Name a time when football was very dull and boring, without much decent players, games, goals, etc. And as well as teams. I say the mid 90's.
USA 94 England and France didn't qualify. Germany was knocked out by Bulgaria, Argentina...what did happen to Argentian?...and the final was a goaless draw between an uninspired Brazil and lacklster Italy. That was the dullest era (summer) of the football for me.
USA 94 was, IMO, one of the best *recent* WCs. I liked the fact that Bulgaria, Sweden, Romania all played major roles. It's not like they were bad teams. They had legitimate world class players, that were in top form. What happened to Argentina? Ask Dennis Bergkamp what happened to Argentina.. The final was dull, but you could also look at it as a thing of beauty the way Baresi and co. stopped Romario. Baggio was hurt in that game so that gave Italy almost no chance to threaten Brazil. I have very fond memories of USA '94.
I do too, but that is not to say it wasn't dull. Maybe it was the heat, maybe it was the fact that I prefer to watch the World's "elite" at a WC rather than Belgium, Norway and so forth and such...not trying to say these didn't deserve to be there. They qualified - nuff said. France and England weren't there because they blew it. But I would have prefered to see them there. Maybe it was the fact that after a horrible final 4 years ago in Italy, and when you think it can't get worse - it does. Maybe it's cause Germany got eliminated early on as defending Champions and they looked out of it, got outplayed and that pissed me off. I thought USA 94 was one of the worse WC. But indeed, do have fond memories, because nevertheless...we had a blast in Orlando!
It depends what point of view you are looking from. As far as I am concerned the mid 90's were one of the best periods of football in recent years.
There has never been a time when football has had a dull year. There is always something that keeps it interesting. Just because one year there is a world cup that doesn't have you on the edge of your seat doesn't make it a dull year. There's always something great.
I thought the 94 WC was terrific simply because of Romania's performance. That was a major achievement for Romanian football and therefore very exciting. Other than that, I was very dissapointed with Germany being eliminated by Bulgaria but it was interesting to see a team like that and Sweden get so far. The final was very dull though.
Since we're talking about the mid-90's here, I thought much of (not all of) Euro 96 was dull. And what was with the crowds outside of England's games? Most of the matches were played in stadiums that were at best three quarters full.
Football's dullest era would have to be the 1910s or 1920s. World War I had it's effect. The game in a way had to rebuild after the war hindered it's progress. Before the war, only England had a clear advantage. Being the home of football, they had played the game for many years and the rest of Europe were still in the development stage. Even in 1913, a second division team from England could still beat a top side in Italy convincingly. There weren't any big tornaments before the 1930s. The biggest tornament at the time for football was the Olympic Games tornament, in which Uruguay was the biggest power. Only amateur players could participate in that event so the likes of England, Scotland and Austria couldn't play with a full-strength team. There weren't any big names or truely great teams in that era too. WWI ended before the 1910s was out and this would have had an effect on kids trying to learn their skills. It took a while for players to really turn into top players. By the 1920s, nobody would have expected a great generation of players. The positives from the 1920s though is that some of the stars of the 30s were starting to play the game and that some new tactics were being brought to the game. All these things and more came to light in the 30s. By that time, the great Depression occured but at least in football terms, top players were coming through the ranks. There are times that the game is at it's peak or at it's darkest. We may have been though some less bright times recently but the 1910s and 1920s weren't great times. There was a lack of great teams and stars and due to the events of WWI, the world wasn't running completely smoothly in the 20s, especially early in the decade. The world needed something fresh and so did football.
The 1920s were in fact a great expansion period. Some european countries, like Spain or Italy, went from amateur competition to a professional league. Players started to be paid for playing, crowds rose up and big stadia were built, and also the leagues (round-robin play) started, leaving the knock-out cups as the second competition. Also the olympics in '20, '24 and '28 put the foundations for the first World Cup in '30. Comparing the "before" and the "after" picture, I think it was a great period, specially 1925-1930. The happy twenties.
You also had the offside rule change which meant the second half of the 20s saw goalscoring increase dramatically and tactics were starting to shift away from the rigid 2-3-5 with varying styles developing around the world.
Thanks for that. I didn't look at it that way. As you pointed, there was all the changes going through the game. All I was considering was the fact that the 20s didn't have those stars or great teams of the 30s but some of those stars did start in that decade. Now I can say that 1910s was the dullest era.
The seventies and eighties for sure, we had Liverpool dominate England and Europe with their dull, boring, backpass orientated style of play, and then there was Heysel.
corporate sponsorship tickets, and people who'd rather stay in the hospitality lounges than watch the football.
oh god, you have issues, get over them. As if the Italian football of that era was known around the world for its adventurous attacking play.