The Best Players of Euro 92

It's that the discussion in the other thread about football as a game of balance (as opposed to golf) made me think like that. Is someone good or is the other bad? In this sense maybe an inverse relationship between parity and excellence. 'Outstanding' is done related to the opponent.

At the same time I also remembered a few tournaments with a number of good sides, and good players, but also with many goals (e.g. the teams weren't cancelling each other out). It provides joy for the spectator rather than a complete stalemate where all 'good' players are cancelled. That is the way multiple players and teams can be regarded as 'good' at the same tournament, I thought.

I hope you understand the nature (and relevance) of my question.

 

Yeah, I know where you're coming from. Often less parity equals more goals (two great attacks or brilliant sides can produce a high scoring draw but it is not very common I suppose). I probably will have a think through the question tomorrow evening I think.

 

Others that might be close in my opinion were Tomas Brolin and Brian Laudrup.

Outside of Laudrup it is hard for me to get a good grasp on which of Denmark's outfield players should get some time of ranking. Flemming Povlsen, Henrik Larsen, John Jensen, Kim Vilfort and Henrik Andersen are all other names I am unsure about. Povlsen and Larsen seem the safest bets and possibly **? Patrik Andersson for Sweden is another unlisted possibility.

 

good call ... B Laurup and Brolin were both so brilliant in Euro92

 

Although press tends to be myopic and short-termism prevails, it was by the international press received as the best national team display of the past 10 years at that time @comme
http://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:011019972:mpeg21:a0542

That was seen as a game of a very high standard, but maybe tellingly, even all attackers had defensive jobs and opponents to track.

 

Are you kidding re best defenders in the world, T Silva yes, Alves and Marcelo going forward maybe but not for defensive duties, David Luiz defensive play and postioning is all over the place.

Surely the evidence was tehre with Luiz and Marcelo's performance agaisnt Germany in the smei fiansl at the World Cup, I honestly think this was the worst defencive perforamance I have ever seen in terms of postioning by a far distance........... so basically I am arguing to the no arguements point here !!

 

Reality and FACT said they are the BEST DF at present from #1 (Silva) to #15 (maybe Luiz LOL)

 

Here are my potential ideas on this topic now:

- 1966 World Cup had a pretty well matched final four (even though the semi-finals were reasonably comfortably won). Talking of 3 star performers it surely had a few (not just the names but the way they played) - Charlton, Beckenbauer, Moore, Eusebio. And other players like Florian Albert, Yashin/Chislenko/Voronin of USSR who did well. Whether Brazil and Italy underachieved or whether they were beaten because there were teams playing them who played very well is open for debate (a bit of both though surely). Hungary were definitely a very good team, on their day at least - like vs Brazil.

- 1974 has a few real top teams - Netherlands, Germany and I'd say Poland too. But arguably 1978 had more depth of quality among teams (more competitive - haven't really checked that but just a feeling - Brazil and Italy who played the 3rd place match were certainly pretty good).

- 1982 had Italy, Brazil, France, W.Germany and other teams like Poland. Quite a lot of very good individual tournaments without any legendary ones I suppose.

- Euro 88 had pretty good semi-finalists I'd say. And an all-time performance by Van Basten plus a very good Dutch team even if not remembered as fondly as the 1974 team.

- World Cup 1998 had Croatia and the Netherlands to add to France and Brazil (even though Ronaldo firstly had fitness issues and then his fit which took away some of Brazil's potential, especially in the Final).

- Euro 2008 was seen as a good tournament entertainment wise and the quality shown by Spain, Netherlands, Russia at times for example was high. Not sure about being generally closely competitive though.

I think that covers the thoughts I've had basically.

 

Thanks for your thoughts. Some of those are not exactly low scoring I think but thanks nevertheless. I agree the least with WC1966 and WC1982 (1974WC slightly behind), agree the most with euro88 I think (which was very low scoring).

 

Thanks. 1966 is a weird one really - seen not really as a great World Cup and with some harsh fouls etc, but for star players having a great tournament it is pretty good (moreso than 1962 I would think, not sure about 1958). 1982 I just felt did have a few excellent teams (moreso really than 1986 even though arguably that was more entertaining as a tournament) and perhaps approaching 10 players who might not be out of place with 3 star ratings.

 

In 1966 all of the semi-finalists (maybe with exception of Portugal) had at least two weak games in their series. As a result, also all star players had a few weaker games (or deserved to be sent off even). I agree though that it is not a bad call for parity and competitiveness, that's true. Goals per game level (2.78) was 'average', not high or particularly low for a World Cup.

Maybe the victory by England (among others) masked a lot, but the tournament review in for ex. World Soccer and Glanville his 'Soccer Panorama' book said the same thing..

1982: thanks for the idea. I understand even better now and how it does meet 'low GPG + quality + parity'. I indeed had in mind that 1986 was generally received as an 'upgrade' in the press (while lower GPG), but I can see the case that it was a level down in quality teams, and see your idea.

 

Rijkaard scored two goals in this tournament, the opener versu Germany and in the semis versus Denmark.

 

He had a very good tournament, agree with him on your top four and the others in that top four too.

How much would Rijkaard be worth today given he s so versatile and an absolte top midfielder and also defender?

 

What makes Hassler stand out for you other than his two free kick goals and one pre-assist (vs Sweden, which was perhaps after a foul)? In which match did he create danger and chances for you?

Is Schmeichel a potential alternative number one? Compared with the stand-out goalkeepers in other tournaments too.


Transfermarkt rates the current top defensive midfielders at 40-45 million euro while the top central midfielders go for 50-55 million euro. There are factors that would inflate Rijkaard his price if he had played today, as well as important factors that would bring it down (market value isn't always just the intrinsic quality). But 40-50 million provides sort of an indication for today and the emphasis was on defensive abilities. He was together with Baresi and MvB statistically and in results the most important/indispensable player for Milan.

 

I should have been more clear by saying that I agree with the players in the top four but not in that order, if you said who was the Best player of Euro92 I could not pick one player that I genuinley thought was the best and would probably put those four about equal but if I have to pick one I would say Schmeichel.

 

There was recently a thread about Pogba his value (http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads...verrated-player-in-the-last-20-years.2020228/), but yes he's so far more attacking for me (I had more the entire top 5 DMs and CMs in mind as comparison). With more of an emphasis on attack rather than defensive requirements (although I saw Brugge vs Milan in 1990 recently and there Rijkaard played very advanced). Against Germany, world champions, in this tournament he played for one half as center back next to Koeman - as he did in the 1988-89 club season, 1994-95 season, and other phases. Attacking players progressively tend to go for higher prices.

The article itself is not fantastic but this has a nice overview with statistics at the beginning and the very end (http://grup14.com/article/paul-pogba-analyzing-the-most-wanted-young-footballer-in-the-world). I feel he's on average closer to an Iniesta or Seedorf in role (to take another Surinam player) than Rijkaard for me. On the other hand, when taking off the difference in penalties his scoring was suddenly much less inferior than Matthaus at Serie A for instance (16 in 142 vs 16 as well in 115; 0.11 vs 0.14). Difficult to exactly compare the peculiarities of different eras of course (e.g. current era maybe more emphasis on short sprints instead of endurance; Milan had many of the best players or close to the best in their position but wasn't exactly overpowering everyone else). Rijkaard according to Panini went to Milan for 5.6m lire, which was the same amount as for Ancelotti and what SSC Napoli paid for Fernando de Napoli.

What might inflate his transfer value (if done today) was his euro88 and/or his habit of scoring and assisting in games with considerable press coverage (e.g. 1989, 1990, 1995 UCL finals; Intercontinental Cup). What might take it down are career choices as playing for Real Zaragoza or self-enforced international retirement (after the Voller incident and the 1990WC debacle).

Yes, my 'needle' bent to that sentiment too. I saw once a stat showing Bergkamp was next to Zidane and Deco one of the major chance/through ball creators in euro history but in this tournament I felt he benefited from playing in the slipstream of Gullit, MvB (all his three goals he scored are for me noticeably a result of this) though he was still quick at this phase of his career. Although it is easy to forget less fancied Denmark players with a lesser name in career, Schmeichel was a decisive factor for a winning team (and like Rijkaard he was primarily defensive, that goes without saying). It was my feeling too and he might have an edge even compared with other tournaments by goalkeepers.

 

Not easy to compare 3-5-2 with 4-4-2 and rough stats are not perfect but Vidal (another fantastic CMF of this era who recently went for about €40m) had more tackles, interceptions, clearances and fewer fouls committed (25% fewer fouls) during the past two seasons than Pogba, although Vidal is more easily dribbled against. While Pogba attempts more shots, more key passes, more dribbles, but was also more often fouled (and more dispossessions plus bad touches that goes along with attacking play). Pogba also narrowly edges him in through-balls.

 

Pogba is a tad overrated, he is nowhere near as good as Rikjaard for example, or Tigana. That he is valued at 100million Euros just shows the hyperinflation of players nowadays, in big part as the world economy has grown so much the past dozen years.

 

Tigana at his peak was a lovely and well-balanced player. That smoothness in moves and balance between offence and defense was/is something rare. But he was also older than twenty-two and scored markedly fewer goals than Pogba does now (albeit at a lower goals per game league). Tigana was more offensive and scored more goals for an inferior club team when he was younger. Later in his career he played occasionally in defense.
Rijkaard sort of did the opposite way. Apart from his very first season (right-sided midfielder), he was primarily a defender until 1984. Then in the second half of 1983-84 he was a midfielder, and 1984-85 he was a sweeper (winning the title and his first individual honors). At the first five years of his career he played maybe for little more than one-and-a-half seasons as a midfielder.

 

I agree with this but works in Pogba's favour in terms of value is his age, he could still have ten years at the top level, and has a good re-sale value after a few years as he is still in his twenties. If Pogba was 27/28 I think noone would toook about the figures they are now.

Similar for Sterling, he would not have gone for the amount he did if he was 26/27.

This is why I would question Man United's alleged bids for Ronaldo, just say they paid £100m, he might in theory only have 2 seasons at the same level as he is now. It is very differnet to when Real bought him at 24. The potential alleged large bids for Bale are more understandable as he is 4.5 years younger.

 

Interesting take, because until recently it was believed a player's transfer value peaked after the age of 25. But maybe the market has evolved and also adopted more widely some of the 'lessons' concerning expensive players between 28 and 30 (rather than just some individual managers as Clough a few decades back).

Pogba has also the bonus of his style, his appearance, a good injury record, the team he's played for (a domestically very dominant one with record amount of points in 2013-14), and to a lesser extent the consumer market.

 

Finally (got this on a flea market about 6 months ago or so), this is what France Football thought about euro 1992. Certainly on a few places a surprising assessment.



Best rated players per semi finalists:

Germany: Hassler
Sweden: Brolin, Eriksson
Denmark: Povlsen
Netherlands: Van Basten