Football - the highest level?

[gerblod]

Since I watched my first World Cup in '66, I assumed that national teams were superior to club sides - after all England or West Germany were made up of the select from their first divisions. 

But, already, the Italian and Spanish clubs had begun recruiting from other countries in that period. Real Madrid had won five ECs with a significant influx of imports. Now, the best club sides are an amalgam of the world's best players.

My question is: which current national sides could match or beat the best club sides?

[MarriedaLeicesterGirl]

53 minutes ago, gerblod said:

 

My question is: which current national sides could match or beat the best club sides?

Do you mean like it is now -- where they only play together during an international break -- or if the national team side was playing together all the time, like a club? Because I think the Brazilian and Belgium teams could match or beat the best club sides over a season.

[gerblod]

1 minute ago, MarriedaLeicesterGirl said:

Do you mean like it is now -- where they only play together during an international break -- or if the national team side was playing together all the time, like a club? Because I think the Brazilian and Belgium teams could match or beat the best club sides over a season.

That's a point I hadn't considered - a national side operating as a league side over a season! There's something to be said for the factor of a team all having the same language, background, national pride etc. 

I assume that the best players adapt best to a different set-up that they're at least familiar with i.e. Kane adapts well to moving from Spurs to England.

I'd say that France stand out as a 'supreme team'. 

Brazil I'm not sure about - just because I haven't seen more than glimpses of the Copa America games. Belgium should be - based on their rating. I guess the yardstick would be, could a national side beat Manchester City over a season (if you could clone de Bruyne)?

Thanks for your answer - it's been stimulating .

 

 

[Sampson]

Belgium are so overrated. So misleading when people go on about them being "the #1 ranked team in the world". They're a quarter final team, it's a fault of the FIFA ranking they're ranked #1, not an indication that they're the best in the world. Any sane ranking would have them around 7th or 8th in the world.

Their only achievement in the past 30 years has to reach 1 semi-final in a major tournament, how that is good enough to be ranked world #1 I don't know.

 

To be fair, 4 or 5 years ago, I think they generally were one of the top 3 or 4 sides in the world, but definitely not now. De Bruyne is the only one who would get in any other national side, maybe Courtois, though I'm not as convinced as that a few years ago.

They often start Wolves, Brighton, Hertha Berlin and Bologna players and a well over the hill Hazard.

England are 100% a better team than Belgium. As are France, Brazil, Argentina and Spain. Italy and Portugal have better individuals overall too, but seem to be hit and miss whether they'll actually gel or be too many egos in one pot or not.

Edited 30 March 2022 by Sampson

[Greg2607]

This is awkward....

 

Edited 30 March 2022 by Greg2607

[Sampson]

18 minutes ago, Greg2607 said:

This is awkward....

 

What's awkward about it? I even said very specifically 4 or 5 years ago when the likes of Hazard, Kompany, Mertens, Vermalen, Alderveirald, Vertongen, Witsel,  etc. were all in their prime, they were much better. They absolutely were a better side than England in 2018. Not sure what a defeat and a win against England 2 years ago really says.

People seem to think Belgium still have all their old guns still in their prime, rather than still having to field a bunch of over the hill 34 and 35 year olds and bottom half Bundesliga and Serie A players to replace them. Even De Bruyne is starting to not look like the same player he was a year or two ago, although he's still crazy effective.

 

I think almost anyone would take England's squad and the squads of 6 or 7 other nations over Belgium's right now.

Edited 30 March 2022 by Sampson

[Stadt]

It's hard to say because the trade off between international depth vs no transfers is so important and what makes the respective squads what they are. International managers are usually failures domestically too, so nations suffer there.

 

In a 38 game season of the best club and national teams I reckon Man City, Liverpool and Bayern finish in the top 3. If France had Guardiola instead of Deschamps then I'd back them.

 

In knockout tournament where there's a higher degree of variance, it's much more open, hard to say but the countries are in with a better shout.

[Dan LCFC]

I don't understand how Belgium have even done it. The algorithm is clearly very flawed when you can make one semi final in that amount of time yet spent what, four years at number one?

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, Dan LCFC said:

I don't understand how Belgium have even done it. The algorithm is clearly very flawed when you can make one semi final in that amount of time yet spent what, four years at number one?

Ask Bryan adams ……….

[Nalis]

Due to familiarity with their teams, we'll use France and England as examples. Lets say France are best team in the world and England are in the top 3.

 

Using the Premier League 38 game season as an example, I'd say France would probably be around Chelsea's position and England would be a solid 5th, something like the below:

 

Man City/Liverpool

Chelsea/France

England

 

In a champions league France would probably be one of the favourites to win due to their cup nous. England might be a quarter final team.

 

All crude obviously.

[Fox92]

On 30/03/2022 at 17:42, Nalis said:

Due to familiarity with their teams, we'll use France and England as examples. Lets say France are best team in the world and England are in the top 3.

 

Using the Premier League 38 game season as an example, I'd say France would probably be around Chelsea's position and England would be a solid 5th, something like the below:

 

Man City/Liverpool

Chelsea/France

England

 

In a champions league France would probably be one of the favourites to win due to their cup nous. England might be a quarter final team.

 

All crude obviously.

England are let down by poor centre backs. Magurie and Mings are nothing.

We're okay in full back positions and probably midfield too.

Kane is one of the most lethal finishers in the World.

[Nalis]

1 hour ago, Fox92 said:

England are let down by poor centre backs. Magurie and Mings are nothing.

We're okay in full back positions and probably midfield too.

Kane is one of the most lethal finishers in the World.

I still rate Maguire for England but maybe thats down to the better full backs and midfield to protect him a bit.

 

Stones hasnt really had a chance at Man City but has been ok for England in the past too.

 

The options in central defence after that are poor at top level in general I do agree. Tomori and White deserves a chance in any upcoming friendlies. Mings shouldnt be anywhere near a squad with world cup aspirations let alone the first XI.

Edited 1 April 2022 by Nalis

[Sly]

France are the one that stand out in terms of depth and ability. 
 

I think Liverpool and Manchester City beat other national team. 
 

The Barcelona / Real Madrid teams of the past as well, far exceeded the level of international teams.  

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

That Spain team that was Barcelona with casilas and ramos would probs have won leagues comfortably. 

[JamieG]

On 01/04/2022 at 13:06, Nalis said:

I still rate Maguire for England but maybe thats down to the better full backs and midfield to protect him a bit.

 

Stones hasnt really had a chance at Man City but has been ok for England in the past too.

 

The options in central defence after that are poor at top level in general I do agree. Tomori and White deserves a chance in any upcoming friendlies. Mings shouldnt be anywhere near a squad with world cup aspirations let alone the first XI.

If maguire played for any other club, he has a bad spell of form and recovers from it quickly. 

Man united fans are toxic they turn him into a joke, and wonder why he isn't performing while at the same time throw a constant stream of abuse at him. 

 

Every football post I see on social media, be it about man United / maguire or Norwich City or any club just gets hijacked by comments and abuse aimed at Harry maguire. 

There's no wonder he struggles to perform in a united shirt he must always have that bullshit in the back of his head. 

 

We certainly coped with set pieces a lot better with him at the back