Tips for Euro 2008

[FIXXXER]

I hate to follow the odds, but I'd have to take the Germans here. I think Klinnsman did a tremendous job during '06 & I think they were one of the more attractive teams of the World Cup. Even with his departure, I think they have continued to build upon that. I also think neither Austria or Switzerland advance to the round of 16 and you will see both countries flooded with German supporters.

I haven't followed the Dutch really much in the past 2 years. Will they field a strong team? They are placed in a tough group (someone stated it was the toughest 4 team group ever assembled, in any competition), but I do not see the French doing well, although I see Ribery making me eat those words.

The Czechs would have been my other leading contender, but the loss of Rosicky destroys their chances. Spain looks incredible on paper, but haven't they always??

[master13]

I can't see a team beating Germany this summer. I know I sound arrogant and I'm sorry for that, but that's how I feel. I know there's plenty of talent in other teams but considering the last couple of years, germans have been superior. Just my opinion.

[Lusankya]

Well you're from Albania, so you don't know the typical German feelings, like exaggerated pessimism.

[johan neeskens]

I guess winning something 10 years ago is better than winning something 20 years ago. But don't get me wrong, even though I am German I don't have anything against the Dutch team whatsoever. I would hate to lose against England and nowadays I would love to see us beat Italy but I don't harbour any special dislike/thoughts of rivalry against the Dutch team.

I also didn't say anything about the current squad, I made and overall comment on the performances of the last 20 years, not on the new team. Like I said, maybe you will prove history wrong. And can you blame me for having very high expectations of the final/win ratio for a good team? For us not winning a tournament for more than ten years now is getting close to unaccaptable. ;)

I just don't get how the Germans are excused for not winning a single game in eight years at the two most recent Euros because 'they had a weak generation of footballers' whereas by contrast the Dutch who reached the semi-finals of the two most recent Euros and never failed to get out of the group stage of the past five Euros are still considered by some as bottlers - I mean, who is more likely to be a consistent football nation, considering the number of active footballers in each country and considering the strength of the domestic league in each country? Where does this ridiculous set of standards re: the Dutch come from? I've wondered about this on these boards for years and I've yet to receive an answer.

Anyway all I ask for is for an honest assessment of THIS Holland squad. Just like the Germans who I'm sure don't want this Germany squad to be analysed on the basis of the two most recent European championships.

[96Squig]

I really hopeOranje to make it out of the group fase, but I honestly don't know what to expect concerning Italy and France.
That said, Germany seemed to be on a stroll recently, and seeing that we as usual have a quite easy path it is likely that we'll make it to Vienna. The Netherlands may be equally strong, but they just have a tougher road ahead, we'll see.
Germany vs Holland would be a nice final for sure though.

[gold.field]

If that's bottling then you must think very highly of the Dutch national team - so only what, three wins out of five is good enough? Also the last time Germany won a game at the Euros was in 1996. And you're calling the Dutch bottlers compared to them?

The problem is there's all these people with opinions about the Dutch NT while they barely know the squad. It's opinions based on the past, on prejudice and on urban myths, not on actual analysis of the actual squad. If you had actually watched Holland play in the past two Dutch qualifying campaigns, for example, you'd come to the conclusion that this generation is the opposite of bottlers as well as, ironically, the opposite of an excellent team. I.e. they've played crap football yet still managed to continue to win. So by all means criticise Dutch football, god knows we do plenty of that on the Dutch board, but try to stick to actual facts and analysis.
A lot of dutch stars play abroaod so that's not necessarily true. Talentwise I would trade the dutch WC2006 squad against "our" german team in a heartbeat (ok, there were other circumstances, injuries, general douchebaggery (Seedorf absent), but still...).

People may overrate guys like Heitinga or Huntelaar, but those guys are not why the Netherlands are rated so high. It's the guys that play at Real, Barca, Chelsea etc.

[squidward123]

A lot of dutch stars play abroaod so that's not necessarily true. Talentwise I would trade the dutch WC2006 squad against "our" german team in a heartbeat (ok, there were other circumstances, injuries, general douchebaggery (Seedorf absent), but still...).

People may overrate guys like Heitinga or Huntelaar, but those guys are not why the Netherlands are rated so high. It's the guys that play at Real, Barca, Chelsea etc.

In general - I still don't understand comments like this. So JUST because a player plays for a bigger club, he IS more talented? That's so wrong for me.


And with regards to your comment - that's not to even mention the discrepancy in results and performance between holland and germany in wc06. The performance and results of the players in the context of the national teams in other words. I am actually not even talking about or judging the dutch players here. I am just asking why the germany play and results of 06 and since is not good enough.

[nekkibasara]

I just don't get how the Germans are excused for not winning a single game in eight years at the two most recent Euros because 'they had a weak generation of footballers'

This period generally considered the biggest disaster in the history of German football. If we do not reach the semifinal of any tournament, we are considered to have "bottled it". I'm not really sure why you think we get a pass for a bad generation.

[Lusankya]

Well Germany had two very weak EUROs but 1994 and 1998 they had two very weak World Cups too. But the following WCs weren't that bad so why should the upcoming EURO become a disaster?

[squidward123]

JN, it's just that germany had 3-4 decades of consistent success; so 8 years isn't going to make a big dent in people's impressions, particularly because there was a WC final and a WC semifinal in those years.

People do not seem to seperate the euros and the WCs, especially since Germany had over the decades done equally well in them.

[Yggdrasil]

I just don't get how the Germans are excused for not winning a single game in eight years at the two most recent Euros because 'they had a weak generation of footballers' whereas by contrast the Dutch who reached the semi-finals of the two most recent Euros and never failed to get out of the group stage of the past five Euros are still considered by some as bottlers -
You don't understand that because many times your NT had the potential to win it all and they didn't. I don't know whether it is called bottling but not living up to one's potential is underachieving.

Also while we have a rivalry and obviously we want you to lose :) still many German fans admired the Dutch style of football for many years in the past. Not so much during the last WC though. But many Bundesliga clubs have Dutch players and coaches and German TV channels always report about Dutch qualification games. Claiming we know nothing of Dutch football and players is just nonsense.

I mean, who is more likely to be a consistent football nation, considering the number of active footballers in each country and considering the strength of the domestic league in each country? Where does this ridiculous set of standards re: the Dutch come from? I've wondered about this on these boards for years and I've yet to receive an answer.
This is because you can make up all kinds of stats which "prove" this or that. In the end what counts are titles. Germany has 3 WC and 3 EC titles and Holland only one EC and no WC title.

Also we know that we sucked in 2000 and also in 2004 although you were still not able to beat us in 2004 which again I consider a case of underachieving.

I hope I don't have to eat my words. :)

[+Gooner+]

No one said we got away with playing like a shower of shit in 2000 and 2004. The squad was crap, the performances were crap and no one, especially not the Germans themselves expected those teams to achieve anything. That was not bottling or underachieving, it was expected and deserved failure. That is the difference I was referring to.

[Yggdrasil]

No one said we got away with playing like a shower of shit in 2000 and 2004. The squad was crap, the performances were crap and no one, especially not the Germans themselves expected those teams to achieve anything. That was not bottling or underachieving, it was expected and deserved failure. That is the difference I was referring to.
I consider the years from about 1998 to 2001 as the worst we ever had.

In 2004 the squad was actually not that bad anymore. By early 2004 Völler had already brought in many younger players who are part of the core of the team now like Frings, Klose, Lahm, Schweinsteiger, Podolski or Borowski. The problem was that at the same time he kept starting players like Hamann, Wörns, Nowotny or Bobic who were past their prime long ago. Well, also he never had a clue about tactics :).

Anyway so while I didn't expect us to make it out of the group of death in 2004 when the Czechs were on their prime I expected us to win at least against Latvia.

[squidward123]

I consider the years from about 1998 to 2001 as the worst we ever had.

In 2004 the squad was actually not that bad anymore. By early 2004 Völler had already brought in many younger players who are part of the core of the team now like Frings, Klose, Lahm, Schweinsteiger, Podolski or Borowski. The problem was that at the same time he kept starting players like Hamann, Wörns, Nowotny or Bobic who were past their prime long ago. Well, also he never had a clue about tactics :).

Anyway so while I didn't expect us to make it out of the group of death in 2004 when the Czechs were on their prime I expected us to win at least against Latvia.

YUP, 1998-2001 was the worst probably for 40 years!

I agree with you about 04 as well.

I thought we might make it out of the group when we went 1-0 up against the czech republic........

And we had played a good game against holland but the late equaliser...

[johan neeskens]

You don't understand that because many times your NT had the potential to win it all and they didn't. I don't know whether it is called bottling but not living up to one's potential is underachieving.


See this is what I'm disputing. Do you seriously believe that over the past five European championships, we had the potential to win it every single time? I'm sorry but I just find that bizarre.

[johan neeskens]

No one said we got away with playing like a shower of shit in 2000 and 2004. The squad was crap, the performances were crap and no one, especially not the Germans themselves expected those teams to achieve anything. That was not bottling or underachieving, it was expected and deserved failure. That is the difference I was referring to.

What makes you think that the Dutch in turn believed that their side would win it every single time though? In 2004 an even lower percentage of the Dutch thought we had a chance of winning it than now - and we still made it to the semis that year, to our massive amazement. So we're all surprised that we got to the semis while in other countries we're labelled as bottlers for reaching the semis! We cannot help that foreigners never bother to properly analyse the Dutch national team. Next time you ask yourself what Holland's chances are, ask a Dutch person.

The only time we should've won but didn't in my life as an active football supporter was at the 1998 world cup in my view. We really were the best side in that tournament. I don't even think we were the best side in 1988 mind.

[grodada]

What makes you think that the Dutch in turn believed that their side would win it every single time though? In 2004 an even lower percentage of the Dutch thought we had a chance of winning it than now - and we still made it to the semis that year, to our massive amazement. So we're all surprised that we got to the semis while in other countries we're labelled as bottlers for reaching the semis! We cannot help that foreigners never bother to properly analyse the Dutch national team. Next time you ask yourself what Holland's chances are, ask a Dutch person.

The only time we should've won but didn't in my life as an active football supporter was at the 1998 world cup in my view. We really were the best side in that tournament. I don't even think we were the best side in 1988 mind.

that may have been the case but you didn't :p
it's ours! we're not giving that golden star back :D

[redstriker06]

I don't think you can place too much of an emphasis on history. Sure, Germany were absolutely horrendous from 2000-2004 (with the exception of a Kahn inspired run to the wc finals in 2002). Squads change drastically from cycle to cycle, going back and pointing at any result achieved before Euro 2008 qualifiers is in my opinion, pointless. I think this tournament is pretty straight forward with the exception of Group C, I feel that any team in that group could have a chance of progressing, and because of the relative weakness of Group D, they put themselves in a good position to advance deep into the tournament. That said, I think because Italy and France AND Holland and Romania were in the same qualifying group it gives us a hint as to how things will unfold.

France beat Italy in Paris and got a point out of the match in Italy when the Italians basically decided to play 10 men behind the ball.

Romania and Holland are pretty even, both games they played during qualifiers were close... Romania managed a win and a draw. I think they'll be able to pull that off again against Holland. I don't know what it is about the Oranje... I just don't fancy them this year despite the fact that they have so many killer attacking options, I think the defense (although statically speaking, one of the stronger ones in qualifying) is a question mark. I also feel that in Van Basten's two years as manager he has failed to create an identity, which pretty much means because of this killer group that there is no learning on the job, there is no room to start off slow. Straight off the bat, it's like playing elimination games... a loss to any team in the first two games will be a HUGE blow.

[Cris 09]

By the way, I didn't say that to slag off German football. Germany is a favourite at Euro 2008, I will gladly agree with that - but not because they always do well at the Euros. That's just not true.

No, but having 3 titles to their name does ad to their credibility!

[johan neeskens]

I don't think you can place too much of an emphasis on history. Sure, Germany were absolutely horrendous from 2000-2004 (with the exception of a Kahn inspired run to the wc finals in 2002). Squads change drastically from cycle to cycle, going back and pointing at any result achieved before Euro 2008 qualifiers is in my opinion, pointless. I think this tournament is pretty straight forward with the exception of Group C, I feel that any team in that group could have a chance of progressing, and because of the relative weakness of Group D, they put themselves in a good position to advance deep into the tournament. That said, I think because Italy and France AND Holland and Romania were in the same qualifying group it gives us a hint as to how things will unfold.

France beat Italy in Paris and got a point out of the match in Italy when the Italians basically decided to play 10 men behind the ball.

Romania and Holland are pretty even, both games they played during qualifiers were close... Romania managed a win and a draw. I think they'll be able to pull that off again against Holland. I don't know what it is about the Oranje... I just don't fancy them this year despite the fact that they have so many killer attacking options, I think the defense (although statically speaking, one of the stronger ones in qualifying) is a question mark. I also feel that in Van Basten's two years as manager he has failed to create an identity, which pretty much means because of this killer group that there is no learning on the job, there is no room to start off slow. Straight off the bat, it's like playing elimination games... a loss to any team in the first two games will be a HUGE blow.

I don't know how long you've been around on these boards but prior to the 2006 world cup, a good portion of posters on there thought, like you, that Van Basten hadn't created an identity, that they didn't particularly rate Holland, and that they were in a very difficult group with Argentina, Serbia and the Ivory Coast, and that they probably wouldn't make it past the group stages. Remember that?