for France to bow down to the new dominant force in football.

 

[Matteh]

I think you've mis-linked. That appears to be a Scottish player.

 

[steds]

European Championship Qualifying : Group B Table

			P	W	D	L	F	A      GD      PTS
[b]1 	Scotland 	3 	3 	0 	0 	9 	1 	8 	9[/b]
[I]2 	France 		3 	2 	0 	1 	6 	2 	4 	6
3 	Italy 		3 	1 	1 	1 	4 	4       0 	4[/I]
4 	Lithuania 	3 	1 	1 	1 	3 	3 	0 	4
5 	Georgia 	3 	1 	0 	2 	8 	6 	2 	3
6 	Ukraine 	2 	1 	0 	1 	3 	4      -1 	3
7 	Faroe Islands 	3 	0 	0 	3 	0      13     -13 	0

 

[Matteh]

Essentially, today's result makes an absolute mockery of this thread.