Most talented teams which failed to get past the first round at WC or Euro

[argentine soccer fan]

We all remember what happened at WC 02 in Japan/Korea. Before the tournament started many picked defending champion France and Argentina as favourites to win, and talented Portugal was also the 'dark horse' choice of some experts. But all three failed to make it past the first round.

I thought we could discuss these teams, and also go back through the history of the game and remember other talented teams which were also expected to do well at the time, and which had loads of talent in their squad, but which also failed to even make the second round. Maybe we can analize why these teams failed and find some common denominators. I suspect arrogance and internal conflicts will figure high. (although there are examples of great teams which had those problems and overcame them to find success.) Possibly we will see lack of good coaching, or of a strong captain as factors. But maybe injuries, players not being at their top level, and bad luck can also be factors. Perhaps some of you remember specific problems about a particular 'failure' team which you followed, and which most of us are not aware of.

Also we can look back and discuss which team we think was the biggest failure of all time, at either WC or Euro, in terms of talent relative to performance. I want to limit it to one specific tournament, so just because the same players found success at other tournaments at other times doesn't get them off the hook.

[Forza Badger]

France really surprised me. After WC'98 and Euro'00, there were really high hopes for the French team. I remember being truly dumbfounded when to not see them progress past the first round.

[lanman]

From World Cups two spring to mind (ther than 2002).

England in 1950 - the squad contained 3 all time greats (Matthews, Finney and Wright) and a number of other outstanding players (Mannion, Mortenson, Milburn, Ramsey, Dickenson). The selection panel never picked a full strength side and came unstuck against the USA and Spain.

Brazil 1966 - the treatment of Pele is well documented but they did finish behind two very good sides (Portugal and Hungary).

From the European Championships the most obvious is England in 1988. They had coasted through the qualifying group unbeaten (including an amazing 4-1 win away to a very good Yugoslavia) and had a number of players coming off outstanding seasons (Beardsley and Barnes in particular were in fine form), boasted the top scorer from the last World Cup (Lineker) and had Robson fully fit for the first time in years. Come the tournament they lost all three games. After losing to Ireland the players were clearly down and many said they had played too many games during the season (neglecting to mention most of the Irish players had played the same).

[argentine soccer fan]

The play of France in 2002 has to be one of the most uninspired performance by a 'supertalented' team. Obviously they had injuries, including Zidane, but it is amazing that they didn't even score a goal in three matches.

As far as England in 50, that is far back in time, and I don't know much about that team. They had some legendary players in that squad, like Matthews and Finney and others, as Ianman mentioned. Everyone remembers them losing to the US, but they also came back to lose to Spain, proving it wasn't just a fluke. Not knowing the details of the matches, one has to wonder how seriously the English took the World Cup at the time. I would guess they probably travelled to Brazil mostly looking to have a good time, and not ready for serious football.

As far as Brazil in 66, that was their only failure in between three titles, so it really stands out. I think a lot had to do with the refs not protecting the talented players. But also I think the team tactically depended too much on Pele, much more than (obviously) their 62 team, and also than their 70 team. Perhaps that was their downfall, as Pele got injured and they couldn't respond against top level competition in their group.

I didn't remember about England 88 doing so bad and losing to Ireland. I remember the tought test which England (probably with most of the same players) provided for Maradona's Argentina two years earlier in Mexico, and I remember what it took to beat them. :D

I am thinking of a team which I remember from a while back that I believe rivals France 02 in terms of great talent and uninspiring play. But I want to google them to make sure I get my facts right before I bring them up.

[bora bora]

in my opinion it is amazing that portugal didnt get past the 1st round of WC2002 even though the team has been playing together for over 10 years!

france is a diferet story, is players are injured, it is a stressful time for the team, but they could have at least scored a goal!

[womble]

Whilst it was surprising that the French underachieved in 2002 you have to remember that the side was also undergoing a transition at the time. Key players like Blanc, Desailly, Djorkaeff, Petit, Thuram, Deschamps and Lixarazu had either retired or were on their way out. That said, they should still have had enough talent to put up a better show than they did.

The Scottish team of the 70's were classic underachievers. They had some great players, especially in '78 but never progressed beyond the opening stages for some reason.

[comme]

WC 2002- Argentina and France
No real explanation needed- France really missed Pires (more than Zidane IMHO) while Argentina lost the crunch game with England.


WC 98- Spain
This was a really strong squad. Real Madrid were the European Champions and along with Barca provided the bulk. Hierro, Raul, Luis Enrique, Nadal, Morientes, Sergi, Ferrer were all quality players. Zubizerreta gifted one goal to Nigeria who were excellent, despite destroying Bulgaria it just wasn't enough.


WC 94- Colombia
Widely tipped before the tournament as possible champions Colombia were drawn in a relatively easy group alongside the USA, Romania and Switzerland. They had some superb players as well including Valderamma, Rincon and Asprilla but lost their first two games and went home in disgrace. The murder of Escobar appalled the whole world.

WC 90- USSR
The European Championship finalists were considered potential winners in some quarters. They started with Dasaev but he was absent for the second two games (anyone remember why?) and despite others including Kuznetsov, Shalimov and Dobrivolsky they crashed out. They only really got going in the last game, thrashing Cameroon 4-0.

WC 82- Scotland
This was an excellent team containing such stars as Dalglish, Souness, Strachan and Hansen but after beating New Zealand they lost to Brasil and drew with the USSR. Ultimately they were pretty ulucky to be drawn with two excellent teams.


WC 78- France
This team had the likes of Platini, Bossis, Tresor, Battiston and Rocheteau. A really quality line up, but they were drawn in a group with Italy and Argentina and someone had to be disappointed.


WC 74- Italy
Arguably the strongest line-up of all with Zoff, Bugnich, Facchetti, Rivera, Mazzola and Riva all included. Again they were unlucky with the draw facing Poland and Argentina.

WC 66- Brazil
One of the best squads Brazil have ever produced. The disgraceful tactics of their opponents crocked the world's best player. Somehow Garrincha, Dj. Santos, Bellini, Tostao, Jairzinho couldn't cope without him.

EC 2004- Italy
A very good squad which didn't lose a single game, but still went out. There were some suggestions of a Scandinavian conspiracy, but they seem fanciful.

EC 2000- Germany
Not a very good team, but when was the last time Germany were so bad?

EC 96- Italy- The WC runners up brought basically the same squad but lost the plot. Saachi changed half the team against the Czechs and paid the price.

EC 92- England and France
Despite Graham Taylor's advice to sit back and watch England win it they were piss poor, and only scored one goal. Substituting Smith for Lineker was suicide.
France were also one of the favourites but despite having Papin, Cantona, Amoros, Blanc and Deschamps they crashed out as they lost to the Danes.

EC 88- Spain
Good team with Zubizaretta, Camacho, Gordillo, Michel and Butragueno but they couldn't match Italy or W Germany. No disgrace.

Ec 84- W Germany
Another excellent team with most of the WC 82 and 86 finalists including K-H Forster, Briegel, Mattheus, Brehme, Allofs, Voller, Rummenigge. The loss to Spain cost them a place in the semis.

[Cassano]

Easy question-Italy Euro 2004. Many tipped them to win the whole thing.

[argentine soccer fan]

WC 74- Italy
Arguably the strongest line-up of all with Zoff, Bugnich, Facchetti, Rivera, Mazzola and Riva all included. Again they were unlucky with the draw facing Poland and Argentina.



That was the team I was thinking of. It was a great time for football. People remember 74 for Beckembauer's West Germany, Cryuff's Holland and also the surprising Poland, but few remember that before the tournament began Italy was considered to be one of the big favorites to win the title.

This has to be one of Italy's most talented team ever, with the 'Bambino d'Oro' Gianni Rivera along with Sandro Mazzola in midfield, and some other veterans from the team which reached the finals in 1970, like the great Riva on attack. In addition, they had some young talent to blend in with the veterans, like Causio, Benetti and Capello. Plus Giorgio Chinaglia, who later went to play to the USA. American soccer fans may remember him as the leading scorer in the old NASL.

The defense was also outstanding, led by Fachetti and Burgnich, and of course goalkeeper Dino Zoff, one of the all-time best, was at the top of his game.

Italy came into the cup boasting a winning streak of over two years in international competition, and Zoff had a then record unbeaten streak on goal of over 1000 minutes.

They began against Concacaf 'minnow' Haiti, and Zoff promptly lost his unbeaten streak as they fell behind. They came back to win, but struggled to beat a side which later gave up seven goals to Poland. Then they were lucky to get a 1-1 draw against Argentina, managing to tie the score on an own-goal by Perfumo. (while getting the worst of an Argentine team which didn't show much during the rest of the tournament, later losing to Holland 4-0).

Italy went into the final match needing only a draw to advance, but they were never in the game and bowed out by losing meekly to Poland 2-1, only scoring a goal in the final moments to make the score respectable.

That squad would be my pick for the all time most talented team which not only failed to advance but also played the most uninspired football at a major tournament. They didn't have any injuries as far as I'm aware off, but they never showed any signs of a fighting spirit. (I remember that Italian team very well because they were on the same group with Argentina and so as kids we followed their matches closely. It was the first time that WC matches were shown live on TV in Argentina.)

Of course, Italy has had their share of spectacular failures as well as successes at the WC. The 62 team failed in Chile, and in 66 they 'only' needed to beat North Korea to advance and everybody knows what happened to them. But I think their 74 team was probably their most talented, with the possible exception of their championship side of 82, and that is why I think it was their biggest failure.

[unclesox]

The Scottish team of the 70's were classic underachievers. They had some great players, especially in '78 but never progressed beyond the opening stages for some reason.
Not just the 70s. From 74 to 90 - five consecutive World Cups in all - they failed to get out of the first round. :eek:
The '74 squad is the answer to an intersting trivia question: Name the only side to go unbeaten in the '74 World Cup.
The '86 team needed to beat Uruguay to advance from Round 1, and when Batista was red carded after 40 seconds, it seemed a matter of time before the Scots scored. Alas, they couldn't break the ten men.

[argentine soccer fan]

The '86 team needed to beat Uruguay to advance from Round 1, and when Batista was red carded after 40 seconds, it seemed a matter of time before the Scots scored. Alas, they couldn't break the ten men.

Not to mention that they couldn't break a team which had given up six to Denmark in the previous match.

[condor11]

the 1982 peruvian team was supposed to be better that the 70 and 78 teams(both made the top 8)

they qualified ahead of uruguay which had earlier won "el mundialito" a mini tourney of past world champs
http://www.rdasilva.demon.co.uk/football/other/mnd1981.html

they had in julio cesar uribe their new cubillas
as well as the returning midfield trio of 78 cueto, velazques and cubillas

end result

2 draws against cameroon(0-0) and italy(1-1)

and a trashing at the feet of poland (which remainded people of the78 debacle)

[Excape Goat]

.

EC 92- France

France were also one of the favourites but despite having Papin, Cantona, Amoros, Blanc and Deschamps they crashed out as they lost to the Danes.



I believed the French also went undefated for 2 years in a row. They might have lose a game or two before the tournament, but nevertheless, their record was extraordinary going into the Finals.

I guessed most of the teams already mentioned by someone else. I am going to add Belgium at Euro 2000 to the list. Being the host, it was shameful not to advance to the other round. I do not think they are the most talented, but deserved a mention.

[womble]

Not just the 70s. From 74 to 90 - five consecutive World Cups in all - they failed to get out of the first round. :eek:
The '74 squad is the answer to an intersting trivia question: Name the only side to go unbeaten in the '74 World Cup.
The '86 team needed to beat Uruguay to advance from Round 1, and when Batista was red carded after 40 seconds, it seemed a matter of time before the Scots scored. Alas, they couldn't break the ten men.
I think there was less expectation for the Scottish team in the 80's than the 70's. I was young in '78 (honest) but I still remember there being a real air of optimism that Scotland would do well. Souness, Dalglish, Jordan, McQueen, Miller, Gemmill were all at their peak. When they got spanked in the 80's nobody seemed particularly surprised.

Good trivia question that, I'll have to try it out down the pub.

[unclesox]

I think there was less expectation for the Scottish team in the 80's than the 70's. I was young in '78 (honest) but I still remember there being a real air of optimism that Scotland would do well. Souness, Dalglish, Jordan, McQueen, Miller, Gemmill were all at their peak. When they got spanked in the 80's nobody seemed particularly surprised.
Yes, I agree. The '78 squad was probably the one that displayed the most promise going into the finals, thus providing the biggest disappointment in the finals themselves.
The '82 and '86 squads were each drawn into what were considered to be at the time the strongest first-round groups (or "Groups of Death" as they called them).
I can still see in my mind Willie Miller and Alan Hanson colliding into each other against the USSR. :eek: :(

[Gregoriak]

I believed the French also went undefated for 2 years in a row. They might have lose a game or two before the tournament, but nevertheless, their record was extraordinary going into the Finals.

France remained undefeated from 29 April 1989 to 20 November 1991. 19 games in all. They lost against Scotland in Glasgow on 8 March 1989 (0-2) and then again against England in London on 19 February 1992 (0-2). Of those 19 unbeated games in between, they won 16.

[Gregoriak]

Another good team that didn`t manage to get out of the group stages was the CSSR in 1958 with players like Masopust, Popluhar, Novak, Borovicka and Pluskal. They beat Argentina 6-1, but two defeats against Nothern Ireland (one from a play-off to determine second place) and a draw against West Germany sealed their fate.