• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

1996 - 2006 (a decade of French football domination) ?

Salamuddin

International Debutant
1996 - France reach semis Euro 96
1998 - France win the FIFA world cup 1998
2000 - France win Euro 2000
2001 - France win Confederations Cup
2001 - France win FIFA u-17 World cup
2001 - France reach semis of FIFA u-20 world cup
2003 - France win Confederations cup
2006 - FRance runners up FIFA world cup 2006.

Possibly only Brazil have matched France's achievements over the last 10 years......

Vive La Francais ....Allez Les Bleus.......
 

Salamuddin

International Debutant
Matteh said:
2002 appears to be missing...

Well they are allowed a little blip.....aren't they especially when you take it into context ....
what have the English, Spanish, Dutch, Germans, Italians and Argies achivd in the same time period ?

Argentina and Italy probably have the best records among that lot...but even they can't match the French.
Has England reached even a semi of a major tourney in teh last 10 years ?
 

Salamuddin

International Debutant
Matteh said:
Euro Champs in 96.

2002 wasn't a blip, it was full scale choke.

Yeah Germans have done ok I suppse....but still not as good as FRance.


2002 was disappointing...but I think Les Bleus have more than made up for it with their other achievements.....you can't win them all but you can be very consistent at the top level and France (largely due to an underrated league and arguably the best youth development program in the world) have done that.
 

Matteh

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Salamuddin said:
Yeah Germans have done ok I suppse....but still not as good as FRance.


2002 was disappointing...but I think Les Bleus have more than made up for it with their other achievements.....you can't win them all but you can be very consistent at the top level and France (largely due to an underrated league and arguably the best youth development program in the world) have done that.
Germans won Euro 96. Was talking about England getting into the semis.

French leagues aren't underrated at all. They've done nothing in Europe for ages, Calais a 4th division team won their French Cup not too long ago.

You can't win them all, but you can at least score a goal in the tournament where you're the defending champions.
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
France has had a such a bunch of legends and it has been a golden generation for them. I was watching the France-Italy re-match in the Euro qualifiers after the world cup final and it was strange seeing the team without names you had become accustomed to (though some of the older guys still remain for the near future). While a few of the newer players impressed, they have some big boots to fill.
 

Hoggy31

International Captain
Matteh said:
Germans won Euro 96. Was talking about England getting into the semis.

French leagues aren't underrated at all. They've done nothing in Europe for ages, Calais a 4th division team won their French Cup not too long ago.

You can't win them all, but you can at least score a goal in the tournament where you're the defending champions.
Took the words right out of my mouth tbh.
 

FRAZ

International Captain
Salamuddin has a point because Frace was not very very well known as an international soccer power house but by hook or by crook or by whatever they have come in the eyes suddenly in this decade . Well nice improvement by them ,I should say !!
 

Matteh

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Platini in the 80s?

They had home advantage in 98, always a massive advantage.
As for 06, they looked so so average in the group stages, then managed to click. Also showed how dependant they were on Zidane in the qualifying that they had to recall him.

They've definitely peaked i'd say, and it's time for another country to step up. Personally i think it's about time Holland actually won, but it looks like it might be Argentina.
 

Salamuddin

International Debutant
Matteh said:
Platini in the 80s?

They had home advantage in 98, always a massive advantage.
As for 06, they looked so so average in the group stages, then managed to click. Also showed how dependant they were on Zidane in the qualifying that they had to recall him.

They've definitely peaked i'd say, and it's time for another country to step up. Personally i think it's about time Holland actually won, but it looks like it might be Argentina.


That's silly. Zidane's one of the greateet players ever...he'd make a difference to any side....Argentina wouldn't have won 1986 without Maradona and Brazil may not have won 1958 without Pele and Germany 1990 without Lothar Matthaus.

As for home advantage, you've still gotta go out there and do the job......a world cup win is agreat achievemnet whether it's at home or not.
 

Salamuddin

International Debutant
I'd definitely say France 1998-200 was better than Platini's great side of 1982-1986...although that a was a very fine team also and had it not been for some German dirty play , thy may well have won world cup 1982.
 

Matteh

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Salamuddin said:
That's silly. Zidane's one of the greateet players ever...he'd make a difference to any side....Argentina wouldn't have won 1986 without Maradona and Brazil may not have won 1958 without Pele and Germany 1990 without Lothar Matthaus.

As for home advantage, you've still gotta go out there and do the job......a world cup win is agreat achievemnet whether it's at home or not.
Yeah but for a team during it's supposedly dominant period you've had thought they could at the very least qualify for the tournament without Zidane.

Fact is, home advantage is a massive advantage. 1/3 of all World Cup winners have been at home.
 

grecian

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Platini was the best player I ever saw, a man that scored goals from midfield in the defensive hell that was 80s Italian football.

I often wonder if Wenger was influenced by a side that used to have Genghini, giresse, Tigana and Platini in midfield, no place for a Robbie Savage-type.

Two of my fave sides ever played in the 1982 WC, brazil with Zico, Socrates, Falcao, Eder, and the aforemetioned French team. Neither won, the fouling Germans, and a cheat-led Italian team in the final. Pragmatism has ruled since then IMO.
 

Salamuddin

International Debutant
Matteh said:
Yeah but for a team during it's supposedly dominant period you've had thought they could at the very least qualify for the tournament without Zidane.

Fact is, home advantage is a massive advantage. 1/3 of all World Cup winners have been at home.

As football becomes more global and increasingly more competitive, I think home advantage is good yes...but it's not as big as you're making it out to be.

Only 1 out the last 7 world cups has been won by the home team.
Spain couldn't do it in 1982, Italy in 1990 or Germany in 2006. I don't think it undermines France's achievement especially when most people thought they would choke along the way.
 

Cloete

International Captain
Holland and France have the two best youth systems in the world IMO. But Brazil is unmatched in numbers. I shudder to think what they'd be like if they had the right infrastructure and coaching at a young age. Sure you can't coach some of it but if you look at England, Italy, Germany etc. players like Ballack, Gascoigne and Totti are massive exceptions. Whereas Holland and France continue to produce bucketloads of players with flair and creativity. Similarly to Brazil, but if they recieved the same coaching as in Holland and France I have a feeling they'd be even better.

Things are changing throughout the world though as other countries try to copy France and particularly Holland's sysetms. That's why the current English team has more "flair" than they've possible witnessed in their entire history. With guys like Gerrard, Lampard, Cole and Rooney.

Also that's why the English league is played at a fast pace with a focus on phyiscal strength, speed and athleticism. The Italian game is a far more technical, defensive game. Holland invented the concept of Total Football and still look to play that sort of game. Brazil is full of creative play and showboating too where you can get guys who aren't physically great by any means but can be a star player. Whereas in England you get players like Agbonlahor, good player, who are in the team because of their speed (although I admit he'll probably develop into soemthing alot better). Things are changing though obviously and Australia's changing too. Typically we used the English model of coaching and youth development and stuff and the focus was on a physical team with the result was Kewell being a massive exception. Our players didn't have the touch, movement, dribbling ability or cerativity to rival the top teams because of the system but we always matched teams physically. We're obviously moving towards a Dutch and French style with Brazilian elements in it too. The difference it made is visible simply from the World Cup with Guus in charge. I still feel we have too many "old style" coaches, most of them being from the UK (not an exaggeration at all), in our game and that's detrimental IMO.

Of course that's all contentious but it's definitely how I think football is the way it is today in certain countries.
 
Last edited:

Matteh

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I'd have said the fact England has 'Gerrard, Lampard, Cole and Rooney' now is an even bigger jump that it might seem. The English game has changed style massively in the last 10-15 years, which is essentially down to more foreigners in the Premiership.
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
Cloete said:
Holland and France have the two best youth systems in the world IMO.
Yeah, but the French system creates such huge amounts of losers it's unbelievable. They're nurtured from 13 into believing football is their future - then for those who fall flat on their faces...

To the thread topic: France 1996-2006 can't measure up to Brazil 1958-1970. Brazil revolutionised world football - with special pace, technique and tactics - France relied on exceptional talent at doing exactly the same Pelé and Garrincha perfected 40 years ago, though at a higher pace. Also, Brazil's only failure came in 1966, when German and English referees (hands up anyone who think it was a coincidence that they were allotted to Brazil's group...) allowed Bulgarian defenders to slaughter Pelé in the first match, and Eusebio's Angola/Mozambique United pounced on the opportunity, hacking Pelé out of the Cup and winning 3-1 to knock Brazil out.

Admittedly they were never that good in Copa America, but they didn't really bother with that cos it gave them too many bad memories about losses to Uruguay. :D

By contrast, France were nowhere to be seen in Euro 96 (Czechs dominated but Germany won), needed penalties and a sick Ronaldo to win WC 98, were solid in Euro 2000, got shown up by Senegal, Denmark and an off-colour Zidane at WC02, and then by Greece in WC04. They had about three years where they could genuinely be said to be best in the world (France 2000 would have beaten Brazil 2000 rather easily tho).
 

Top