Sir Alex gives World Cup and Euro Cup the Shaft

Yeah, I've heard about this. Well, what can you expect from a Scottish guy who''ll never see his nation do anything remotely important in the World Cup, besides, he's right now in the middle of an ordeal called Real Madrid, he wants to "rally the troops".

Oops, that sounded a whole lotta like Bush. Sorry.

 

The latter stages of the CL has been superb over the last couple of years. Certainly superior qualitywise to what we saw at Korea/Japan whose KO-stage was the worst in memory apart from may be Italia 90.

 

I think it's obvious: he's trying to rubbish the WC and Euro Championships while giving lead to the CL so that the next time national federations ask him to release their players for international duty, he hopes he'll have popular support in refusing to let them go. Whether what he says is true or not is irrelevant, so long as people believe what he says.

 

Ferguson is not in a position to weild influence over anyone except gullible Man Utd fans. And Kevin Keegan.

Everyone else just laughs at his ridiculous outbursts.

 

Haha guys come on there's no reason to get even remotely offended by "Sir" Alex's remarks !

I think the figures for the last world cup were in the billions of people watching ?

Correct me if the number was less, but I know for sure that both France 98 and Korea/Japan registered phenomenal numbers of people watching !

- Joe

 

Ferguson: " 'If you look at the statistics of the last three or four World Cups, they do not get anywhere near the Champions League in terms of entertainment, goals and excitement,' said Ferguson. "

Who said anything about watching? It's about which is the better in terms of entertainment value. And the latter stages of the European Cup have pissed all over their World Cup equivalents for nigh-on 20 years now. He is entirely right. Face it, the World Cup is the third-best football tournament out there.

 

Re: Re: Sir Alex gives World Cup and Euro Cup the Shaft

In the eye of the beholder, I suppose. Frankly, I care way more about the outcome of the World Cup than I do in the outcome of the UEFA Champion's league, so for me the World Cup is far, far, far more entertaining. But then, I'm a fan, not a soccer aesthete. For me, caring about the outcome is really pretty important, and since I really don't care about any of the teams left in the CL, I have only a mild interest, and I'm only mildly entertained by it.

So, Sir A. may have a point for his fanbase, but not for the rest of us. Frankly, I'm pretty thoroughly unconvinced by the soccer quality argument too, but that's another story.

G.

 

My point was about which was the best competition in terms of the players on view, the teams they form, the football they play and such-like. Of course relevance plays a part. But then, as a Brazil fan, you are more likely to be watching World Cups from a viewpoint of active interest than most of the rest of us.

There are no English teams in the CL anymore and yet the semis of the CL are a good deal more diverting than the semis of the last world cup were.

International football is just overrated, that's all.

 

I wonder if it is. In many cases, it's the same players on view. Both the top national teams and the top clubs have many great players and a mix of good ones playing. In terms of the players on view, I'm sure you could construct quite of list of talent who are no longer "on view" in the CL, just as you could for the semis of various world cups. They get less playing time together I suppose, but I don't really think the talent is that much less. 2002 was a bit wierd in having two cinderella teams going so deep. But then again, I would *so* much rather watch Turkey - Brasil than AC Milan- Inter Milan, simply because for me the former has something behind it, while for everyone who's not from Milan it's just one big bankroll versus another. Perhaps the level of team skill is higher, but the individual talent is the same (the same people), and the excitment is much higher. For me, that is. Am I really alone in this?

Yes, I'm a Brasil fan, but I'm a USMNT (the gnats) first and foremost, but then again it was a pretty good tournament from that point of view, too. Let us just say that my wife ( who brings me into the Brazil circle) and are arranging separate viewing facilities for the confed cup (assuming we can watch anything at all...)

G.

 

I hear you, but am not convinced you are convinced.

Here's a question for you Matt - before being sent to purgatory you are allowed to see one last complete football event: a) one season's Champions League, or b) one complete WC Tournament?

I'm WC all the way, in-spite of all the valid points you raise.

 

I'm not. The latter stages of Korea/Japan was downright dreadful at times compared to USA 94 and France 98. There was a very significant drop qualitywise in my opinion. World Cup 2002 also fades against what we have seen in the Champions League recently. There are probably a number of reasons for that:

Too many giantkillings early on. Surprises are fine as long as they don't come in masses. It hampers the quality of the tournament in the long run when a big number of lesser competent sides overachieve. Turkey, Senegal, USA and South Korea scored a grand total of ONE goal combined at the quarterfinal and semifinal stage. With only nine goals scored in the seven decisive games (QF,SF,F), the KO-stage at WC 2002 was a bad flashback to Italia 90 for many neutrals. Certainly for me.

A low total number of goals doesn't necessarily mean low quality of play, but the "big" teams have a knack of becoming stronger for every round and reach peak form during the latter stages. Many of these "new" teams looked incapable of stepping up a gear. They looked burned out or satisfied at the stage where traditional powers accustomed to four week tournaments (Argentina, France and Italy) would have been firing on all cylinders aiming for the title - and given us unforgettable classic games. How many games from last summer's World Cup will truly go down as a classic? Few if any. Which brings me over to the next point..

The 2002 World Cup also started two weeks too early due to the rain season over there. Most players had barely finished off their clubseasons before flying to the Far East. Several of the biggest names in world football arrived injured or only half-fit. Ronaldo, fit for a few months in a great Brazilian side, sparkled with energy and made the difference. Thankfully in Germany 2006 kick-off date is June 9th or 10th. Valuable extra days of rest. For the good of football and the World Cup.

I'm a huge fan of the World Cup, but its position on top of the football pyramid doesn't automatically qualify it as the tournament with highest level of on-the-field play. Certainly not in a year when several potential champions disappeared early of various reasons. All credit to the teams who knocked them out. Most of the "inferior" teams earned their spots in the KO-stage on merits, but they couldn't replace the "superiors" on the field when it mattered towards the end of the tournament. At least not when comparing it to the latter stages of the Champions League.

 

European Cup. Every time.

 

Last 8 of this years Champions League - Inter, Milan, Juventus, Real Madrid, Valencia, Barcelona, Ajax and Man Utd - 7 of the most famous teams in European history and a team that has been in two of the last 3 finals.
Last 8 of the 2002 World Cup - Brazil, England, Senegal, Turkey, Spain, South Korea, Germany, USA.

I challenge anyone to argue that the quality of play visible at the World Cup involving those teams was better than this years Champions League.

 

So interesting when you think of the fact that the European championship failed to even win a game against an African team which itself only managed to reach the quarters.

 

I have a question! If the WC squads played together year-round and broke for the odd match and a "CL" tourney every 4 years which would be the more exciting then???

By the way Sir Alex does say the CL is better in "popularity" terms. But he might mean that WC attracts more casual fans while the "regulars" follow the CL. Don't want to put words in his mouth though.

 

I agree with Matt's take. The Champions League and the EuroCup have much better futbol quality by far. The WC is fun and you always hope to watch a great match every time you tune in but many times you end up VERY disappointed, like in Japan/Korea where after Spain got eliminated I could care less about the tournament. I too was very sorry that many top players arrived in bad form like Zidane. Whoever has not seen Zidane play in Real Madrid, in the 2000 EuroCup or in his Juventus era is losing out on a lot.

And I'm not European. Maybe I am an aesthete whatever that means

 

Man I agree when Spain went ou that was it. Hopes of excitement were gone although Turkey Brazil wasnt bad. Germany played some yawners for sure although this is all old news of course.

 

an athlete with a speech impediment.

 

I understand the disappointment at Spain going out, but exactly what did they provide in terms of great matches that weren't equalled by the teams that advanced further than they did?

I'm not singling you out personally, but there seems to be a misconception among soccer fans and posters here that tournament matches exist for the entertainment of the spectator. They do, in an economic sense, but the teams are there to win matches first and foremost. If the "entertaining" ball you were looking for wasn't there, it's probably because the teams that managed to advance further placed more emphasis on the result.

It's just a shame that there's so much gnashing of teeth when the teams whose players are always on television don't advance, rather than an acknowledgement of the successes of teams whose players don't receive as much hype. There's a reason the trophy isn't simply awarded to France or Spain or Germany, and it's because the matches need to be played. World Cup worth isn't measured by one's appearances on FSW or Four-Four-Two; it's measured by wins on the pitch.

 

Exactly. This is football, not figure skating. Wins on the pitch, not scores from judges.

G.