This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Best football player in the world.

J.S.

vienna95

er, no. cruijff ran the 70s.
and the point was, dutch football was the best in the world in the 70s.

hmm...cannot say he ran it in the 70's...of course it depends on what you mean my 'running things'. The way I see it, Maradona ran things in 86, by that definition the Dutch, nor Johan ran nothing.

As for the future being Orange, wellllll, I don't think so, ive heard it all before. The Dutch talk big, never actually win anything on the world stage, as the 70s proved. Also, with the 70s, its hard to claim the Dutch were the best. For instance, early 70s they were nowhere near the best (i.e. Brazil) then the lost two world cups, theeen after 78 the team was in decline (i.e. 82 they werent even there!).

Reply 61

Juwel

18

Holland and Spain are Europe's big footballing underachievers, anyone (without bias) can see that.

Reply 62

Bigcnee

OP

11

J.S.

hmm...cannot say he ran it in the 70's...of course it depends on what you mean my 'running things'. The way I see it, Maradona ran things in 86, by that definition the Dutch, nor Johan ran nothing.

As for the future being Orange, wellllll, I don't think so, ive heard it all before. The Dutch talk big, never actually win anything on the world stage, as the 70s proved. Also, with the 70s, its hard to claim the Dutch were the best. For instance, early 70s they were nowhere near the best (i.e. Brazil) then the lost two world cups, theeen after 78 the team was in decline (i.e. 82 they werent even there!).

I think you're wrong here. The best team often doesn't win the big prize. The Dutch in the late 70's revolutionised football, and few would argue that they were the best.
If you look at the Dutch youth (very good) and the current players, it is not hard to work out that they will play a prominent part in future international football.

Reply 63

Bigcnee

OP

11

ZJuwelH

Holland and Spain are Europe's big footballing underachievers, anyone (without bias) can see that.

True, but Holland are better than Spain, who haven't actually got a great team.

Reply 64

Juwel

18

Bigcnee

I think you're wrong here. The best team often doesn't win the big prize. The Dutch in the late 70's revolutionised football, and few would argue that they were the best.
If you look at the Dutch youth (very good) and the current players, it is not hard to work out that they will play a prominent part in future international football.

Not forgetting the importance of:

RUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUD!!!

Reply 65

Juwel

18

Bigcnee

True, but Holland are better than Spain, who haven't actually got a great team.

Spain never had a great team, just a mixture of individuals. Holland easily have the number on Spain in that respect, which makes their underacheiving more baffling. As for England, love them to bits but we are poor.
Portugal a "surprise package" for Euro 2004 in their own backyard?

Reply 66

J.S.

7

Bigcnee

I think you're wrong here. The best team often doesn't win the big prize. The Dutch in the late 70's revolutionised football, and few would argue that they were the best.
If you look at the Dutch youth (very good) and the current players, it is not hard to work out that they will play a prominent part in future international football.

I agree with prominent part, as has been the case with Dutch football post late 80s. They seem to be a 'very nearly' team though. You are right about the best not necessarily winning, perhaps in 74 they were the best, although after that i think it was steady, followed by rapid decline. Then were asleep untill 88, and then with that exception, they've been 'very nearly, not quite followed by the odd dire flop (i.e. 96, 2002).

I would be very cautious about looking at a youth side and concluding from there that they're going to be anything other than 'prominent' (you yourself have not done this, other people may). You can vaguely see where a countries footie is heading from the youth side, however, it's impossible to say with any great certainty that a team is to become the leading power. I don't think we can conclude from the youth set up that the Dutch are likely to have a better decade than the one that just gone by.

Reply 67

97morrob

Can i just say that raul does play for real madrid and therefore is the only reason why he is recognised as a good player
his scoring record is terrible

for the best player in the world just look at theiry henry and ruud van nistelrooy both have extremely good scoring records and are all round brilliant players

Reply 68

97morrob

Anna

henry is good,but yeh, raul is good aswell

i agree henry is the best and i support man.u

Reply 69

Eru Iluvatar

18

ZJuwelH

Holland and Spain are Europe's big footballing underachievers, anyone (without bias) can see that.

Yes, i totally agree.

Reply 70

Eru Iluvatar

18

ZJuwelH

Spain never had a great team, just a mixture of individuals. Holland easily have the number on Spain in that respect, which makes their underacheiving more baffling. As for England, love them to bits but we are poor.
Portugal a "surprise package" for Euro 2004 in their own backyard?

No, england are a quality side, honestly.
Look at the talent in the squad.
When the whole squad is fit, it is up there with the other great teams in the world, such as Brazil, Argentina, France, Italy etc.
I would honestly say that England have a good chance at Euro 2004.
They'd have a better chance with Rio in defence, but thats beside the point.
Portugal are a good side, and one of the favourites because they are on home soil.
And France, with their humiliating World cup have something to prove, so also could do really well.

But i say, go Latvia!!! Gotta be the favourites for the tournament :biggrin:

Reply 71

97morrob

armatillian

Depends wot ya judgin on – neither is best all round player – that’s probs nedved. But the first player id want in a team is raul – cos first n foremost u need sum1 who can finish n hes the most prolific finisher in the game.

who are you trying to kid
ruud is da best finisher in the game at the moment
clinical finishing against scotland
27 in 29 champs league ( no one has a better record )

Reply 72

saintuntilidie

97morrob

Can i just say that raul does play for real madrid and therefore is the only reason why he is recognised as a good player
his scoring record is terrible

are you havin a laugh?
Raul is the most prolific goal scorer ever in the champions league!

He soon will be the highest ever goal scorer to wear the white strip of real madrid- though will probably never match the quality of Di Stefano.

So to say his scoring record is terrible, shows a distinct lack of knowledge of the football world.