Worst W/C of the post-Pele era

[Auriaprottu]

As before, this isn't a new topic, but I'm looking for some input from BS members to support or disprove an idea I've been tossing around in my head. Please cosider excitement and quality as the main criteria for your choices. I'll vote later to preserve my vote's anonymity. Thanks in advance.

EDIT: Mods, if this thread belongs elsewhere, please move its twin along with it.

[Mario]

hmmmmmm excitement and quality?

USA '94, Brazil had no cohesion at all and still won the title, Taffarel, an average GK received just a few goals.

[comme]

I thought 2002 was pretty boring. With the elimination of so many of the top teams, so much excitement went. The only really good game was Brazil-Costa Rica.

[Bauser]

2002's dreadful knock-out stage makes it the worst, but 1990 is close second.

[superdave]

2002 had the best group play, because of all of the upsets, and a reasonable number of goals. But I agree, the knockout stage wasn't so great.

1998 was the inverse, coincidentally.

[Pele1970]

Sadly for me, I only watched 1990 and 2002 - the worst WCs.
86- I watched some games,
82- I was too young to understand much although I watched,
94- had an early-morning job and went to bed early, 98-worked far from the city, didn't have TV or friends.
98 and 02 - I watched some games 2, 3 times.

[Roehl Sybing]

The top two vote getters in this poll are the World Cups where the US first returned to the finals after forty years of absence, and where the US went to the quarterfinals.

Just saying that this is what some of you have chosen, and I can't help but think why. :)

[Auriaprottu]

Originally posted by Roehl Sybing
The top two vote getters in this poll are the World Cups where the US first returned to the finals after forty years of absence, and where the US went to the quarterfinals.

Just saying that this is what some of you have chosen, and I can't help but think why. :)

I never had that in mind (although others may have), but my next thread here will explain the reason for both polls.

I do wish more posters had voted, tho.

[Excape Goat]

My vote goes to 1990....

Not in order....

1) Brazil.... traditionally the most entertaining team decided to play safety soccer.

2) Italy.... traditionally the most defensive soccer decided to play more defensive.

3) Argentina.... one man team, but Maradona is no longer exciting liked 4 years before. They played to survive.

4) Holland.... Van basten, Gulit failed to shine. The whole team played poorly, except for one game.

5) England.... Gazza was exciting, but the team did not play well until semi-final.

6) West Germany.... played extremely well in the 1st round, but backed to the usual boring self after the match against Holland.

7) France..... no show.

8) Vialli, Van Basten and Gulit failed to shine.

9) Low scoring game.

[Bauser]

Excape Goat summed it up very well. I might add a couple of more reasons to Italia 90s low status:

10) The Soviets were a shadow of the team they were in the 1980s.

11) The game was screaming for an introduction of the backpass rule. An enormous amount of playing time was wasted while the goalkeeper and nearest defender passed the ball between themselves. The goalkeeper had no rush getting the ball in play either.

[Germanshepherd]

Originally posted by Excape Goat
6) West Germany.... played extremely well in the 1st round, but backed to the usual boring self after the match against Holland.

Usual boring.... Germany is usually known for attacking and highscoring football. Did you know that Germany has scored almost as many goals as Brazil in World-Cup history. The last years German football was boring and of low quality but that is not a usual thing regarding history.

[Bauser]

Originally posted by Germanshepherd
Usual boring.... Germany is usually known for attacking and highscoring football. Did you know that Germany has scored almost as many goals as Brazil in World-Cup history. The last years German football was boring and of low quality but that is not a usual thing regarding history.
Good point.

Germany has scored 2.07 goals per World Cup game in average (1930-02).

Numbers for other countries with long WC traditions:

Brazil: 2.20
Italy: 1.57
Argentina: 1.70
England: 1.36(!)
France: 1.95
Russia: 1.73
Uruguay: 1.63
Spain: 1.58
Holland: 1.75
Yugoslavia: 1.62
Sweden: 1.69

But the best of all is.....

HUNGARY: 87 goals in 32 matches (2.72)

Even if we shave off 8 goals from their 10-1 thrashing of El Salvador they get a solid 2.47. Impressive!

[Mario]

Originally posted by Bauser




Even if we shave off 8 goals from their 10-1 thrashing of El Salvador they get a solid 2.47. Impressive!

you like to remember that to me dont you? :(

[argentine soccer fan]

Excuse me, can you repeat again that result of the Hungary-El Salvador match?

:D

[argentine soccer fan]

Originally posted by Excape Goat
My vote goes to 1990....

Not in order....

1) Brazil.... traditionally the most entertaining team decided to play safety soccer.

2) Italy.... traditionally the most defensive soccer decided to play more defensive.

3) Argentina.... one man team, but Maradona is no longer exciting liked 4 years before. They played to survive.

4) Holland.... Van basten, Gulit failed to shine. The whole team played poorly, except for one game.

5) England.... Gazza was exciting, but the team did not play well until semi-final.

6) West Germany.... played extremely well in the 1st round, but backed to the usual boring self after the match against Holland.

7) France..... no show.

8) Vialli, Van Basten and Gulit failed to shine.

9) Low scoring game.

I can only think of one point to counter your argument:

1) The exciting, care free play of Cameroon, signalling the emergence of African football.

I guess in balance you are right. 1990 sucked. And it is fitting that the championship was decided by a bogus penalty.

[PumaBear]

Although 90 and 94 were not very good, the vote definitely goes to 2002. The fact that many stars arrived hurt, that you had to wake up in the wee hours of the morning, that after the first round the level of play was abysmal and the very poor offiiating, made Japorea the worst cup ever... by far. I hated it.

[Mario]

you're really evil asf!




Originally posted by PumaBear
that you had to wake up in the wee hours of the morning...

now think about all those asians waking up at the same wee hours when the WC is hosted in Europe or America!?

[Mario]

when exactly are you planning to tell us about your intentions with this poll Auriaprottu?

[Auriaprottu]

Originally posted by Mario
when exactly are you planning to tell us about your intentions with this poll Auriaprottu?

Old news, friend... I did so awhile back. Check out the "Is a World Cup less excitng when the 'cream' rises to the top?" thread in this forum.

[Excape Goat]

I have one more to add on WC 1990.

1) Low attendence in the stadium..... some of the games involving the weaker teams played in front of half empty stadium.