Best and Worst International Tournaments

[Mpache]

1 minute ago, Michael said:

You'd take Mexico all day long? I know you would, because you are bias. Senegal would have every chance of beating Mexico, you are talking as if it's a given that Mexico would win, which is utter rubbish.

Biased 

Anyone would know I absolutely hate Mexico's national team and have been accused of being biased against them and even "obsessed"

[Michael]

7 minutes ago, Inti Brian said:

You can't just look at quality on paper though. Senegal should be comfortably better than Mexico for example, and I'd take Mexico all day long as the winner of that. How about the total of 2 African sides who made it out of their group in the last world cup compared to the 4 from CONCACAF?

Africa has some banging teams on paper who are shocking on the pitch, and people will know I'm not talking out of my mind as I've been the biggest CONCACAF critic for the longest time. 

The quality of players on paper goes a long way in determining how good a side are. Obviously good management plays a key role as well, but they are both important. But even if sides are managed badly, if they have players that are much more superior to the opposition, they will invariably win.

[Mpache]

4 minutes ago, Michael said:

You are funny, Bolivia are very poor, while Paraguay and Venezuela aren't much better. I have watched Bolivia play several times and I would class them as poor internationally. They are only half decent when they play at home at high altitude and use the thin air as an advantage over their opponents.

Bolivia are shite, but Paraguay and Venezuela are miles better. It's not even close. Those 2 teams I'd fancy to give anyone a game. They are no mugs. Obviously not great but they have some very talented players. Bolivia on the other hand is shocking.

[Michael]

7 minutes ago, Inti Brian said:

We genuinely weren't bad in Russia and I don't get this mentality that we did. Put Denmark with any other seed 3 team and I would have been confident in going through. We played well, but Denmark is just about even if not slightly better and we were picked to lose. Despite that we dominated that game and just failed to put away our chances.

I agree we didn't create much against France but you said we stood no chance when we only lost 1-0 and outpossessed them pretty much all game? That's not what I would class as "no chance"

Next year justice was served as we reached the Copa America final, so enough with this bollocks please.

Peru aren't a bad side, they have several very decent players, but I can think of loads of European sides that are either on their level or better than them.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Inti Brian said:

We genuinely weren't bad in Russia and I don't get this mentality that we did. Put Denmark with any other seed 3 team and I would have been confident in going through. We played well, but Denmark is just about even if not slightly better and we were picked to lose. Despite that we dominated that game and just failed to put away our chances.

I agree we didn't create much against France but you said we stood no chance when we only lost 1-0 and outpossessed them pretty much all game? That's not what I would class as "no chance"

Next year justice was served as we reached the Copa America final, so enough with this bollocks please.

You were very confident of getting out the group before the world cup as well. Peru are a very average side. Maybe no chance was a bit harsh but you are still a very average side. You couldn't even win in new Zealand. And what are you on about 4 teams made it out the group from concacaf? Only Mexico got out their group as far as I can remember definitely not 4 teams

[Mpache]

Just now, Gunnersauraus said:

You were very confident of getting out the group before the world cup as well. Peru are a very average side. Maybe no chance was a bit harsh but you are still a very average side. You couldn't even win in new Zealand. And what are you on about 4 teams made it out the group from concacaf? Only Mexico got out their group as far as I can remember definitely not 4 teams

So much for the Copa America final then.

So much for knocking out Uruguay and Chile in the last Copa.

So much for knocking out Brazil in 2016

So much for ANOTHER semi-final in 2015.

Yeah, we are an "extremely average" side. All because we lost one game to Denmark. That will define our level forever.

And I said the last 2 World Cups. Mexico, Costa Rica and USA in 2014. Mexico in 2018. Where as only 2 African sides made it out in the last 2 world cups. Both in 2014 and both went out immediately after (although I liked Algeria)

[Mpache]

6 minutes ago, Michael said:

The quality of players on paper goes a long way in determining how good a side are. Obviously good management plays a key role as well, but they are both important. But even if sides are managed badly, if they have players that are much more superior to the opposition, they will invariably win.

I know, but get this, Senegal couldn't make it out of that group with a weaker on paper Japan and an underperforming Poland. Mexico did against two European sides including the world champion. They didn't make it to the last World Cup prior, and didn't do anything in AFCON until about last year while Mexico was winning every other Gold Cup. 

Everyone on here knows I hate Mexico. Even ask @Gunnersauraus who's accused me of even being "obsessed" in the past. So I'm not biased because I despise them but I can acknowledge where they actually sit in the football world.

[Guest]

You didn't say last 2 you said last world cup. Go back and read the post. And you are just picking the last two world cups to get the results you want.

You did well in the Copa America but like someone else said teams sometimes try out youth players in it. I don't believe you would beat a decent side in a world cup when the teams really care about it. Peru are maybe top 20 in the world at best

[Tommy]

19 minutes ago, Rucksackfranzose said:

Remembering that you thought Croatia would be worse than Peru before the last WC, your judgement might be not as good as you think.

 spot-on. Everyone with five working brain cells could have told you that Croatia is way ahead of Peru in terms of talent. 

[Mpache]

Just now, Gunnersauraus said:

You didn't say last 2 you said last world cup. Go back and read the post. And you are just picking the last two world cups to get the results you want.

You did well in the Copa America but like someone else said teams sometimes try out youth players in it. I don't believe you would beat a decent side in a world cup when the teams really care about it. Peru are maybe top 20 in the world at best

Ah I did, that was a typo then because I meant the last 2.

And as someone who's watched every Copa America since 2007, I can guarantee you that every team sent their best squad to the 2019 Copa America, so don't move the goalposts please. You're just looking for excuses now. Some people need to give us more credit than we have at the moment.

In fact the only example I can think of where a team didn't send their best team to the Copa in the last 10 years was Brazil in 2016 and it wasn't even a bad team that they sent. They did it because of the Olympic games. So while the whole "youth player" thing was true in the past, the last 10 years it's usually always been the best squads.

[Beelzebub]

Looking back at all the World Cups where it is being played matters a lot then most people think. 

Last two world cups played outside of Europe half of the European teams got knocked out in the first round, while in 2006 2018 it was almost a European affair.

[Mpache]

5 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

And you are just picking the last two world cups to get the results you want.

I mean if you want to look at the last World Cup, then we can.

CONCACAF 1

CAF 0

Try again next time.

[Mpache]

Just now, Azeem said:

Looking back at all the World Cups where it is being played matters a lot then most people think. 

Last two world cups played outside of Europe half of the European teams got knocked out in the first round, while in 2006 2018 it was almost a European affair.

I mean that's just called home advantage.

South America has only won 1 World Cup in Europe (1958) and Europe has only won one World Cup in all the America's (2014)

[Stan]

23 minutes ago, Inti Brian said:

You can't just look at quality on paper though. Senegal should be comfortably better than Mexico for example, and I'd take Mexico all day long as the winner of that. How about the total of 2 African sides who made it out of their group in the last world cup compared to the 4 from CONCACAF?

Africa has some banging teams on paper who are shocking on the pitch, and people will know I'm not talking out of my mind as I've been the biggest CONCACAF critic for the longest time. 

 

8 minutes ago, Inti Brian said:

I know, but get this, Senegal couldn't make it out of that group with a weaker on paper Japan and an underperforming Poland. Mexico did against two European sides including the world champion. They didn't make it to the last World Cup prior, and didn't do anything in AFCON until about last year while Mexico was winning every other Gold Cup. 

Everyone on here knows I hate Mexico. Even ask @Gunnersauraus who's accused me of even being "obsessed" in the past. So I'm not biased because I despise them but I can acknowledge where they actually sit in the football world.

 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Inti Brian said:

Ah I did, that was a typo then because I meant the last 2.

And as someone who's watched every Copa America since 2007, I can guarantee you that every team sent their best squad to the 2019 Copa America, so don't move the goalposts please. You're just looking for excuses now. Some people need to give us more credit than we have at the moment.

In fact the only example I can think of where a team didn't send their best team to the Copa in the last 10 years was Brazil in 2016 and it wasn't even a bad team that they sent. They did it because of the Olympic games. So while the whole "youth player" thing was true in the past, the last 10 years it's usually always been the best squads.

Ok fair enough but i still don't believe it is taken as seriously as European teams take the euros. Germany got religated in the nation's league doesn't mean they are a bad team and we are better because we got to the semis when we clearly took it more seriously

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Inti Brian said:

I mean if you want to look at the last World Cup, then we can.

CONCACAF 1

CAF 0

Try again next time.

Yeah Mexico. I said Mexico were the only decent side in concacaf. Panama qualified from concacaf so that proves how bad it is.

[Mpache]

2 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Yeah Mexico. I said Mexico were the only decent side in concacaf. Panama qualified from concacaf so that proves how bad it is.

You have heard me ramble on about how shite CONCACAF is the last 3 years mate, and I don't even entirely believe it's better than CAF as a whole, but Mexico at least is better on the field than any African side. I can guarantee you that.

[Guest]

Just now, Inti Brian said:

You have heard me ramble on about how shite CONCACAF is the last 3 years mate, and I don't even entirely believe it's better than CAF as a whole, but Mexico at least is better on the field than any African side. I can guarantee you that.

I agree they probably are. But you said concacaf was better on a whole which I don't believe

[Michael]

2 minutes ago, Inti Brian said:

I know, but get this, Senegal couldn't make it out of that group with a weaker on paper Japan and an underperforming Poland. Mexico did against two European sides including the world champion. They didn't make it to the last World Cup prior, and didn't do anything in AFCON until about last year while Mexico was winning every other Gold Cup. 

Everyone on here knows I hate Mexico. Even ask @Gunnersauraus who's accused me of even being "obsessed" in the past. So I'm not biased because I despise them but I can acknowledge where they actually sit in the football world.

Be clear about what happened. Germany completely underperformed because of terrible management. Yeah Mexico narrowly beat them, but Mexico got destroyed by Sweden 3-0. All Senegal's matches were close. They beat Poland 2-1, drew with Japan and narrowly lost to Colombia. I'd also say that Senegal weren't greatly managed as most African sides aren't. Managers often leave African teams because of many reasons, pay often being a big reason.

Just because Mexico got out of their group and Senegal didn't doesn't mean anything. At the end of the day Mexico got outclassed by Sweden, while Senegal were a real challenge for all their opponents.

As for qualifying for the World Cup, of course Senegal find it harder to qualify for the World Cup, there are many more tougher sides in Africa to compete with in order to qualify for the World Cup. However, Mexico have an easy route qualifying for the World Cup, their only serious opponents are the USA and Costa Rica(even they aren't really that great these days).

[Mpache]

Just now, Gunnersauraus said:

I agree they probably are. But you said concacaf was better on a whole which I don't believe

If I did say that then fair enough, but CAF is a lot worse than it should be. As I told Stan, I can't entirely pinpoint the problem either. Some of the managers are just as good as the players, and they are still shocking.

[Mpache]

1 minute ago, Michael said:

Just because Mexico got out of their group and Senegal didn't doesn't mean anything. 

I could say the same with Peru and several teams. But I still get tossed over because we lost to Denmark. See how it can work both ways?

And just for the record I don't think Mexico are great. I said that I believe Japan are better than them a while back and got lots of stick for it. I stand by that opinion but there is a fundamental issue with African football and I couldn't even tell you what it is. But when you watch the AFCON and watch them in the World Cups, they are way worse than they should be.

I think Drogba's Ivory Coast is a prime example. What a team that was, yet in 3 World Cups they didn't make it out of their group once.

Agree to disagree.

[Michael]

Just now, Inti Brian said:

If I did say that then fair enough, but CAF is a lot worse than it should be. As I told Stan, I can't entirely pinpoint the problem either. Some of the managers are just as good as the players, and they are still shocking.

The managers don't usually stay as managers of African teams for a long time. There are always usually issues with pay and the facilities and camps aren't always that great. To get the best out of any team, you need to manage them for a while and you have to have settled players who are up for the cause. Having players who are not paid on time and having below par facilities is not conducive to getting the best out of a team, that is pretty obvious.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Inti Brian said:

If I did say that then fair enough, but CAF is a lot worse than it should be. As I told Stan, I can't entirely pinpoint the problem either. Some of the managers are just as good as the players, and they are still shocking.

That ivory coast team a few years ago was the best African team I can remember. Had a tough group in 2006. Can't remember the tournaments after that. They should be better I agree but not sure they are massively underachieving they tend to get hard groups in the world cup.

[Michael]

1 minute ago, Inti Brian said:

I could say the same with Peru and several teams. But I still get tossed over because we lost to Denmark. See how it can work both ways?

And just for the record I don't think Mexico are great. I said that I believe Japan are better than them a while back and got lots of stick for it. I stand by that opinion but there is a fundamental issue with African football and I couldn't even tell you what it is. But when you watch the AFCON and watch them in the World Cups, they are way worse than they should be.

I think Drogba's Ivory Coast is a prime example. What a team that was, yet in 3 World Cups they didn't make it out of their group once.

Agree to disagree.

I never mentioned Denmark. Why are you talking about what others may think in our conversation? lol

[Mpache]

Just now, Michael said:

The managers don't usually stay as managers of African teams for a long time. There are always usually issues with pay and the facilities and camps aren't always that great. To get the best out of any team, you need to manage them for a while and you have to have settled players who are up for the cause. Having players who are not paid on time and having below par facilities is not conducive to getting the best out of a team, that is pretty obvious.

That could be a clue.

Just now, Gunnersauraus said:

That ivory coast team a few years ago was the best African team I can remember. Had a tough group in 2006. Can't remember the tournaments after that. They should be better I agree but not sure they are massively underachieving they tend to get hard groups in the world cup.

In 2010 they had a pretty tough group too with Portugal and Brazil. 2014 they had no excuse. Greece, Colombia and Japan. 

But to be frank, a side that good on paper should have been able to give the likes of Portugal, Brazil and Colombia a proper game. Which you could argue they might have in fairness.