Not really. At the World Cup, as well as the best European teams, you have the South American teams, and African teams are starting to get better. There are no bad teams at a World Cup. However, you still get mediocre teams like Ukraine, Ireland and Sweden at Euros. You also have to go through more teams to get that far in a World Cup.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1990_FIFA_ ... kout_stage

1990 World Cup: Republic of Ireland reached the quarter finals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_FIFA_ ... kout_stage

1994 World Cup: Sweden reached the semi-finals, Republic of Ireland reached the last 16.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_FIFA_World_Cup

2002 World Cup: Republic of Ireland and Sweden reached the last 16

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_FIFA_World_Cup

2006 World Cup: Sweden reached the last 16, Ukraine reached the quarter finals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_t ... tournament

According to stats Sweden are 10th in terms of performance (games played/wins/draws/losses/goals for & against).


As for Brazil winning 2 World Cups in a row, Italy did that before them (1934 & 1938). Spain may not have won 2 World Cups in a row but they have won 3 tournements in a row which no other team has done (Argentina & Uruguay won the Copa America between them in the years 1955 - 1959).

Are you kidding? At the last cup alone Nigeria, Algeria, North Korea, Honduras, Cameroon, New Zeland (though they did put up a good fight, but lost their own regional cup recently to Fiji!)... Even in terms of qualifying European teams there were the likes of Slovenia, Switzerland and Serbia none of who managed to qualify for the Euros.

Sweden and Ireland are ranked higher than any Oceanic or Asian teams and only bested by the Ivory Coast in African teams. Ukraine are definitely on the up too, but then judging a competition by one of it's hosts is a bit harsh anyway, certainly not much worse a team than South Africa?

There is far more quality to the teams in a Euro than a world cup, at least in the group stages.

So a team doesn't qualify so you say they suck? That's now how it works. FIFA's ranking system is so messed up that they get the seedings wrong and you'll get really weird seeds or strong teams in the same group. Just look at group A for the World Cup qualifiers. You have Belgium as the third seed, but they're ranked second lowest in the group, whereas Wales are ranked third highest but are the 6th seed.

Also, keep in mind that there are less spaces that there are less European spots in the World Cup than the Euros.



Are you seriously using FIFA's ranking as an argument? That ranking had England as 6th before the Euros, and they won't even drop out the top 10 with the way it works after it, and Netherlands couldn't even get a single point. You also seem to be forgetting Ghana did pretty well and only went out because Uruguay cheated.

You also forgot Japan in your little "all Asian teams suck" generalisation.


No there isn't.



To summarise, your argument hinges on FIFA's rankings which have proven to be incredibly flawed. Those rankings mean shit if you look beyond them and look at actual performances. Score lines don't tell you anything, and neither do rankings.


Are you making a point or just throwing Wikipedia at me?

I apologise that the systems and evidence supplied by myself and mangaman were inadequate. I fail to see anything much at all backing up your arguments however. FIFA rankings, match results and tournament positions seem like a better argument than 'I like these teams but not these ones', however flawed they are as systems of judgment.

I don't think I said anyone's teams sucked? That said even Japan are pretty average...

Teams being good 10-20 years ago doesn't mean they're any good now. Ireland in 1990? Come on. How many of the players or managers are still the same?

Scotland once qualified for euro 96 and the World cup in 98

But didn't you say Brazil winning 2 World Cups in a row (in 1958 & 1962) was better than Spain winning the last 2 Euros and the World Cup which was in between?

No I didn't, and I don't see what relevance that has to the point I was making. I don't really want to get into arguing on Maxon's behalf, but his point was surely that he considers the Ukraine, Ireland and Sweden teams of the present day to be mediocre, not the Ukraine, Ireland and Sweden teams of five, ten or twenty years ago.

Sorry for mixing you and Maxon up - it wasn't intentional. I still think my point is valid though. If he doesn't think teams being good 10-15 years ago means anything then neither does Brazil being good 50-60 years ago (when they won back to back World Cups). Their current form isn't great - they have lost at the quarter final stage of the last 2 World Cups (getting knocked out by France and Netherlands) while they got knocked out at the quarter final stage of the 2011 Copa America by Paraguay.

So, to put it in a slightly less confusing way, what you mean is you don't think the current Brazil team is all that great?

In fairness just because Ireland, Sweden and Ukraine are "mediocre" doesn't mean they don't put on a good game.

Hell, I had more fun watching France play Ukraine than Italy play England. Don't get me wrong but even two - nil up, right up to the last minute, the pressure Ukraine were putting on France was apparent, there were some cracking attempts made at a goal or two regardless of how the game had progressed.

I think Ukraine played a really good tournament. Both them and Sweden were unlucky not to get through. Wouldn't be entirely surprised if either of them had gone on to put up a better quarter final fight than England or France did.

Well, now that the Euros are over it's back to club football. There's been quite the managerial merry-go-round down south, with AVB at Spurs the latest appointment, and of course the transfer window is already in full flow: Kagawa to United, Sigurdsson to Spurs, Podolski and Giroud to Arsenal (good signings, hopefully they finally win it this year).

What's everyone hoping for from their teams this year? Where do you hope you'll finish in the league? Where do you think you'll finish? Will you win any trophies? What players does your team need/want to sign?

I'm predicting an easy domestic season for Celtic. Sevco have today officially been rejected a place in the SPL so what little challenge they may have made is gone now. In all honesty I hope to see them not even get into the 3rd division, this whole thing is a disgrace and the structure of football up here needs stripped top to bottom, the current SFA should all see their heads rolling for the way they've behaved. Focussing back on my team though, I'm hoping we can get to the Champion's League group stage and have a decent go at Europe again as it's been a while. Plenty of signings needed to improve the team most notable at least 2 good centre halves, some cover on the wings and a target man centre forward.

As for my other team, Arsenal, think they can make a challenge at the title again with the signings so far and if they add a couple more (without losing anyone big), there's a lot of deadwood to be shipped out though. At the very least I think this is the year the barren run ends and we'll win something.

Wooden spoon? The impression I have of Arsenal & Wenger is that as long as they qualify for the following seasons CL they are happy - any time they look like they might win the PL they fall away and if it looks like they might miss on out on the CL they improve their performances.