West Germany: https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/G...erungsstand/Tabellen/liste-altersgruppen.html 18.1 million people under-20 in 1970 to 13 million in 1989. Partially compensated by the addition of East Germany (which gives you a Sammer, Kroos or Ballack) and the integration of minorities. Or 23.4 million people under-20 in 1970 for both Germanies together and just 14.7 million in 2014. Think also of nutrition here....Resulting in tall people... (height is not necessarily an advantage in today's game, even less so).
This is the nub of the problem. Football does a pretty good job of identifying the best players but there are outliers and anomalies, particularly among defenders. People do fly under the radar but over time clubs are good at recognizing talent. At the same time we know that much of how a player performs is as much as about the situation as about their raw ability. If I look at the peaks and troughs of a nation like the Netherlands I do think you can see that even the 2010 World Cup finalists were quite a way short of the sort of talent we saw in 2000 for instance. If you just look at the clubs represented by the defence, there is nobody (maybe Van Bronckhorst is an exception, but he's a slightly odd player) who established himself as a mainstay of a truly top level club. However, there are so many variables at play in determining people's quality. We so often have a tendency to potentially overrate certain players because they come from a successful national teams and therefore get more opportunities to play on the biggest stage. On the flip side we can have a tendency to underrate second choice players from the big nations (Filipe Luis for instance) because they are only understudies at top level. England have got 5 right-backs at present who'd have a chance of starting under normal circumstances.
This is the nub of the problem. Football does a pretty good job of identifying the best players but there are outliers and anomalies, particularly among defenders. People do fly under the radar but over time clubs are good at recognizing talent. At the same time we know that much of how a player performs is as much as about the situation as about their raw ability. If I look at the peaks and troughs of a nation like the Netherlands I do think you can see that even the 2010 World Cup finalists were quite a way short of the sort of talent we saw in 2000 for instance. If you just look at the clubs represented by the defence, there is nobody (maybe Van Bronckhorst is an exception, but he's a slightly odd player) who established himself as a mainstay of a truly top level club. However, there are so many variables at play in determining people's quality. We so often have a tendency to potentially overrate certain players because they come from a successful national teams and therefore get more opportunities to play on the biggest stage. On the flip side we can have a tendency to underrate second choice players from the big nations (Filipe Luis for instance) because they are only understudies at top level. England have got 5 right-backs at present who'd have a chance of starting under normal circumstances.
I'll take two related comments together here. That's what LvG said too yesterday as a pundit at Madrid vs FCB. He said he doesn't have the impression the club really invests proper time and training to let Griezmann, De Jong, Vidal perform at their real level, in a different tactical role (without complete freedom) as what they are used to. From what he hears and sees. Manchester United under Ferguson (+Phelan, Meulensteen) did precisely that, even with Cristiano Ronaldo. "Busquets was the best player of the entire field, even though he made costly mistakes and overplayed himself sometimes." 🧐 'Frenkie de Jong wordt bij Barcelona vaak overgeslagen. Dat gaat in zijn hoofd zitten'. aldus onze analist Louis van Gaal...Frenkie bij Ajax vs Frenkie bij Barcelona 👇#Clasico #RMABAR #ZiggoSport pic.twitter.com/hlkgls9Vju— Ziggo Sport Voetbal (@ZS_Voetbal) March 1, 2020 (not sure if you can see abroad) At the same time, he admits he was wrong with his prediction that FDJ would be a substitute like e.g. Dembele is. He explained that by FDJ being strong defensively and in transition. Closing passing lanes, tracking runners a few times, making no mistakes or clear mistakes ("better fit than Arthur or Vidal in that respect"). Recognizing the left flank and left back (Alba, Firpo) is very vulnerable right now and the options he can pass the ball to in one go are often sub-optimal. "What you don't want to have is a quick turnover, interception and counter after a speedy move by yourself, while the offensive movement is not coordinated and your first reference point Messi doesn't have his best day. That is where Madrid can be really dangerous and Barcelona vulnerable, with the left-back zone - see the 2nd goal in injury time - and a central defense showing cracks, Busquets becoming even slower. Then I see De Jong rarely lost the ball, only 8 times in 90 minutes, never on a dangerous place or situation, created a one-two and chance for Griezmann in the first half, a through ball for Messi in the 2nd half, block Marcelo - which your system somehow doesn't recognize as a through ball. I think it was a mature and sober display without being a spectacular one." I don't quite agree with this. The midfield and attack had plenty of quality, even someone as Dirk Kuijt or Van der Vaart. Seedorf and Van Nistelrooij were left home while they had still something to offer around that time or in that season. Van Nistelrooij could have been a joker sub (in many tournaments there are 'big' players left home somehow; e.g. Bommel in 2008). The defense was the weakest part, I agree. Stekelenburg was a very talented goalkeeper though (one of the very best in the 2010 World Cup) but undone by injuries and his lack of professionalism. Mathijsen and Heitinga were solid defenders and starters for a few years below the elite (always finishing 3rd to 7th with their club in top five leagues). Not for relegation fodder or for clubs finishing in the lower halves. Van der Wiel had the single best season of his career in 2009-10 (only player to not miss a single Eredivisie minute), then regressed, lost his place, moved to PSG where he sometimes received ESM votes and was in ESM team of the month once. Van Bronckhorst was old but defensively quite solid, his replacement Braafheid in the final a disaster. Obviously none of them except Gio is top 100 material all-time for their country. Example: Filipe Luis has been in the ESM team of the month 7 times. That is as often as Evra and one more than Ashley Cole. Only Roberto Carlos, Maldini, Marcelo, Alba, Angloma, Alaba and Lizarazu are ahead of that count. I do rate Filipe Luis btw, but also clear full-backs from the bigger countries have a marked advantage there (it always was that way in history, much more so than other positions on the field, more so than goalkeepers too). That's right but I don't find a Walker (watch him vs Madrid again) or Trippier particularly reliable to be honest. Our lot can have good joy there.
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/w...-best-quality-footballers-per-captia.1926733/ In my view, only Spain and Uruguay are equally good for the last 25 years. The ESM selections and BdO nominations support it. Uruguay relies heavily on three players (Suarez, Cavani, Godin account for 80% of the ESM selections since 1995) but has had also a few others of (underrated) quality. Some decent/good full-backs too…
See this and this, and this. Wasn't a starter! Maxi Pereira was fairly good imho.... Most of the times I saw him. Even defensively he had his good days when it counted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxi_Pereira
Now reading Ferguson his autobiography and he is saying there Thiago Alcantara is of the Welbeck and Cleverley class (to defend the Man United youth academy)
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...ng-spain-germany-france-england-a8397056.html "Industrialized production of footballers"
This might be wrong but with France is it simply the lack of enthusiasm which exists for the game in lots of areas. That might be a cliché but seems to be true. Since the 90s though their production line has been relatively steady. Seedorf is a valid suggestion for the 00s, not as a starter but as an honourable mention and in hindsight I would have included him. He's a funny one though in that his international participation in the decade was so interrupted. Obviously had issues with Van Basten and so only really participated at Euro 2000 and 2004. I think the point about minorities is definitely a valid one. Without getting into a potentially sensitive discussion about any different attributes they may or may not have, simply being able to draw on the entire population you have is a massive advantage (and something Britain has struggled with in terms of participation in football among the Asian community and the middle classes). I can't give a particularly good reason for the decline of Italy recently. In part it is probably cyclical, part of it may be the decline in the league (though this is a chicken and egg debate), part of it is probably luck as well. It can sometimes feel like a cop out but I do think it can be underplayed as a factor. Italy have always been a bit streaky in terms of their tournament performance but things like the ill-fated appointment of Ventura, injuries suffered by some key players, have not helped them. Obviously they don't have the same talent pool of the 90s but have they been unlucky along the way as well?
It is true, and is visible in the aggregated combination of attendances + television rights + commercial income. Not that they went completely off the map since, but 2012 is for example not so great. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Euro_2012_squads#France Less than half was playing at a top team (even if I count generous), fewer with a really integral role at those sides, as part of the spine rather than as adornment (Evra was part of a spine I'd say). Only one ESM inclusion in the whole 2011-12 season is an indicator (Ribery at september 2011 - maybe would've been 0 if they were Cameroon or so). Very easy qualification group while winning only 6 out of 10 games, at the main tournament only winning against Ukraine. This with a markedly higher population than Spain or England. Only four players of the squad went on to win the Champions League in whichever capacity (Ribery, Malouda, Evra, Benzema). Two more with the Europa League. He played quite fine in 2004 and could have played in 2010 too, but the manager Van Marwijk found him "too good for the bench". Thing is though that featuring and playing in two national team semi finals is still more than Lampard and Pirlo taken together in the decade, for instance. I don't say he is a surefire lock but he's up there and has more ESM inclusions as Pirlo in his career for instance (Pirlo is more like a near-lock for 2005-2015 to me; he wasn't a starter before 2003). He was also excellent when Milan won the Serie A in 2010-11 (Gazzetta had him as the 2nd best creative player behind Ibra of his team; both Gazzetta and DBS show him as #2 attacking midfielder of the league), the last Juventus didn't win. He's underrated at times although I have also seen foreign lists where he pops up among the 10-20 greatest midfielders in history. So again, I tend to disagree with you, and you don't seem to rate someone/something of the last 30 years. Lampard is quite close for 2000-2010 I agree, with all those semi finals with Chelsea as well. Evidently 'Fink Tank' shows him as impactful from 2004 onward (so is RvP). He has to be ahead of Gerrard overall. Interesting take by Ferguson in his book on Lampard. "Frank Lampard was incredibly reliable and consistent from box to box. The avoided defensive work a bit in his prime, but he was end to end and hardly missed a game." "Lampard, for me, was a marvellous servant for Chelsea. But I didn't think of him as an elite international footballer." Definitely streaky, but that their Elo ranking/rating for the 2010s is the lowest since the 1920s is a strong indicator. There is also no Italian starter with a CL medal since 2007 and no one since 2010.
One very, very underrated midfielder of the last 20 years is Esteban Cambiasso imho. Not mentioned as often as other underrated players as say a Carrick or Arteta or Busquets (mentioned so often as underrated that he's not). Technically good too and not one (often) unproductive luxury player like Riquelme. Also underrated compared to Mascherano I guess. I don't know precisely what happened - and there is a history with 'big' players dropping out - but complicating factor was here that after euro 2004 the plan was to get rid of the 'golden generation'. The only outfield remnant (Bronckhorst) was initially on the bench as well. When he came back later (after late runs in the CL and of course decisive moments vs Juve and Inter for the scudetto) he was offended by the comment others had served the coach well and were ahead in the hierarchy ("very good players, yes, ahead in the hierarchy cannot be true"). Spoiler (Move your mouse to the spoiler area to reveal the content) Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler Mourinho calls Seedorf 'mister Champions League' September 5, 2007 - Although Clarence Seedorf, as a club football player, already won almost everything that could be won, he only received an individual prize for the second time in his career last weekend. After being elected talent of the year in the Netherlands, he was crowned best midfielder of the past season in the CL this time. Seedorf was preferred to players such as Frank Lampard, Steven Gerrard, Andrea Pirlo, Genaro Gattuso and Paul Scholes in the election. "Those names give my election extra shine. Just like the fact that the coaches of the Champions League participants have made the choice. The Golden Ball is determined by journalists and with all due respect to them, the opinion of top trainers makes it more prestigious" , Seedorf responds to his election in Sportweek. Seedorf was allowed to take the jury report home. It stated that Jose Mourinho (Chelsea) described him as 'mister Champions League' and that Bayern coach Hitzfeld Seedorf finds 'one of the most complete midfielders in Europe'. "Nice words, I can put them in my pocket," Seedorf grins. https://www.fcupdate.nl/voetbalnieuws/75772/mourinho-noemt-seedorf-mister-champions-league/ Clarence Seedorf received the prize for the best midfielder of the past season in the Champions League. Although Seedorf has not been able to play a prominent role since Van Basten since his return to the Dutch team, he was delighted last week by the favor of highly regarded coaches such as Hitzfeld, Capello and Mourinho, who called him the 'Mister Champions League'. "I think Seedorf has deserved that prize," said Van Basten on Thursday. "But in the end he is not judged by that. There are more players who have won prizes and are good. " https://www.volkskrant.nl/sport/zorgenvrij-op-weg-naar-wedstrijd-7-en-8~baf5328d/?referer=https://www.google.com/
One last comment: Surely this costs you goals, despite having four/five teams in it: I think many continental countries (Italy and Germany more so than Spain and France) have more players with a middle class background. The median income or education of the parents remains however lower as the distribution of the general population. It is a cliche that poverty results in great footballers. This is also true for Sweden, Switzerland, Belgium or the Netherlands. Subsequently 'the system' (and FIFA/authorities connection/protection ) does the rest. It's overall a nuanced picture I think. More middle class footballers (good for potential) goes often hand in hand with more middle class people in general (reduces the talent pool). What it also increases is the quality of the coverage, in northern europe. Looking at it with more analytical distance rather than the narratives or pandering to market segments (to an extent it also helps if a country is not too football mad). Of the ~2010 defenders I never really liked Heitinga (he had a good long pass though) because he could lose focus and his head and wanted to be a blood and thunder defender too much, Mathijsen was very reliable and solid (2nd link, 3rd link). I kind of rated him, he was focused, reliable and never made truly big mistakes - just someone a national team manager can reasonably stick to for a while and a quite fascinating player to watch because of lacking any physical attribute (but of course Stam and now VvD are level higher - the latter won 8/12 of his aerial duels yesterday, regardless of the result he played much better as vs Watford and had some good passes too). At any rate, they didn't concede too many goals but of course this can also be flipped around to say the goalkeepers were good organizers/savers and compliment the goalkeeper ('look at the defenders he had to play with!'). I'd take the Mathijsen of that time over a Stones or Rudiger without a shadow of a doubt, and dare I say it, even over fashionable De Ligt ('lucky' to be part of an international semi final and two finals run).
This is how he wrote it down in his own take (scanned it). I have to read the autobiography in full still. Spoiler (Move your mouse to the spoiler area to reveal the content) Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler The bowler hat of mister Seedorf I was happy to have press chief Jansma with me, otherwise few wouldn't believe it. It was just after the 1-0 game of Netherlands-Luxemburg at 17 november 2007 in De Kuip. We had qualified us for the european championships of 2008. After the european championships in 2004, lost in the semi finals against hosts Portugal, I was assigned to make a new start with Oranje and put my signature to it. A new talented generation was emerging with Van der Vaart, Sneijder, De Jong and Robben, although it were mostly attacking players. From the 'oldies' only a few remained [in the first two years thirty-two players made their debut, without hurting the results too much; e.g. Vlaar failed against Italy and didn't play for five years]. Accordingly, Seedorf wasn't selected at all by me for the first two years, but when he started to play really eye catching and win games for Milan in a more advanced role, he was brought to the group, november 2006. I wanted to see him from up close, in training and in matches, even though some previous coaches couldn't always let him shine for the national team. Partially because guys as Sneijder and Van der Vaart had sometimes their physical problems, I gave him a chance for the first time against a good England and kept him with me. Apart from two late cameos in qualifiers, in friendly matches he played three times from the moment he joined the squad, in september against Bulgaria I gave him longer playing time and eventually he started three qualification games: Romania away, Slovenia home and Luxemburg home, in october and november 2007. Romania away was the first match we lost on the road to the european championships. Not that I wanted to place this in his shoes, but it didn't help the cause. John and I have thought about this many times over. Eventually we thought we had better options in midfield, after we saw him for a while in training and matches. That is why he wasn't our first choice for the attacking midfielder position, but we often preferred Wesley and Rafael. But well, because of circumstances and his quite influential play for Milan he received three times a starting place in the autumn of 2007. He got the chance he wanted very much and about which he thought he had a fair claim. After his third match, the 1-0 in Rotterdam against Luxemburg at 17 november 2007, he asked for a talk with me. He wanted to talk that very same evening. Press chief Jansma arranged a room and also stayed with the talk. Four days later would be the last qualifier, away from home against Belarus in Minsk. For him, now he got chances, a fine opportunity to show himself again, a big chance to play himself in the definitive european championships squad for probably a competitive team. To my big surprise Clarence started with the news he resigns himself for the last match, because he wanted to focus himself for upcoming important games with Milan. After this a whole plea followed. He found it incredible that before those three games I didn't always start or use him. He thought he needed a bigger chance and was convinced that if I would give him more time we then throw high odds at the European Championships. I didn't write down his precise comments but the gist of it was: "If you let play me, doesn't need to be as an attacking player, we will do well in Austria and Switzerland. The team will become better. That also happens at Milan, where I have my value and always play." He dragged many aspects into the discussion to make clear with him in the starting eleven we have a good chance, but of course every team loses more tournaments than they win. I was dumbfounded. I was seriously busy with giving him a chance to play himself in the team. Until that moment he wasn't always convincing. Lost against Romania, playing average against Slovenia and 1-0 at home against Luxemburg leaves room for improvement. Thus away in cold Belarus was an extra opportunity to convince us. Well, according to Seedorf himself he was proven quantity. He was better than some of the players in the squad, he played Serie A and Champions League. 'What do I need to prove?' He found that ridiculous at this point in his career, he has to be one of the first names in the squad. I was really surprised and answered I'm giving him a chance right now, three times in a row. I have the best intentions with him. That I see and respect his abilities, his almost one-of-a-kind career in different circumstances, but resigning now for the last match doesn't give a hungry impression. Kees and I had been listening to him with amazement. What struck me is that he behaved himself more like a businessman than a 'footballer'. Mister Seedorf was dressed in a three-piece suit, phoning like a sports agent, and after the talk he stepped inside a saloon with running engine. Milan's private jet would fly him back. He had a briefcase under his arm, an umbrella in his hand. When I walked to the car I thought: only a bowler hat is missing. After the car was gone the press chief said to me: "It is good I was there, because I would never believe a person can talk about himself like that.' But no matter how Clarence or Mister Seedorf was dressed: how he performed it was all about. There he didn't make the national team really better. He said this the whole time, but in our eyes he hadn't built up a case for oranje. As national team coach you have to make choices, and I have honestly made the choices on a technical and tactical base. All the rest doesn't play a role. If others arrive to different conclusions, so be it.
I'll have to go with Robben. When not having injury he was arguably 3rd best player of the world 2009-2015. Many fans and media heavily focussed on Ibrahimovic, presenting him as no.3 just slightly behind C.Ronaldo, but that was such a joke. It became even more apparent when Ibra and Cronaldo faced each other in the WC qualifier. When Ibra went to Paris they really did start building the Zlatan myth. Robben however was consistently good when he played, and for me the Dutch player of the 2010s. I'd give the 2000s to RvN. That has been one of the more entertaining stories I've read in a while. I can already picture Seedorf like that, entering a team with mostly young, rising stars and making demands to MvB. I do recall the Austria away friendly (I think it was a crazy 3-4?) was his last NT match and he wasn't happy afterwards when providing commentary. I should read that autobiography. Does MvB also explain his side of the story concerning the incidents with van Bommel, van Nistelrooij, and Davids?? Davids was still around during early WC06 qualification..
This also matches with what Ancelotti wrote in his two books. https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/players-going-against-the-stereotype.2104432/#post-38551593 Yes, they came 0-3 behind away against Austria and he entered the field at 1-3 (for De Zeeuw, lol). He created the winner for the 4-3... That was the last we saw from him for Oranje. Ronald Koeman said then: "I am full of understanding. He stands in his right, he is too good a player to be the fifth wheel on the car and that he was with the national team, under this national coach." The discussion then also returned under Van Marwijk (not so much for 2012, but for 2010), when he had e.g. winning assist against Real Madrid, played against his former team, and backheel flick goal against Man United. "I was there in Bernabeu and he plays like an elder statesman, incredible to see." -- "Maybe too good for this country." Only in 2017, an unusual nine years after his last game, he received the flowers for past services (and received the 2nd highest 'rank' of distinction). https://www.knvb.nl/nieuws/organisatie/berichten/25240/clarence-seedorf-benoemd-tot-bondsridder Yes he explains that and Davids was bound to be phased out. He also explains how Van Nistelrooij returned for 2008. He was done with Bommel after the 2006 World Cup, since he didn't stick to the instructions and agreements. An enormous amount of debutants and 'big names' on the chopping block, but strangely the overall results didn't hurt too much: https://www.vi.nl/nieuws/advocaat-troeft-michels-en-hiddink-af-van-basten-onbereikbaar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Football_Elo_Ratings#Averages_by_decade
This was Clarence's side of the story, summer 2019 in a television programme (before the autobioghraphy). Which has four hours of recorded material in the evening and is then condensed to one hour (more or less his words, as good as it can be transcribed). Spoiler (Move your mouse to the spoiler area to reveal the content) Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler 'There is a risk this will be misunderstood and doesn't come across well. It hurts me, as a sportsman you are deprived of the chance to play final tournaments. It is sad that in my own country there was no real public recognition as a footballer until the final years of my active career, and it still results in polarizing reactions. At the same time, I realize I can't complain too much about it because the three big clubs I played for handed me the number 10 shirt - without me asking for this - and was also one of the vice-captains. The 'real' captain, good captains of Real and Milan, went by seniority and length at the club. Van Gaal is the best trainer, everything started with that. Someone has to give you a chance and introduce you well, and Van Gaal was good at that. It's hard to say who was the best player, if there was one, but the Brazilian Ronaldo felt as something unique. I played against him when I was at Ajax, then when I was at Real Madrid and played with him for Moratti's Inter. Moratti signed many players at the time and it looked as an interesting project and chance to play with Ronaldo, Baggio, Vieiri, Blanc, Recoba, Mutu... too many to mention. But it wasn't successful and didn't work. The closest we got was the cup final in 2000 - I scored - and in 2002 we were eliminated in the UEFA Cup semi final by Feyenoord and lost the championship on the last day. I couldn't play that day and it was frustrating to watch. Inter fans mostly recall some of my games or goals I had against Juventus instead of a trophy because there wasn't any! I had an image of Van Basten. That was also because of Capello, who told how he was at the training. He said, "You are like him." That was not meant as an insult. When I joined Orange, I also noticed that we could talk well about certain things. Only we had a difference of opinion and vision. A missed opportunity, because I really liked it. I wanted to play a role in the project, but if you say - Marco said - that Sneijder and Van der Vaart are higher in the hierarchy than I am, then we have not understood what hierarchy means. Hierarchy means: how many stripes do you have. And I had more stripes than those boys. That does not mean that I have to be the starting player, the first player on the sheet, but it is about the group hierarchy. It seems like I'm complaining, I don't want that. I now have a third keeper at Cameroon. He is the oldest player. So if there is something, I'll call him. I give him his respect. It's a missed chance because I really liked it with Marco in the sense that he wasn't a bad trainer, football exercises, for sure, and I was used to Ancelotti. The people management with various players should have been better. We are shooting ourselves in the foot. The best players have to play for the national team. Point. If you play at your club, at the top clubs, then you are one of the first on the list. So first look at the players and then adjust the system. All teams in the world did that. In the Netherlands we got a tendency of first looking at the composition and whether you fit into it. That does not work to win. You first should have your best players. Okay, it has worked quite well everything considered, population, resources, but it can be better. Hard to prove. Injustice to me? What great injustice has the Netherlands done to itself. I am not saying it because the Netherlands had achieved a better result with me, I am saying it because I think that if someone deserves something, it must be given. That is how I grew up. I was called up because I played well in the youth of Ajax. Otherwise you were not called. If you didn't behave well, your club didn't send you. I remember that Leo Beenhakker said: you are not going to that tournament! We hadn't behaved at a youth tournament. They wanted to punish us. We were very sick of that because it was a great tournament. Eventually they sent us, because the KNVB went after it. I'm not the easiest type of person, also not the most difficult - there have been a few footballers with a healthy dose of self-worth and argumentation. Of course there are occasional tensions, sometimes, but at none of my six club teams it came to a head with team mates. That it became an unworkable, uncoachable or unmanagable situation. That it exploded at any of the six clubs and people had to leave. My club team-mates liked to have me as one of the two vice-captains, in communication to the manager and the board as well. What underestimated however is that for the younger Oranje players I was an echo from the past. 'There we have him again'. If you play with a large team in the Netherlands, it means that they will be the first to look there. Then the boy from FC Twente must be very good before they leave the boy from Feyenoord at home. That was normal. Van Basten suddenly made AZ Alkmaar the most selected club. During my time at AC Milan, one of the best periods of my career, they called a boy from AZ for my position. Okay, that is possible. Whether he is better then? No, because otherwise he would play at AC Milan and I at AZ. That's simple. When I am winning the Champions League for a record fourth time, and again not as passenger in the knock-out stages if I might say, there is no tactical reason to leave me at home. Six times I won the league. Ideally that could have been more, but most of the times finished in the top regions, when it was slightly less automatic as today for the big teams, so it cannot be a reason to not call me up. I wasn't a Cruijff, Ronaldo or Van Basten but me not among the 25 best players of the country remains hard to agree with. And it was no problem for me to play a muted role on the pitch. You feel a 'gap' somewhere, not having a real stand out tournament. Maybe it is a compensation for my club career with Champions Leagues and world titles with very different leagues. But I don't feel resentment towards our football pyramid. I am committed to Dutch football, I walk with the Dutch flag everywhere I go, I am indebted and a representation of it, I am working with Dutch players and I am helping Dutch football in the background. If I had a problem, I wouldn't do that. If everyone, almost everyone, is fit and healthy for euro 2020 I would say anything less than a semi final is a disappointment. Anything less than a quarter final a fiasco. That should be a realistic aim. https://www.voetbalzone.nl/doc.asp?uid=90072 https://www.voetbalzone.nl/doc.asp?uid=205697
Hard to really judge him given the lack of CL performances (in the KO stages, next to pretty much every other world class striker - Villa, RvP, Kane, you name it) while at the same time performing well for the national team with some stand out games and moments. He has 11 league titles for five different teams. Take half away of those and it still compares fine to Zidane (three), Ronaldo Nazario (one), Kaka (two), Ronaldinho (two or three), Modric (one post-2008), Henry (five), Cristiano Ronaldo (six), Figo (eight), Rivaldo (three), Nedved (three), Cannavaro (two) to name a few but of course some of those league titles were won by default...
Sorry for taking so long to come back and only partially covering your points. I think Ferguson obviously has an interesting perspective as arguably the greatest manager in history, while at the same time, everything he says is designed for an effect. Not particularly on Lampard but his whole book feels like an opportunity to argue for certain things. His treatment of Keane, Gerrard, Veron all feels like he's making a point. Maybe that's unfair but it feels like it's pushing buttons, in much the same way that Ferguson operated as a manager You look at what he said about Jordan Henderson in his book as well, implying that he has a deep issue with his running style with potential for future injuries and you wonder if he was trying to undermine a young player for a rival club. Despite what Ferguson said, nobody made more appearances than Henderson last decade in the PL.
Most underrated defender of the last 20 years is Ricardo Carvalho I think. "It is a philosophy that Carvalho, 31, shares with a certain Jose Mourinho, who has been a towering figure during his career, developing him into an international-class defender, a Champions League winner. In fact Mourinho, when he bought Carvalho from Porto for £19.85 million in 2004 in his first summer spending spree, privately remarked that he was acquired to help teach John Terry how to defend." https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/f...This=true&TB_iframe=true&height=400&width=950 And he did it again when it was needed the most with a headed goal and a dribble + assist (the challenge/foul on him also caused the goal for Atletico). Also changed his positioning and style throughout the match, really (after the 1-0 played deeper, keeping balance and security; after Ox left the field played more from the right), although certainly not among the very best games he played in his career. Georginio Seedorf needed— Carson (@WC_LFC_Torres) March 11, 2020 What Ancelotti says and explains
Wijnaldum was the best outfield player last night. Of course Llorente was the most decisive and Morata did his part but over 120minutes Wijnaldum was terrific. Big fan of Thomas Partey's performance too.
He was mentioned 0 times in that 2000s thread. Shows the point of 'underrated' well although I think I agree with others that was not the same player at Real Madrid (hard to say, can imagine the management at Madrid didn't help either). Nevertheless consistent, successful and reasonably productive for quite a while. In trophies he is one of the more decorated players in that period. Yes I see what you mean. It is understandable but his take on Scholes ("the best English midfielder since Bobby Charlton") or Giggs is very complimentary compared to others. Or that it is "absolute nonsense" to compare Lampard and Gerrard favorably to Scholes. Obviously Scholes has twice as many league titles as Lampard and Gerrard combined, and played in more big finals too, but that's a bit like saying vBommel is automatically up there with DB10 with his eight league titles in four different countries and a few major finals as starter/captain. Lampard for my money is a (very) strong option for a 2000s team, a near-lock (with Pirlo, Xavi and others more like 2005-2015). What I disagree with though is the idea several Englishmen have been worthy of such standards and no Dutch player in the last 20-25 years (although there haven't been obvious locks either). Looking at tournament performances, average Elo rating, the amount of CL 'heroes', protagonists or winners, man of the match performances in CL finals, the absolute number of goals in the CL (see above video, and England has four teams in) that has a weak base. Outright infuriating are guys as Dearman who think Czechoslovakia has done more in football history. Likewise, Italy has a four times higher population but not four times as many players with 2+ EC/CL finals played. The market forces are strong though (which I/we also saw in the Dest for USA case). Nigeria is now trying to steal that Bayern youngster from us, and they have other African countries on their side. Some big football outlets like Goal.com are referring to him as 'Nigerian' (while he was never born or trained there and for now plays for the Oranje under-21 team). Additional circumstance is here that the leadership of the Nigerian FA is German. Left and right clubs are stealing players for free (Bayern included) and federations are stealing players - with some backroom dealing going on and cartel tendencies. That said, in the newspaper of record (NRC) his father said Feyenoord had not full trust in him and didn't see him as the talent of the academy. "Father Remco says that the choice for Bayern had to do with perspective. "At Feyenoord, Joshua did not get the full confidence that he did get from Bayern. They had a plan with him and saw him as a long-term successor to [Robert] Lewandowski. Well, that plan hasn't slowed down so far. ” https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2020/03/0...-ze-grote-plannen-met-joshua-zirkzee-a3993040 UEFA and FIFA also so smart to tweak competitions such that cashcows don't go out early or don't get hard draws most of the time. 'Eureka, we just expand the Nations League for the next edition!'
Yes I agree Partey and Oblak stood out for Atletico (Partey also great a few months ago against Real Madrid). There were many who played well (Ox, Dijk, Savic etc. too), with a couple negative outliers. Jan Oblak is also prone to get underrated over time (not helped much by his trophy cabinet). He has possibly been the best keeper in the world in three seasons or so, I think. Also remarkable how Slovenia (2 million inhabitants) has had two world class keepers the last 10 years, and Costa Rica had Navas. Usually this specific position requires specific investments, and therefore many smaller clubs don't invest that much in it (although now also keepers get transferred for big sums that is changing). Not as much as they can, because returns are unsure and investments very specific. What might be an explanation? Jan Oblak, Samir Handanovic, Vid Belec: Why do Slovenia produce so many world class goalkeepers but struggle outfield? [...] That may be because sports like ice hockey, handball and basketball have more of a history in Slovenia, with the country’s teams being more successful than their football side. Slovenia’s basketball team won the Eurobasket in 2017, while their hockey team has qualified for nine Ice Hockey World Championship. Their handball side has played at eight World Championships too, finishing runners-up in 2004. If those sports are more prominent, skills learned using them are predominantly with your hands and that would benefit goalkeepers. https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/foot...c-vid-belec-slovenia-goalkeepers-world-class/
Interesting to read this thread back from 2007 (Cambiasso is mentioned twice in the thread; Cristiano mentioned several times as overrated because he shoots a lot and loses the ball a lot and/or miscontrols/punts after a dribble): https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/most-overrated-underrated.592179/page-18#post-12970449 https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/most-overrated-underrated.592179/page-16#post-12950407 https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/most-overrated-underrated.592179/page-12#post-12880957 https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/most-overrated-underrated.592179/page-16#post-12949941 https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/most-overrated-underrated.592179/page-23#post-13159116 This and other 'subtleties' now tends to get forgotten indeed, at many places. Think also of euro 2004 here and the 2006 World Cup (two official 'man of the match' awards there, with productivity). For a long time though I was wondering whether he was really better than Overmars (who also excelled at both sides of the wing, as well as centrally in midfield), that is now archaic. It changed around 2011-12. Martin Jol said in 2005 he's the best of the country since JC14 and only three others have been as good in between. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2005/jan/14/newsstory.sport3