• 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.

Spain vs France: World & European Champions.

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
SPAIN:


-----------------------------Casillas--------------------------------------

Ramos-----------------Pique-----------Puyol--------------------Capedevilla

----------------------Busquets/Senna-----Alonso--------------------------

------------------------------Xavi----------------------------------------

---Iniesta--------------------------------------------------Villa-----------

-----------------------------Torres---------------------------------------

Backups: Reina, Valdes, Arbeloa, Marchena, Fabregas, Silva, Pedro, Guiza/Llorente


FRANCE:

-----------------------------Barthez--------------------------------------

Thuram----------------Desailly----------Blanc---------------------Lizarazu

--------------Vieira----------Deschamps------Petit------------------------

-------------------------------Zidane-------------------------------------

--------------------Henry------------Treseguet/Duggary-------------------

Lama, Rame/Coupet, Lebouf, Candella, Sangol, Karembeau, Makelele, Pires, Djorkaeff, Wiltord


As most would know Spain becoming world & Euro champions together have emulated France from a decade earlier..Spain have the superior depth, but if these two could have met at their peaks in a hypotetical match-up. I reckon Spain would struggle to break France down.

Spain are bascially the Barcelona of international football. To stop Barca @ club Level you need team who can shut down their mid-field passing & have a strike force who can take advantage of any mistake they make on counter-attacks. Like what United did in CL 07/08 semis - Chelsea (to a degree in the 08/09) semi - Inter Milan this year.

Vieira/Deschamps/Petit at their peaks would make it extremely hard for Xavi & co to control the midfield play i'd say.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
The difference between the two is that the France side which won Euro 2000 was vastly different, and vastly superior to the side which won the World Cup.

Your France side combines both - at no time did the side you've listed play together anywhere near its peak.

Dugarry wasn't a fixture, and how the hell you've managed to exclude Djorkaeff from the starting XI is beyond me.
 

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Spain for me, just.

I doubt they'd care but their World Cup performances (bar perhaps the SF) just didn't do justice to their ability. I'm giving it to them based on their utter dominance in the qualifiers and friendlies (they've lost only 2 games or something in 4 years). What did France's corresponding record look like in that period?
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
The difference between the two is that the France side which won Euro 2000 was vastly different, and vastly superior to the side which won the World Cup.

Your France side combines both - at no time did the side you've listed play together anywhere near its peak.

Dugarry wasn't a fixture, and how the hell you've managed to exclude Djorkaeff from the starting XI is beyond me.
Wasn't Dugarry a regular in 98? At least at the start of the tournament.
 

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Didn't France in '98 have a centreforward who didn't score all tournament? Was that Dugarry? Not sure.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Didn't France in '98 have a centreforward who didn't score all tournament? Was that Dugarry? Not sure.
You're thinking of Stephane Guivarc'h.

Henry and Trezeguet got a couple of goals in the group stages, Dugarry came in for Zidane when he was banned in the knockout rounds.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
The difference between the two is that the France side which won Euro 2000 was vastly different, and vastly superior to the side which won the World Cup.

Your France side combines both - at no time did the side you've listed play together anywhere near its peak.
They basically played that side EUR0 2000 Final FYI. I just altered it tactically for this hypotetical match-up because its Spain they are playing

France in Euro 2000 matchday 6


Dugarry wasn't a fixture, and how the hell you've managed to exclude Djorkaeff from the starting XI is beyond me.

Camn down now. Firstly i didnt suggest Dugarry was a fixture, surely by putting Duggary/Tresguet meant it was clear either one could start in this hypotetical line-up.

Also as i said intially Spain are the Barcelona of international football, to beat Spain you have to do to them what Inter did to Barca last year. Which is preventing Xavi/Alonso/Iniesta much freedom in the mdi-field.

Theirfore with 3 serious defensive mid-fielders would be who can sorta of man mark those 3. Thus a creative player like Djorkaeff & even Pires would be sacrfices, thus in this hypotetical match-up, France has would have a great chance.
 

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
You're thinking of Stephane Guivarc'h.

Henry and Trezeguet got a couple of goals in the group stages, Dugarry came in for Zidane when he was banned in the knockout rounds.
Yep, that's the one. France's defenders contributed heavily with goals in that WC, Blanc scored a winner against Paraguay and who can forget Thurams' 2 in the SF.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
They basically played that side EUR0 2000 Final FYI. I just altered it tactically for this hypotetical match-up because its Spain they are playing

France in Euro 2000 matchday 6





Camn down now. Firstly i didnt suggest Dugarry was a fixture, surely by putting Duggary/Tresguet meant it was clear either one could start in this hypotetical line-up.

Also as i said intially Spain are the Barcelona of international football, to beat Spain you have to do to them what Inter did to Barca last year. Which is preventing Xavi/Alonso/Iniesta much freedom in the mdi-field.

Theirfore with 3 serious defensive mid-fielders would be who can sorta of man mark those 3. Thus a creative player like Djorkaeff & even Pires would be sacrfices, thus in this hypotetical match-up, France has would have a great chance.
That's not how Inter beat them.
 

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Inter got their fair share of luck in beating Barcelona as well.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
That's not how Inter beat them.
That definately what Inter did. Especially in the 2nd leg. Inter were incredibly well drilled and disciplined and counter attacked ruthlessly

Xavi couldn't control the mid-filed given that Cambiasso/Motta where the perfect shield shield as DMs. While Messi was bullied out down the right by Morinho eruditely having Chivu/Zanetti on left. So Barca creativety was shut out.

Thus any chance Inter had they counter-attacked ruthlessly (the 1st leg) & buried it.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
That definately what Inter did. Especially in the 2nd leg. Inter were incredibly well drilled and disciplined and counter attacked ruthlessly

Xavi couldn't control the mid-filed given that Cambiasso/Motta where the perfect shield shield as DMs. While Messi was bullied out down the right by Morinho eruditely having Chivu/Zanetti on left. So Barca creativety was shut out.

Thus any chance Inter had they counter-attacked ruthlessly (the 1st leg) & buried it.
No it wasn't. Xavi, Busquets and Keita were given the freedom of the midfield - if you doubt this check the possession and pass completion stats.

What Inter Milan did very well was to deny Barcelona any space in the final third to play intricate passes in behind them, and closed Messi down extremely well by doubling up on him.
 
Last edited:

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Xavi and Messi were ineffectual by their standards in the first leg, Inter deserved to win the first leg by a couple of goals. Barca were a hair's breadth (and some poor finishing) away from doing the same at the Camp Nou. Was a very even tie, Inter shaded it.
 

Pothas

Hall of Fame Member
Oh god Aussie v Furball.

This is going to be dire.

Aussie you need to know that Furball knows everything about football and everyone that everyone who disagrees with him is stupid; he will let you know this in his erudite and ever so slightly smug manner.
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
TBF though, GF is right re the Barca-Inter 2nd leg. It's pretty ridiculous to say that Barca didn't control the midfield. They damn near owned almost every blade of grass in that midfield. What were the possession stats, 80-20 or something like that?
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Oh god Aussie v Furball.

This is going to be dire.

Aussie you need to know that Furball knows everything about football and everyone that everyone who disagrees with him is stupid; he will let you know this in his erudite and ever so slightly smug manner.
Think that's the nicest thing you've ever said about me :wub:

edit: Ikki, 2nd leg stats were 86% possession for Barcelona. 555 passes completed to Inter's 67.
 
Last edited:

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
No it wasn't. Xavi, Busquets and Keita were given the freedom of the midfield - if you doubt this check the possession and pass completion stats.



What Inter Milan did very well was to deny Barcelona any space in the final third to play intricate passes in behind them, and closed Messi down extremely well by doubling up on him.
Am how would me checking the possession & pass completion stats discredit what i just said?.

Obviously if Inter's tactics where to be defensively discipled with Cambiasso/Motta shielding the defense & break on the counter-attack, when they get a chance. Barca (mainly Xavi) would be allowed to keep the ball (which would result in Barca having more possession), but as you said when he got the final third. He could penetrate the DM or the defense with his trademark ground or air passes. They had more of the ball but they couldn't do anything with it.

Plus i did say Messi was doubled up on "While Messi was bullied out down the right by Morinho eruditely having Chivu/Zanetti on left. So not sure why you felt the need to repeat it.

Good to see you defending Inter now though. Since earlier this year when i predicted that Inter would beat Barca if they met & suggested a bue-print on how Messi could be dealth with. You & others here on CW thought it defied logic:

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/2141789-post8974.html

GingerFurball said:
I'm joining the party late, but I thought I'd just check that aussie is aware of who Barcelona play in midfield.

The idea that ANY club side has the match of Barcelona in midfield is a staggeringly ignorant one.

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/2141918-post8991.html

me said:
Yes both Chelsea & Inter can match them in mid-field especially when you consider bench strenght.

When you talk about their regular first XI, although Barca with Xavi/Toure/Iniesta/Kieta (whichever trio starts) is better than everyone. Essein/Lamps/Ballack/Mikel/J Cole (whichever 4 starts) & Zanetti/Cambiasso/Muntari/Sneijder have the skill set really shut down Barca's creativity from mid-field & bully out Messi like what United did in 07/08. But of course its easier said than done.

Thats Barca's weakness, just like how a Australian batting line-up in cricket had a weaknesses & on turning pitches. Barca have a weakness againts physical teams who can shut them down along with quality strikers who can take advantage of goal-scoring oppurtunities when they arrive. Which ATM in europe is only 2 teams.
Very interesting indeed....Anyway back to Spain vs France
 
Last edited:

Furball

Evil Scotsman
They didn't match Barcelona in midfield though, they denied them space in behind their defence for their midfield to make use of their passing ability. They're two entirely different things. If the game plan was to match Barcelona in midfield, then they failed, badly. Their game plan wasn't to match Barcelona in midfield: it was to block Messi and shut down all the space within 25 yards of their own goal and restrict Barcelona to long shots, which they did.

Back to Spain v France: given that the France side of 2000 is the best international side I've ever had the privelidge of watching, I don't think they'd need to try and nullify Spain's midfield - there was more than enough talent in the French side to cause Spain plenty of problems.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
They didn't match Barcelona in midfield though, they denied them space in behind their defence for their midfield to make use of their passing ability. They're two entirely different things. If the game plan was to match Barcelona in midfield, then they failed, badly. Their game plan wasn't to match Barcelona in midfield: it was to block Messi and shut down all the space within 25 yards of their own goal and restrict Barcelona to long shots, which they did.
Well yes. Then bolded is what i'm tryig to say. You have explained it better than me though.

But just to be clear again, i was never suggested the non-bolded part of that post. If it confused you or anyone else, my bad.

Back to Spain v France: given that the France side of 2000 is the best international side I've ever had the privelidge of watching, I don't think they'd need to try and nullify Spain's midfield - there was more than enough talent in the French side to cause Spain plenty of problems.
I think if they nullified Spain's mid-field it would make it easier for them though. How would you line-up that hypotetical France XI to tackle modern day Span?
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Oh god Aussie v Furball.

This is going to be dire.

Aussie you need to know that Furball knows everything about football and everyone that everyone who disagrees with him is stupid; he will let you know this in his erudite and ever so slightly smug manner.
You forgot to mention that his favourite film is braveheart and that he has an inferiority complex towards the English tbh
 

Top