Post them by separate sources, if you have them, maybe in tabular form, if it's easier for you. or if you have them scanned from magazines for example!
Michel had a phenomenal first game as evidenced by his high ratings from all sources, but went downhill in the defeats to Germany and Italy. He was surely one of the classiest players Spain has ever had. To give you an idea, this season, if I remember correctly, he scored 14 goals and, according to some media such as "Don Balón" he gave 22 assists! Brutal data accompanied by good ratings in almost all the games he played in the different events of the season. In my opinion, the only reason why I don't consider him "world class" (I'm sticking to "international") was, precisely and despite his incredible start, his irregular Eurocup and Spain's early elimination.
I've just found the last Euro 1988 FF issue (#2203, three days after the final) and the final standings of the "étoiles" : (sorry, I can't enlarge the picture so opening it in a new window and zooming on it will be needed and it will remain not easily readable)
He remains well ranked in the Etoiles FF final rankings, making the first 11 but I understand your observation and analysis. The different contexts have a big influence on the perception about the players too (compared to 2008/2012 for example but also at the time of his playing career, to start with. Edit : Not to question that he could be a bit irregular and dropped a bit before his 30, but ya know.
After the defeat to USSR in the first round, it was written that Gullit criticized Michels in the press and in this document, after the final, in the article on the left, Gullit says completely the opposite when the journalist points out that Gullit carried Michels in triumph/ chaired him, after the win : "I wanted to thank him. We should make a 'Golden Praise' to him like we award a Golden Ball. On the trophy we'd write : Thanks Michels, from the 1988 Netherlands team". Journalist : "his part in your success is important?" Gullit : "Very. when a team which has so much strong personalities plays with as much cohesion, the trainer always has something to do with it; And, beyond, the game, an emotion passed between him and the players". Journalist : "What do you think about his departure?" Gullit : "It's terrible...".
Maybe interesting to compare this with the 1984 FF ratings... (with Tigana as #1 surprisingly). These 1988 ones look higher across the board.
Ive 2 football Championships in my heart for life till the day i die The wc 1982 in spain And the euro 1988 in germany I was a Younger big fan of piontek and denmark (the Holland 74 to me when you 16 yrs old in 1986 wc. Euro 1984 was not broadcasted to brazil and i cannot follow piontek in 1984. Only yrs later through my dvd football collection when finally i saw the euro 1984 All matches) Denmark.in euro 1988 was a total deception loose our 3 games The Charlton warriors and that Holland game with kieft goal i didnt forget till these days(Ive that match) But ,i believe If ireland goes to the semifinals they cannot win germany Unforgettable moments to me this Championship
Some times later... I did the comparison with the Tour de France top-3/ Top5/ 10 (as soon as I read your post something like within the 24 hours you posted this provocation... hum, reflection. eheh). Not sure if it's interesting though (what i did) although the Italians come back on the podium in the 90's too (as for the early 80's, Zoetemelk could be considered as a 'late bloomer') . France '84 is a bit for the Euros what Mexico is for the World Cup to me (although it's not exactly the same thing, context, circumstances etc.). Also Euro 84 is kind of the first Euro tournament that settles the competition as a highly valuable one. Then, in '88, the star-system is stronger too. And the northern countries had things we did not have (in France), as for the FF ratings... and the grass is always greener elsewhere... especially when you're not qualified... The tactics had evolved for sure... and other things... so I don't question which one of the two tourneys was the best one but it was different for sure. So was the ratings scale in the end (not really a conclusion but that's what questions me... probably these things have an incidence). I don't mind much about the fact that some countries were not there in '84 because if they did not qualify it's because they were not good enough, simple as that. Then, as for The Netherlands it's a bit tricky (especially in '84 but also in '86) but I don't think it would have changed much things given the last World Cup qualifying campaign and in the end, one of the most difficult opponent for France besides Denmark in their first match was Spain in the final (without forgetting Portugal in the semis. Belgium had their problems but it is as it is and Yugoslavia were Yugoslavia... so you're ever swept by them or sweep them... 3-2 though, not that easy although in the end end it can look easy... it's a late pk for Yugoslavia that makes it 3-2... they had nothing to loose in that third game... but it was not that simple, as always with them). The Soviet Union team would have been difficult to play against tho, as always during those times. They kind of struggled by the end in '88 when, at the same time, Holland had raised their level and deseverdly, logically, scored that extraordinary second goal. Kuznetsov was missing too. Yeah, the all-rounder (except for scoring goals... he has one in '86 though, which is cool) Tigana had the best ratings above Platini. As already talked about in other threads, the team was strong enough for they (Giresse and Tigana of Bordeaux) asked Platini to "stop" withdrawing and concentrate more on finalizing, or more clearly, on ending the actions. Rather than preparing it, what they could do as well. The attacking mids or forwards often need to touch the ball in a deeper position on the field in order to take confidence but in the absolute, it is not necessary. And he was needed upfront, without taking away the merits of the two strikers who permitted him to shine, them too, not only because of their defaults but also due to their qualities (especially Lacombe, in his pivotal role but also the young Bellone, Ferreri... as wingers or so... they could occupy the defenders a bit at least...). Platini had to be served, in the main, for he can win the match. maybe 2:37 illustrates it a bit (haphazardly found excerpt, very quickly). It's in possession, going out from the back.
when i was 13/14 yrs old in euro 1984 i did not have knowledge enough to follow and recognize tactical in the field I only knew few stuff as 442 433 but the 352 used in europe in the beggining of the 80s i only had the chance to understand in 1986 wc with sepp piontek he was a revolutionary coach i found a article he wrote a 3421 system in 1988!!! it was a piontekk variation study to 352 Omg check this out placar magazine 1988 - sepp pionttek inovation
Incidentally, in the 1991 Match Football Yearbook, there is a page with a flashback to Euro 88 and the results. The only ratings shown are those for the Final - the same as printed in 1988, but they added descriptions of the goals and a match summary, as below: Gullit goal - Erwin Koeman's swinging cross was flicked on by Van Basten to the unmarked Gullit who headed home. Van Basten goal - Muhren's superb left wing cross was brilliantly and spectacularly volleyed home by Van Basten. Game summary A slow starting final but skill prevailed with a great display by both teams. Holland were deserving winners of not only this match but the whole competition. Van Breukelen saved a Belanov penalty and Van Basten netted his fifth goal to become top scorer.
XI of Jimmy Magee (Irish journalist) as published in Sunday World on July 10th Zenga; Bergomi, Rijkaard, Kuznetsov, Rats; Houghton, Wouters, Giannini; Zavarov, Gullit; Van Basten (or Zavarov; Gullit, Van Basten - the write-up makes it seem like Gullit is put in front 2 but in roaming role) Also mentioned were Dasaev, Immel, Van Breukelen, Bonner, Moran, Kohler, 'both Dutch full-backs' (Van Aerle and Van Tiggelen), Hughton, Brehme, Maldini, Matthaus, Thon, Donadoni, Muhren, Whelan, Protosov, Vialli, Voller and Altobelli. As might be expected there is some overlap with his 1988 calendar year selection: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/interesting-best-xi.325564/page-63#post-41488340 Dasaev; Bergomi, Rijkaard, Hysen, Whelan; R.Koeman, Gullit; Maradona; Van Basten, Careca, Hugo Sanchez (mentions for Southall, Bonner, Van Breukelen, Zenga, Sanchis, Maldini, Rats, Michel, Matthaus, Houghton, Giannini, Zavarov, Donadoni, Butragueno, Romario, Voller, Protasov) - Magee says the XI he picked this year is the most exciting team he has picked yet (between 1973 and 1988) Him and Franz Beckenbauer were pretty positive about the players, teams and tournament. Here is Beckenbauer's take: Elsewhere in the British/Irish press I noticed Brian Glanville and Johnny Giles were less positive though (Giles picked out Van Basten and Houghton, but said Gullit didn't influence games regularly so much as Cruyff, Platini, Beckenbauer, Charlton had done; Magee said himself that if nobody knew who Gullit was they'd all be saying what a great player the number 10 with the dreadlocks was though on the other hand; Glanville mainly picked out Van Basten but also mentioned Vialli although not for the semi-final game, Baresi, Protasov, Aleinikov, Rats, Kuznetsov, Houghton, and Gullit for the Final, while referring to Sandro Mazzola saying Matthaus "played well in spasms" and saying Voller was in the descendant after an injury has caused him to lose pace and pointing to disappointing tournaments for Lineker, Beardsley and Barnes of England).
I know this will be hated by one member of the board but for anyone interested I discussed Euro 88 with Shahan of the Soccer Nostalgia blog.
I will certainly not listen but let me guess: the "maybe the best team won" line gets followed, it was by no means a penalty (8:44) and other takes that gravitates to the usual Anglo-German teaming up and pandering to where the audience is. Your disdain and patronizing Sandbrook-ish haughty contempt, how you rank the historic/modern players, has always been clear if not outspoken (of course: seeing your twitter page you freeze us out entirely for EC/CL and World Cup XIs and then chuck them full with Brits, Italians, Germans). - The only game 'Holland' lost was not coincidentally officiated by a German (the worst record is with this nationality) - The gifts and truly bizarre calls Germany received in the opener against Italy was done by a Brit. Havelange was right about this. I am out of here now. People as Wilson and Kuper I vehemently dislike as well (and Wilson is outright vile and nasty at some places and takes).
If you are going to leave, then just leave. Stop saying you are going to leave and then hanging around and perpetually coming back.
I noticed in the British press as well that Italian coach Vicini had picked a "Best of the Rest" XI without Italians, before the semi-finals were played (effectively a group stage XI). The names were shown with no formation or system alluded to, but while it could be a kind of 5-2-3 with a non-right back at right back, I guess the Zona Mista tempate would be most likely, therefore placing Rijkaard as midfielder or kind of 'half back' maybe (assuming as he was playing predomiantly as defender in the tournament it wouldn't be him as box to box player, but Matthaus, with Zavarov as midfield number 10, and maybe Koeman as sweeper, Sanchis as RB/CB and Kuznetsov centre back - with Heintze as left back/wing back and perhaps Gullit as 3rd attacker/winger in this line-up and Protasov as second striker and Van Basten as main striker, or vice versa): Bonner (Ireland); Koeman (Netherlands); Sanchis (Spain), Kuznetsov (USSR), Heintze (Denmark); Rijkaard (Netherlands), Matthaus (W.Germany), Zavarov (USSR); Gullit (Netherlands), Van Basten (Netherlands), Protasov (USSR)