Boca USED to be a big club .. may be we have to roll back 20-30 yrs ago? Now aday, like it or not the Argentina league is reagrded as a smaller competition than most TOP5, 7 leagues in Europe. Same applied to Brazil leagues ... No exception even am a Brazil fan Argentina league is now below Liga, EPL, Bundesliga, SerieA, French league for sure ...
Actually it's not, been around the English language a good long time. With regards to your inability to comprehend what I posted, I in no way attributed the success of Milan/Barca/Utd/'pool to the last decade. What I did was question your support of James' comment that Boca Jrs. was a small club compared to the aforementioned clubs. He in fact put them on the same level as Villarreal Back to the point, the only way somebody could look at Boca Jrs. and call them a small club would be due to their dismissing everything they've accomplished prior to the past decade. Now mind you, Boca Jrs. in the past ten years have won five league titles, one Copa Argentina, an Intercontinental, two Copa Libertadores, two Copa Sudamericanas and three Recopas. Go back beyond the prior decade and tell me how Boca Jrs. doesn't make a legitimate argument to be historically a bigger club than any of the aforementioned clubs? I'm not taking anything away from those clubs at all but not putting Boca Jrs. on that same plateau is ridiculous bias. What exactly swayed your opinion? That's what I'm most curious about. You responded to a post that called out James' stupid comment. You would have been better off initially pointing out that your response in now way shape or form was a defense of James' post which I believe Pipiolo had responded to. At that point it was abundantly clear that you were responding to Pipiolo's claim that Boca Jrs. was the second biggest club after Madrid. The claim that they are is much easier to make than they aren't. Have at it if you'd like. Never took you for stupid, just a tad bit biased towards the European world view of football Anytime you have a post that is six degrees of separation from James it's always best to throw a caveat in there
This is absurd, for a club to have used to be a big club it must have fallen from grace for a very long time and not come back, kind of like Flamengo or Santos. Only last year Boca was playing the final of the Copa Libertadores, and had they not lost two key players in Roncaglia and Orion they would likely have won it.
Are you high? Let's just look at the past 15 years. 8 league titles 1 Copa Argentina 2 Intercontinental 4 Copa Libertadores 2 Copa Sudamericana 3 Recopa Sudamericana If you narrow the field to the past five years with the exception of the dominance of Barca and Man Utd. not much separates Boca Jrs. from the rest of Europe's best in terms of success. If you think the gap in quality between today's European sides (excluding Europe's biggest spenders) and those of Argentina and Brasil is that vast then you certainly don't watch nearly as much football as you do and of what you do watch, practically none of is from Brasil and Argentina. 20 to 30 years huh
An interesting perspective of looking at thing's, but if we are using your method's and requirement's into coming to such a conclusion we might as well throw in Penarol into the mix. I mean the Uruguayan outfit have won the equivalent amount of Intercontinental Cup's as Boca, 5 Copa Lib's to Boca's 6 but having one more notch in the runners-up category and a whopping 17 domestic title's more than Boca.
That is not all of of my requirements, some of them are tacit and I felt didn't have to spell them out. Yes, Penarol and Nacional of Montevideo have a good more league titles than Boca Jrs, but the Uruguayan league is really a two-horse race, just like the Scottish league and the past dozen years the Spanish league. Whereas the Argentine league is historically one of the top four in the world, along with Serie A, La Liga and the Premier leagues, and the best in Latin America. Even at present, despite a momentary decline, it fights for a number 4 or 5 ranking with the Brazilian and French leagues. It also means that Penarol and Nacional have had far more chances at the Libertadores trophy than Boca; in essence, the two Uruguayan biggies get every ten years, nine cracks at it. Boca obviously cannot enjoy such a luxury in a league that features River Plate, Independiente, Estudiantes de la Plata, Racing, San Lorenzo, Velez Sarsfield and Newell's Old Boys. So all told, Boca has won the most trophies while competing in top competitions across: the Argentine league, the Copa Libertadores, and the Intercontinental Cup.
Correction, what I wanted to write was that "Riquelme won both his libertadores titles before coming to Europe, after penalty shootouts in the finals." (Skipped out the "before coming to Europe" part while editing my response, before I posted it). As you can see from my earlier response on this thread (quoted below), I was aware of the fact of Riquelme's 3 Copa Libertadores wins. Leadleader is going to have a field day with this slip up. Regarding missing players, what I meant to explain when I wrote about it was that the Real Madrid team Riquelme beat was missing its key figures from both CL winning campaigns i.e. 1999-2000 and 2001-02. I would compare it to playing against a Boca team of the same time, missing Riquelme.
they were surely a BIG club in Argentina and also in SOuth America AGREE however .. it did not mean they STILL ARE BIG around the world, especially Europe! if they won Argentina league (small) and c0pa sudAmerica ... Like Rangers won almost every SPL title from 90to 2000, and won 5 of 10 last 03 -13 to make 15 titles in last 20years, and are they the BIG club in Europe and the world? NO Well it may be unfair (understood) but Argentina and Brazil leagues are still SMALL compare to TOP5 bests leagues in Europe ... that's what I meant. Let's look at TOP20 most powerful and VALUABLE clubs in the world: Rankings as of 17 April 2013.[1] Rank Team Country Value ($M)[2] % change on year Revenue ($M) 1 Real Madrid Spain Spain 3,400 76 650 2 Manchester United England England 3,165 42 502 3 Barcelona Spain Spain 2,600 99 613 4 Arsenal England England 1,326 3 368 5 Bayern Munich Germany Germany 1,309 6 468 6 Milan Italy Italy 945 -4 326 7 Chelsea England England 901 18 409 8 Juventus Italy Italy 694 17 248 9 Manchester City England England 689 35 362 10 Liverpool England England 651 5 296 11 Tottenham Hotspur England England 520 -8 226 12 Schalke 04 Germany Germany 498 -15 221 13 Borussia Dortmund Germany Germany 436 16 240 14 Internazionale Italy Italy 401 -18 236 15 Lyon France France 368 -4 167 16 Corinthians Brazil Brazil 358 - 119 17 Napoli Italy Italy 330 16 188 18 Hamburg Germany Germany 300 -16 154 19 Marseille France France 285 -18 167 20 Newcastle United England England 263 9 146 CERTAINLY Boca not there ..
Is that really how you rank clubs? Being rich must be a nice thing, but it is not really the measure of a great team. Some clubs are great the old fashioned way, by discovering and developing talent. I've seen a lot of great players playing Champions league who showed their worth at Copa Libertadores first. And tradition is important too. Players like Riquelme, Cata Diaz and Gago are not back at Boca because of money, but because of the admiration and respect they have for the colors and tradition of the club.
definitely ... otherwise, you go around the world there would be like milllions of "big clubs"??? You can NOT say this is a big club, and BTW they had NO VALUE?? Nonesenses
Another correction, Van Der Saar did not join till the next season so GK related issues were not one of the reasons for Juve's poor performance in 98/99. (Seems I should stop posting late in the night )
Thing is that even the most amateurish uneducated football fan around the world knows who Boca Jrs. are. And why exactly does it matter what Europeans think? As I posted above, fans with the most minute level of knowledge of the game know who Boca Jrs. are. I would say that better than 95% of football fans living in South America if not the world actually give a shit about 98% of the teams playing in Europe. What you are not grasping is that the Top 5 are who they are mostly because of the overall wealth of the leagues but also the success of a small percentage of teams. With every post you make it more and more obvious that you watch little to no football from Brazil or Argentina. You're moving the goal posts now. We've been talking about clubs being successful based on the actual footballing success over a few different periods of time. Those clubs have financial power which is hardly the same as football power. The game is about sporting success not who makes the most money Your negative ranking of Boca Jrs. makes me wonder which Brazilian club you support. Amargo.
If it was all about money then the Mexican clubs owned by their huge TV company would win Copa Libertadores every year.
@Moishe Didn't claim it was new to the English language, just a word I had never recalled as with many English speaking people and the uncommonly used words in everyday language, but apparently I'm conversing with the human thesaurus. Again as for the initial part of post, I'm not James. What was the comment I supposedly supported James on again? The thing is that I gave my example of Penarol, being on par with Boca when it came to Copa Libertadore's win's and Intercontinental cup's and having a much greater gap in term's of domestic title's. Then he brought up a fair point in regards to the Uruguayan league essentially being a two horse race, essentially due to the lack of depth, overall quality and balance in the league. But using that criterion regardless of the silverware Boca has achieved over the year's does that put Boca on the same 'plateau' as the AC Milan's, Manchester United's and Barcelona's of the world? More or less the aforementioned team's have a similar number of trophies to that of Boca, here's the question for you, in terms of depth, overall quality, opposition and strength would you still put Boca on the same pedestal? Prior to let's say the turn of the century it's surely debatable. Boca were traditionally contender's and at times even dominant in the domestic scene both prior and post 2000. But prior to 2000 in the Continental club competition's Boca's is nothing out of the ordinary. Independiente, Penarol and Estudiantes had won 7,5 and 3 Copa Libertadores to Boca's 2. The 2000's was definitely one of Boca's brightest decades though. Well I touched on it in the post above, and I still don't buy his claim that Boca is the 'second biggest' club in the world only after Real Madrid. I'll probably reply to his post soon enough. Vice Versa sir...vice versa
You have a mixed up understanding in the term BIG club mate. 1- Boca is not "big" relative to TOP25 clubs around the world, but it did not mean they are NOT popular. I am sure CHINA are by no means a Big NT in world football, but 99% people in the world know they exist, at least ONCE at worldcup .. OK? 2- Being NOT as BIG as TOP25 clubs it's by no means they play "bad football" = Boca always played great football even for their size ... they did great at interconinental cup event now at least Corinthians are there in TOP25 for Brazil, and not sure if you realize, Brazil leagues, are getting more and more powerful due to economy growth there. Their salary pay and values of the clubs getting bigger evry day ... at least more so than Argentina leagues in general
A big club has both success and tradition, which Corinthians is not even 1/10th of Boca Jrs. How do you know more fans in Asia follow Corinthians than Boca Jrs, the latter has had far more success the last dozen years since the global marketing of the sport. Boca Jrs >>> any Brazilian club.
when did I say that??? READ and do NOT imagine I even example that Boca were very popular *like China (sarcastic) but it ain't confirm they are BIG - again ... RELATIVELY to the TOP25 biggest clubs in the world!
Actually James, in order to "lose a case", your argument must be flawed, rather than a small detail that reinforces your actual argument. But anyways: that's loosing a case either way? Would you prefer it if I compared young Zidane vs young Riquelme? Because Riquelme did have a great game against Real Madrid in year 2000, and Riquelme was very young at the time. And I can tell you, Riquelme's performance vs Real Madrid absolutely destroys Zidane's performance against AC Milan. My actual argument with regards to Zidane vs Riquelme, has always been crystal clear. My disappointment with Zidane's performance, has absolutely no effect on my actual argument. Furthermore, the additional (which was not a part of my initial argument) comparison between young Zidane vs peak Riquelme is not really flawed, I mean, you could compare young Zidane vs young Riquelme and the argument would be much more in favor of Riquelme. Young Zidane won a WC without being the best player in his team, played a key role in getting Bordeaux to the UEFA Cup Final. On the other hand, young Riquelme won the Copa Libertadores whilst being the best player, not only in his own team, but in the tournament; then he went on to have a legendary performance against Del Bosque's Real Madrid, his performance far out-performing what Luis Figo (FIFA World Player of the Year at the time) had to offer. Young Zidane vs young Riquelme, is not a flattering case for Zidane, in my opinion. You could even compare peak Zidane vs peak Riquelme, and my argument would still be the same: Riquelme could take over the flow of a game, better than Zidane ever did. In this respect, I have always identified Zidane with Iniesta, and Riquelme with Xavi. Zidane is more likely to produce one great run or one great goal, but his performance throughout the 90 minutes will be rather "sporadic" or "inconsistent". On the other hand, Riquelme can take over the flow of a game from beginning to end, and unlike Xavi, he did have the magic to thoroughly entertain a crowd (note: not to say that Xavi is a boring player, but in comparison, I don't think he is as entertaining to watch). I think you have a straw man argument there James. You want to discredit my whole argument on the basis of what in your opinion was an "intentionally flawed" or "biased" comparison, when in fact the comparison would (as far as I'm concerned) remain the same regardless of it being young Zidane or peak Zidane vs young Riquelme or peak Riquelme. Zidane never failed to deliver? Then please do tell, what happened that time that Zidane was invisible whilst playing a Champions League Final with Juventus? What happened that time Zidane was invisible against Manchester United, in a game that meant that Juventus was effectively eliminated from the Champions League? Are you sure Zidane "never failed"? Hey, what about Zidane's first club? His first club had been playing first division football for almost half a decade prior to Zidane, yet curiously, the very same season that Zidane started almost all the games, the club was relegated, and Zidane moved on to Bordeaux. I don't know how badly Zidane failed that season, maybe his club was just unlucky despite Zidane performing at a decent level, but what is indeed certain, is that "demotion" is rarely a good sign of great performances. NOTE To describe Boca Juniors as a "smaller club" on the same category as Villarreal, is just..... not to offend you, but it is indeed stupid. Now that's a loosing case, if you asked me.
Assuming you are talking about the 1998-99 CL SF, - Zidane gave the pre-assist for Conte's goal in the first leg (Check at min 25 in the link http://www.theguardian.com/football/1999/apr/07/newsstory.sport) - Zidane gave the assist for Inzaghi's first goal in the second leg (Check at min 7 in the link http://www.theguardian.com/football/1999/apr/21/newsstory.sport6) Also, for a guy who was 'invisible', he seemed to be part of a lot of positive actions for his team, as can be gathered from reading the minute-by-minute from those two match links. BBC also seems to feel he was outstanding in the 1st leg while playing with a knee brace (check image) on coming back from a 3-week layoff as seen in this link here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sport/football/317396.stm and they also say that he continued to be influential in the second leg when poor marking had led to Manchester United's first goal as well as second goal as seen in this link here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sport/football/325389.stm. So lets just put the blame at the right place shall we i.e. the failure in this case was of Juventus' defence, which was not able to hold on to a 2 goal lead for 80 minutes in the 2nd leg of CL SF. The season Zidane first played in a high number of games (28 games) for Cannes was in 1990/91 when Cannes finished 4th (their highest finish since the 1940s) which allowed them to qualify to play in a European international tournament for the first time in their history i.e. in the UEFA Cup in 1991/92. The relegation did happen, but in the second season when he played a majority of matches, although Zidane's role in that is unclear because his stats in the league improved from his first season (scored 5 goals in 31 games played which was second highest behind the top scorer Francois Omam-Biyik who scored 7 goals in 35 games played) and Cannes was competing in 3 tournaments (something which it was not used to doing) out of which it did manage to go quite far in the Coupe De France (SF loss to Monaco on penalties).
I'm not sure if you realize this, as I see you posting often, but a pre-assist on an eventual loss, or reaching the SF of the mighty Coupe de France, is not really that impressive for an all-time great playmaker.
A pre-assist and an assist, that is 2 goals out of 3 that Juventus scored in the two legs of the SF. Zidane was injured and playing with a knee brace in the 1st leg, went for a knee surgery immediately after the 2nd leg. Lastly, I think you are not realizing that leadleader said Zidane was 'invisible'. Can you tell me how an 'invisible' man is supposed to provide a pre-assist and an assist and be termed as being outstanding or influential by a respected publication from the nation of the team which was playing against him? As for the CDF SF, you are mistaken, it was mentioned to show the number of games that the team was playing was higher than a team like that was used to and not as a great achievement for an all time great playmaker.
In this particular example it may be merited, I was just making a point that I've seen you elevate Zidane's performances in minor matches or competitions too many times, while in another thread for instance you question Riquelme's value for Argentina, despite them leading until his exit in a quarterfinal World Cup match against Germany at their home soil no less. What worth does a semifinal exit in the French Cup have in relation to that?
Am happy you agree. No worth at all, as I added later, you misunderstood my point since the reason I mentioned the CDF SF was to show that Cannes was playing more matches than a club that sized was used to in a single season, which could be a reason for their relegation in the league, especially since Zidane's level in the league certainly didn't seem to fall down in terms of goal stats in that season. Regarding the Riquelme part, I really did not see him (or any other offensive player for Argentina) being relevant for the last 15 minutes of his time on the pitch in that match. Was just trying to explain that part. If you feel otherwise, I am perfectly ok with the same since I already said all that I wanted to in that thread.
Videos of Zidane his 1998-99 semi-final performances: I think it is not worse as some of the worst semi-final displays by Cronaldo or Messi in the current era.