Who is the best international team ever?

[Evilo]

Look, it's really obvious to anyone who's looked at both teams.

You are here arguing over nothing. It's not even France, so you can't call me biased, right?
Yes, apparently, you managed to.
You talk about eras, yet I was the first to mention the recent Spanish team (in fact I mentionned teams like Brazil 70, France 00, Spain 08-10, Germany 70s, Holland 70s, France 84, etc..., a huge variety of eras).
Ding, you crashed yet again.

Brazil 02 had a huge team on paper, but failed to dominate like they should have.
Brazil 86 (or 82 as mentionned) was as amazing a team as you'll find in the history of the game, but lost in a penalty shootout to one of the best teams ever. Hardly a huge knock.

 

[Luigi Habs]

funny you mention that. I recorded a crap load of games from this WC. I remember back then I had a DVR, this was before the technology was monopolized by the cable/satellite providers that only allowed you to use it with a subscription.

Anyways, there's highlight videos on youtube of Ronaldinho alone in his amazing skills and performances in this WC. As a team?..well they won the WC lol... watching Cafu or R.Carlo's runs, or Rivaldo's long balls, I mean this team was a treat..I truly don't understand your bashing..

To be honest, my favorite team in that tournament was Senegal. I absolutely loved their style and I always like these underdog teams like Romania and Bulgaria in 94. But this thread is about best intl. teams ever, and this Brazil team was one of the best Brazil teams. Again, I fail to understand your total dismissal of this team. Specially calling them "unspectacular".

Prior to WC 2002 Brazil struggled in the qualifications. Their style of play was heavily criticized. Then came the worst WC in the history of World Cups. After a great 98 WC, WC 2002 was a total fraud. Bad officiating and bad play overall. Best 2 teams in the tournament were Brazil and England but that isn't saying much. Ronaldo had a great tournament but that's pretty much it. The other brazilian players were ok at most, and that's all what was needed to win.

Even though I was too young to watch WC 86, I have watched later almost every single game of that tournament, and what a WC it was. Any team between Germany, Argentina, France, Brazil or England could have won the WC. That Brazil vs France game was one of the best games ever.

 

[Panteras]

how did Brazil 02 not dominate? lol they scored 18 goals and allowed 4....they won every game, they were the best team in every match, and they won the cup. How did 86 in contrast apparently "dominate"? their most notable achievement in that tournament was beat Poland, sure no knock on them for losing in penalties to the 3rd placed team in that tournament...but apparently all sorts of knocks for the last Brazilian team to manage a WC. You make it sound like it was Brazil 94 or something lol. So in conclusion what is it? style of play? is that what you are basing for criteria of judging "best intl sides ever"? so should I bring up Senegal into this list? they had a great style that was was enjoyable to watch...heck they achieved same thing that 86 Brazil team did lol...so is it achievements? stats? how do you base it? Brazil 02 had everything, the stars so individual performces, the stats, the achievement, and the dominiance whether you want to accept it or not I mean I don't know what else they should have done to be considered spectacular and dominant? beat every team they faced 10-0?

 

[Panteras]

Prior to WC 2002 Brazil struggled in the qualifications. Their style of play was heavily criticized. Then came the worst WC in the history of World Cups. After a great 98 WC, WC 2002 was a total fraud. Bad officiating and bad play overall. Best 2 teams in the tournament were Brazil and England but that isn't saying much. Ronaldo had a great tournament but that's pretty much it. The other brazilian players were ok at most, and that's all what was needed to win.

Even though I was too young to watch WC 86, I have watched later almost every single game of that tournament, and what a WC it was. Any team between Germany, Argentina, France, Brazil or England could have won the WC. That Brazil vs France game was one of the best games ever.

that's not true at all mate, sorry. Rivaldo had a great tournament, heck you even Kleberson was a revelation he was great (even though he sucked and went into oblivion after that). But many players in Brazil had a good tournament and I fail to see how they didn't play well as a team? I think only Germany had more assists and distribution of assists amongst their players in this tournament. This thread is about greatest intl sides ever, and I just think this Brazilian team deserves to be there because of what they achieved whether you think this was a bad WC or not and the players that made up that team, their stats, and they way they played. I don't know what else they should or could have done in this tournament? lol

 

[Evilo]

Frankly, when you give Denilson as a supposed big name on the bench, everything's pretty much said. Denilson was a Youtube hero, nothing else. Never was a good player.


Brazil won because the opposition was crap and because the ref handed them their qualification against Belgium.

Again, try to find a copy of that France/Brazil 86. You won't argue anything about that issue after that.

 

[Eco]

2015 uswnt

 

[takk]

Ronaldo had a great tournament but that's pretty much it. The other brazilian players were ok at most

This is simply wrong. Even Denilson was playing his best football during 2002, might be the only time you can see him playing with that amount of discipline and composure. Brazil was a treat to watch during that tournament, certainly was the best team even tough they arrived with much question marks, they responded greatly to all the doubters.

Saying the other players than Ronaldo were ok at most would talking out of your butt end. Cafu, Rivaldo, Ronaldinho, Emerson were all great. The goalie Marcos was very good too, but he was outshined by Rustu and Kahn.

Teams of '06, '10 and '14 can't hold a candle to the '02 team. I'd understand the sentiment of teams of 80's were playing more delightfully with Zico and Socrates, but treating the 2002 team as a doormat near them would be a flawed approach.

 

[cgf]

...Emerson wasn't even part of the squad in South Korea/Japan...

That 2002 team simply didn't dominate on the field. I didn't realize before this thread that there was anyone who watched that tourney who thought otherwise. They won it all, and may look dominant on paper, but they weren't on the field. Even if their big names, stats, and the sorry state of the opposition might be misleading you.

To better understand that tourney, one of the worst german sides since the amateur days went to the final against that Brazil.

 

[takk]

Yeah, major blunder on my part regarding Emerson. But suggesting the players other than Ronaldo were average would be out of place. Maybe if I raise a little Gilberto Silva I can redeem myself a bit as they were both defensive midfielders. I might have thought of him but my mind wandered off to 06 Emerson. That might be the cause of my slip-up, though of course can't be an excuse.

I think Germany squad was an improvement over those of 98 and 00 ones. They created a sensation right away by rolling over Saudi Arabia, which also marked the arrival of Klose. Maybe if Italy didn't get a raw deal against South Korea the final would be different. But I don't think that German side was weaker than the previous two tournaments.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

It would be impossible to be worse than the 00 squad. That squad was easily the worst German squad ever and not just because of the player material but also the coaching and team spirit. Nothing short of a disaster.

 

[Eisen]

This is simply wrong. Even Denilson was playing his best football during 2002, might be the only time you can see him playing with that amount of discipline and composure. Brazil was a treat to watch during that tournament, certainly was the best team even tough they arrived with much question marks, they responded greatly to all the doubters.

Saying the other players than Ronaldo were ok at most would talking out of your butt end. Cafu, Rivaldo, Ronaldinho, Emerson were all great. The goalie Marcos was very good too, but he was outshined by Rustu and Kahn.

Teams of '06, '10 and '14 can't hold a candle to the '02 team. I'd understand the sentiment of teams of 80's were playing more delightfully with Zico and Socrates, but treating the 2002 team as a doormat near them would be a flawed approach.

They were not a treat to watch at all. I especially remember two games against Turkey. They couldn't have complained if they lost either. Coaching wasn't great either and basically the whole team underwhelmed.

 

[takk]

They clowned it up in first game against Turkey that's for sure. Yeah they shouldn't be in the best ever conversation at all, probably they're the least exciting Brazil squad than won the cup along with 1962 though I don't think they were underwhelming, I don't see the need for giving them Greece 2004 treatment.

 

[Panteras]

I just don't know what else people expected of that team? how else could they have played better? what else were they supposed do or have accomplished? it's a WC, they scored 18, conceded 4. Won every game...lol some people are just never satisfied I guess. Now it's about weak opposition, or Turkey gave them some good matches...lol what else? Brazil 02, the Rodney Dangerfield of WC winning teams by HFboards standards hahaha

 

[ecemleafs]

I personally loved the 02 world cup. Totti got hosed though

 

[Panteras]

I liked it too. Although that ball was hard to get use to and yes there were a lot of regrettable officiating. But overall it was fun, specially with Turkey, Senegal, and USA going far. Even though S.Korea pissed me off they were actually pretty darn good in that WC and their fans were just fantastic.

 

[Evilo]

I just don't know what else people expected of that team?

Play nice offensive collective football?

 

[Panteras]

but how did they not do that? I guess at this point it's highly subjective and whatever standarda you're trying to judge it by. Because to me they did just that. They scored a crapload of goals, and had 6 different scorers as well as good distribution of assists amongst it's players and they played good as a team thus why they won the damn thing...not to mention all the individual treats of the star players that were on that team. Yeah, I mean, again, don't understand the bashing and unwillingness to give this team any credit.

 

[Evilo]

I can't much really, as you can see everyone around here thinks they were disapointing except you.
They won the WC, fine, but that was thanks to reffing (for them and againt other big teams) and they didn't dominate like they should have on the pitch.
When you compare to Brazil 82/86, which didn't win but played out of this world football, they don't compare well.

 

[Panteras]

there are others here that think Brazil 02 was a good team. Come on man you can't say they won that cup because of reffing ..and against "big teams" lol yes Belgium was a superpower back then in world football. Again I disagree, I don't know what sort of dominiance you are talking about to be considered dominant in your eyes??? 10 goals each match? 80% possession? I don't know, what standards are we talking about here??? ....out of this world football? really? okay, I'll def look for these games on youtube.

 

[Bon Esprit]

Best team of alltime?

It's simple Hungary of the 1950s. Close thread.

The reality is: Noone knows and ever will know. Evilo and me (maybe others, too) can tell you later born how good teams of the 70s, 80s or 90s were. But in fact you can't compare Puskas to Platini or Ronaldo/Messi.

 

[SeawaterOnIce]

I personally loved the 02 world cup. Totti got hosed though

I was both rooting for Spain and Italy that tournament and it was so brutal to watch how one-sided the reffing was. Both teams got absolutely robbed...and it was no surprise that S. Korea has failed to do much since then.

 

[takk]

Man, Nigeria from 94 to 98 was swell as well. Best African team of all time?

 

[Evilo]

there are others here that think Brazil 02 was a good team.

I can't see anyone saying Brazil deserves a mention among the best of all time except you.
OTOH, plenty have said they were underwhelming.
And plenty have stated Brazil 82/86 should be mentionned.

And indeed, that Brazil/France game is an orgasm of football.

 

[Panteras]

I was both rooting for Spain and Italy that tournament and it was so brutal to watch how one-sided the reffing was. Both teams got absolutely robbed...and it was no surprise that S. Korea has failed to do much since then.

same here I was so pissed after both of those games. Even the Germany vs USA had some terrible reffing, was all over the tournament. To be fair though, that S. Korean team did play pretty darn good even though they should not have reached that far.

 

[Eisen]

there are others here that think Brazil 02 was a good team. Come on man you can't say they won that cup because of reffing ..and against "big teams" lol yes Belgium was a superpower back then in world football. Again I disagree, I don't know what sort of dominiance you are talking about to be considered dominant in your eyes??? 10 goals each match? 80% possession? I don't know, what standards are we talking about here??? ....out of this world football? really? okay, I'll def look for these games on youtube.

They feasted on a weak group, and by feasted I mean barely winning against Turkey, and clobbering the rest. They never convinced in the elimination rounds. There was no tactic really to be seen. They beat teams due to individual effort only. In the semis they barely beat Turkey again (in a bad match). A really crappy German team was just as good in the finals (a rare rookie mistake by Kahn sealed that deal).