I disagree but we’ll see
France - Euro 2021 Discussion
- Thread starter BusbyMalone
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
France looked frighteningly quick and strong at times, the pace and power they had compared to the almost every other team I've seen in the cup was night and day. And yet they didn't really blow me away, I expected to see more chances created really. Obviously Germany are a very good team, though.
I don’t think you can call tiki-taka anti-football because the term itself means playing extremely defensively. I guess when taken to extremes, tiki-taka can be deemed defensive because you are denying the other team the ball and if they don’t have the ball they can’t score. But with the best exposition of tiki-taka (the Barca team with Messi/Xavi/Iniesta), there’s no way you could call that defensive or anti-football. I also don’t think you could call that team boring, but I can see that people have wildly different views on these things.
Strange ending to your post there, and we’re kind of getting off track. The point is that Deschamps is going to be criticised because he plays defensively with a surfeit of attacking weapons. That’s the long and short of it.
I enjoyed Barcelona, I was a big fan of the Xavi-Iniesta-Messi era, I'm talking more when Tiki-Taka became a caricature of itself, with less adventurous pass forward for the sake of possession. That Barcelona side was ultra-offensive, and Messi was a force of nature. My comments are more on the Spain we've seen recently, since we're talking international sides, but I'm forever an admirer of that Barcelona team and I don't consider them as boring as the games I've seen with Spain. As you said, people view things differently which I love about football and find more pronounced in this sport than others.
There is no problem with you criticizing Deschamps if you want, there is an issue with you trying to dictate what people should think. Your previous post being an example where you tell someone what can or can't be called boring. The fact that you only value "attacking" football is only really your problem it doesn't apply to everyone and plenty of people value winning a lot. If your point was simply that you don't like it then there would be nothing to say, enjoyment is subjective.
Yeah I see what you are saying
If we wint his Euros I'm expecting the narrative to change, right now our NT is somehow quite liked and popular, especially in 2018 due to the locker room dancing videos, friendly attitudes and all that.
However winning two international tournaments by parking the bus? Yea it's gonna anger some people I think
However winning two international tournaments by parking the bus? Yea it's gonna anger some people I think
I’m not dictating what people should think, I’m telling you what posterity values. I often use the Brazil 70 example (generally considered to be the greatest team of all time) but there’s many other examples. I keep saying this, but football in the grand scheme of things doesn’t actually matter (apologies Bill Shankly). Whether a team wins or loses doesn’t cure cancer or solve world hunger. It’s entertainment. It’s a spectator sport. Therefore entertaining teams are remembered more fondly. And ok, people can differ on what exactly is entertaining, but that doesn’t mean that there isn’t some kind of consensus. I’m sure there are people who think that the 74 German team was more entertaining than the Brazil 70 team but it’s not a typical view.
To me, they are way too boring to the point of being unwatchable.
But I do understand the point behind this football. Individually, they can't be matched, and ever since 2018 World Cup, Deschamps seems to have made it his main task to ensure that each game is won by individual brilliance. Ok, last night may not be the best example for it, but creating a footballing environment in which goals can only occure trough either individual brilliance or freakish accidents like last night guarantee that his team is almost certainly going to win.
They remind me a lot of World Cup 2006 Brazil, which also relied on inividual brilliance and magical quartet of Ronaldinho, Kaka, Adriano and Ronaldo. They were incredibly boring to watch, they were routinely smashing easier opposition until they came to a better team in quarters. Zidane destroyed them, but actually it was a triumph of a whole French team which played much better football.
Now, I know these things can't be compared as they are not completely equal, but the point is, as long as they win, they are fine. If they happen to lose, it's going to be a disaster for Deschamps and his whole philosophy.
I wouldn't compare them to Spain couple of nights ago in terms of boredom either, as it wasn't completely Spanish choice to have game played that way. Sweden didn't really want the ball at all.
But I do understand the point behind this football. Individually, they can't be matched, and ever since 2018 World Cup, Deschamps seems to have made it his main task to ensure that each game is won by individual brilliance. Ok, last night may not be the best example for it, but creating a footballing environment in which goals can only occure trough either individual brilliance or freakish accidents like last night guarantee that his team is almost certainly going to win.
They remind me a lot of World Cup 2006 Brazil, which also relied on inividual brilliance and magical quartet of Ronaldinho, Kaka, Adriano and Ronaldo. They were incredibly boring to watch, they were routinely smashing easier opposition until they came to a better team in quarters. Zidane destroyed them, but actually it was a triumph of a whole French team which played much better football.
Now, I know these things can't be compared as they are not completely equal, but the point is, as long as they win, they are fine. If they happen to lose, it's going to be a disaster for Deschamps and his whole philosophy.
I wouldn't compare them to Spain couple of nights ago in terms of boredom either, as it wasn't completely Spanish choice to have game played that way. Sweden didn't really want the ball at all.
In Spain Mourinho was criticised mainly for (some) os his games against Barcelona. For example when he tried things like Pepe as a midfielder in order to play only more destructive football.
Other than that some critics (and praises) came with his personality.
I know and I knew that France is the main favorite and it has the best squad by a large margin, but it is not what we are talking about.
Spain also won Germany 6-0 a few months ago, and?
Spain is a tier 3 or 4 favorite, far behind other teams, and that was the situation before Sweden game. It has good players but not top players. Sweden game didn't change anything.
If you take a look to the France-Germany summary you will see more clear chances from Germany. France offsides weren't close calls at all.
Obviously you are not going to convince me about France being favorite because i was convinced long time ago.
You are not going to convince me about Spain not being one of the main favorites because I already knew long time ago.
However, you are not going to convince me about the incapability of Spain of scoring goals because only Germany has scored more goals than Spain in Europe in the last 10 years (you can take the last 5 and same stats). Spain is simply not as consistent as it used to be because the quality of the players is not comparable, and it makes extremely difficult to win things in a knock-out tournament.
I'm not expecting to convince you about it, but 70 games of goals stats don't lie.
There is no way you can call Spain ultradefensive. Spain has been the 2nd European with more goals in a span of over 10 years, only after Germany.
You cannot say that a team that wins 6-0 over Germany or 6-0 over Croatia (just mentioning 2 but there were more similar similar results against decent teams) in the last 2 years is "ultradefensive" or "antifootball". I have never seen in my whole life an ultradefensive team scoring 6 goals against a team like Germany.
As I mentioned before, Mourinho was ultradefensive only against Barcelona (i think he got obsessed with the 5-0 he received on his 1st match). He didn't play like that against other teams, and they also scored a lot of goals.
You might like the style, you might hate it, but you cannot say that it is "ultradefensive" when the numbers say the opposite.
And not only goals, but chances, shots, etc.
I think this is my last message today because of my account limitations... so have a good day!
Dafuq are you talking about? These are the lineups from 2010 WC final, semifinal, quarterfinal and best of 32. Spain played with doublepivots in Xabi Alonso and Busquets
Your team won each 1-0 and was a Paraguay penalty from being knocked out. Superb offensive display my arse. Bore off now
Mate lets be realistic that Spanish team were 'boring' because other teams were terrified to go after them. Pressing them meant that they would generally find a way around it and punish the space left so as the OP said even an attacking German team decided to park the bus against them. Its like blaming Barca for being boring against Jose's Inter. The teams that Spain came up against decided not to play football (hell the purveyors of Cruyff football decided to try and kick them off the pitch in the final) so it is more their fault for the boredom than Spain's for having to face bus after bus every game.
In fact the fact is that we should have parked the bus against Barca in 09 and 11 like Chelsea did but Fergie was too proud and we suffered for it.
You're asking for something that is very rare in the entire history of football. Winning a major International tournament is probably the hardest feat in football, winning it in style can be nigh impossible. Its one thing to assemble a golden generation of footballers, getting them to play together and win in spectacular fashion is a whole new level. Perhaps you are right and that France can play better football and still deliver trophies, but them being boring is really the only stick you can beat Deschamps with. His international record over the past two major tournament has been exemplary.
France are the best team ive seen so far, they will probably win it.
Never said he didn't do defensive duties at all. I said he had same issues (good or bad) as he plays with us.
Also France pretty much defended almost all game. His defensive stats were supposed to be high in that sense. And, duels is what he is good at in both United and France and win lots of fouls because of it.
Not exactly some things that he didn't do at United.
The Barca that played like they did against us in that 2011 final was glorious to watch, I agree. But I also remember games where they basically won 1-0 with almost 90% possession and it's impossible to deny that those games weren't boring as hell. Lesser teams didn't have a clue what to do against them while Barca was almost challenging themselves to see how many passes they could make before scoring by walking the ball in. It got a bit old to be far.
It was a baffling performance. They didn't really press, looked passive defensively, generated no sustained offensive pressure. And yet they seemed entirely in control and looked like they could be lethal in the attack when they wanted to. Don't feel like I've got a clear handle on what they are yet, but I suspect that was a sign of strength rather than weakness.
I agree. Spain's style is not boring, and certainly not defensive. When up against a team that parks the bus, it's not going to be much fun to watch (especially not until they score a goal), but that's not a reflection on Spain's style of play.
I also agree with your assessment of the team's chances. Their style isn't an easy one to succeed with - it takes both very, very good players individually, and also a very well-drilled colllective. This edition seems to fall a bit on the short side in both. The players are not of the same quality as the classic editions of yore, and also they have hardly played together. If I understand correctly, it's a quite different and new team compared even to the qualifiers.
I would be amazed if this france team didnt make the final as a minimum or even win it. Far superior to any other team in the competition.
I think Italy would like to have a word. France has the superior individuals, but Italy is playing superbly as a unit.
Everything you’ve said is fair. They really should have beaten a weak Portugal (sans Ronaldo) in the Euro 2016 final at home though, so I wouldn’t say his record over the past two tournaments has been exemplary. Obviously you have to give him credit for winning the World Cup.
So France will probably do them the italian way. Play defensive and score a goal, bye bye Italy
They won one game scoring 7, and another one where Neuer with such a high line that they played sweeper for a whole half. France game was functional (but he was against the defensive Deschamps that people are talking about here). And finals are almost always cagey, even with relatively expansive teams.
To be clear, you agree that Germany weren't playing attacking football in 2014? That the 7-1 was due to Brazil totally collapsing more than anything else, Brazil had more shots, more possession and more corners than Germany. And France are definitely pragmatic, Deschamps is paid to win games and tournaments.
Edit: By the way, Howedes was playing fullback for Germany.
Last edited:
I don't agree, what counts as attacking football in an international tournament, name examples of more attacking teams than Germany that won a tournament? They scored 18 goals in 7 games.
I agree that Brazil collapsed but Germany made them collapse. They scored 7 goals in a semi-final! They deserve a lot of credit for that. Look at the goals and how proactive their movements were. It was attacking football. A defensive team wouldn't have believed their luck after going 2 up and sat back, not scored 7 goals against the hosts.
No one is taking credit away from Germany being a great team isn't limited to play "attacking" football and there are no recent examples of teams winning tournaments and being attacking, Germany 2014 included. And think about this, you are happy to call france defensive when they had the second amount of goals of the tournament in 2018 with 14 goals, you are essentially considering that Germany is attacking and France is defensive based on one result out of 7 games. And on a game where Germany didn't have more possession or shots than the opposition.
Only one loss in two major tournaments and you don't think its a great record. And its not like they got dumped out early, their loss was in extra time of the final.
That French side wasn't even that good. They were still using washed up defenders like Evra, Sagna and Koscielny. They didn't have Mbappe and Payet was their best attacker.
I was really impressed with them. looked the far more dangerous side when it was 0-0, were proactive and started brightly , went 1-0 up and then asked germany to break them down which they couldn't.
Look like a side that can do everything to a high standard and can play multiple ways throughout a game. I genuinely don't get the boring gibe at all, but then I am in the camp that think Spain were a really hard watch in 2010 so horses for courses etc.
Not unbeatable but clear favourites for me unfortunately...
They were playing at home. It’s a massive advantage. I mean South Korea made it to the semi finals of the World Cup on the strength of the tournament being played in their own backyard.Only one loss in two major tournaments and you don't think its a great record. And its not like they got dumped out early, their loss was in extra time of the final.
That French side wasn't even that good. They were still using washed up defenders like Evra, Sagna and Koscielny. They didn't have Mbappe and Payet was their best attacker.
Among other things, sure.
Germany was proactive, France really isn't. Main difference being the pressing, which is deeply ingrained in Germany football philosophy. I haven't seen France press too much, they were trying to control game mainly through good defensive positioning, and they were good at it.
Attacking sides that have won the tournaments recently have been Spain 2008, Spain 2012, Germany 2014, Spain 2010 to a lesser extent. It's not true that attacking teams don't win. France 2006 was also pretty offensive team, they only lost it on penalties. So it's not like you can't succeed playing attackingly.
How offensive were the teams I counted? Maybe not perfectly, but much more offensive than this French side for sure.
None of these teams were attacking.
You really have no strong argument here at all, do you?
What argument am I supposed to bring and to what question? I didn't argue that France was attacking and actually stated that it was a pragmatic team based on solid defense, so I don't see why I would try to argue that these teams were or weren't more attacking than France. Now I can tell you that none of these teams were attacking because they weren't, all of them were balanced teams.
Germany was also playing at home on tuesday, and it definitely factored into France's setup.
And yet IIRC none of those teams has a higher goals per game ratio in the knockout stage of their respective competition than France 2018.
Favourites for the tournament but I don't see the "favourites" in this side. On individual level they're brilliant though.
Germany, Belgium and Portugal have.yet to convince us on the field infant every team, bar Italy.
Germany, Belgium and Portugal have.yet to convince us on the field infant every team, bar Italy.
I'm very clear in my comments. You are mixing things and you are doing it again.
I was answering to this:
You say that Spain didn't play with strikers and then you put me line ups that includes:
- Villa & Torres against Portugal
- Villa & Torres against Paraguay
- Villa & Pedro against Germany
- Villa & Pedro against Netherlands
seriously.... dafuq are you talking about?
I was telling you that it was wrong and that the tournament that Spain played without a proper 9 was the Euro2012 (Silva/Cesc for the most part). That is the team with Busquets + Alonso that you consider horrible to watch for all neutrals. However...
That "boring team" that was "Playing two pivots in Xabi Alonso and Busquets and no strikers to control the middle of the park and annoy all neutrals" scored 12 goals in 6 games, the team with most goals overall and the team with most goals per match.
That boring team without a striker won 4-0 in the final to Italy
That boring team without a striker has been the only team in the history of the EC to score 4 goals in the final.
That boring team got the biggest victory in a EC/WC final (nobody else has won by a 4 goals difference, ever)
If that is not a superb performance, what is it? i'm all ears.
In the WC, as you have demonstrated, Spain played with at least 2 strikers (Villa + Torres/Pedro) every knock-out game. The fact that Spain had the hardest match against probably the least quality opponent says nothing. Yes, Paraguay missed a penalty, and? Spain missed another one, had more chances and won the game. So... dafuq are you talking about?
Spain played against parked buses on every single round. It is not a coincidence that the best game Spanish display was against Germany, who was by far the best quality team aside from Spain. However, Germany was used to attack a lot (16 goals in the tournament) but... they simply couldn't handle that. They were not ready to play without the ball, and by choice or incapability of doing so they were just staggering in their area for 90 minutes. They looked like a totally average team and they were actually great. If any of those teams had tried (or could have tried) to play a more positive football, you would have watched more goals (from Spain, probably), but who is to blame? the team that parks the bus or the teams that plays 90 minutes in the contrary area?
Hopefully, France will stop to think they have the best team and attack in the world...
Very happy for Hungary, legendary football nation from an historical perspective. A full stadium. This country knows how to respect and celebrate the Beautiful Game.
Very happy for Hungary, legendary football nation from an historical perspective. A full stadium. This country knows how to respect and celebrate the Beautiful Game.
You are French? Of course you are the best team, or one of the very best, either way you look at it. My issue is, Deschamps really isn't trying to play the brand of football which would make you easy on the eye. France really has quality to play differently.