Spanish federation has proposed to FIFA (officially) to host the 2nd ever 2013 Champions World Cup. This time it would REPLACE the FIFA COnfederations cup, and have all 8 World Champions competing for the 2nd FIFA Champions World Cup title.
- Argentina
- Uruguay
- Brazil
- Germany
- England
- Spain
- Italy
- France


The first one was held in 1980 in Uruguay, and had Uruguay beat Brazil (again) in a famous final that at the time stopped both nations. (2-1)

http://www.youtube.com/watchv=CjyJilRg28M&p=8342ABC46319FC3D&playnext=1&index=6



IMO this would kick SO MUCH ASS. Much better than seeing (no offense): USA vs. Saudi Arabia , or the like. These (along with Holland) are the world's main footballing nations hands down. FIFA are seriously considering it, but I feel it's a no brainer. It's basically a dream tournament.

To be honest we already have this: it's called the World Cup. Those teams rarely fail to qualify and when they do it is well deserved. I'd MUCH MUCH MUCH rather see teams like Portugal and the Netherlands than Uruguay and England.

And obviously Spain is only making this stupid proposal because they just won the World Cup. Had they lost to Holland I'm guessing they would think this was as stupid as I do.

Sounds like a 'World Cup' where it will mostly be played by reserves.

I enjoyed "Le Tournoi" in '97 ... that was a small enough group to see everyone play everyone else in a round-robin format ... for the proposed new tournament, having an 8-team round robin (maybe with a final between the top 2 teams) is the only way I'd really give it respect ... and it's one of the only ways a new tournament could bring something unique to the international football scene ...

but if it is going to be 2 groups of 4, I'd prefer to keep the Confederations Cup ... the Confed Cup is a chance for smaller nations to play the big boys, for the regional champions to get some global recognition of their cup-winning efforts, and for the world to see some upsets happen ... back in 2003, Eto'o's wondergoal against Brazil gave Cameroon and Africa a victory to be proud of ... Egypt have been jinxed in their World Cup qualifying efforts in recent years; but in 2009, they gave Brazil a right scare through the mercurial Mohamed Zidan ... and again in 2009, the boost to sah-curr's image in the US was HUGE when they made it to the final by beating Spain, and made Brazil produce a stunning comeback by going 2-0 up in the final ... I like to see that sort of stuff happen ...

actually, I don't see why we couldn't have both ... the Confed Cup could be held the year before the World Cup, while the new Champions World Trophy could happen the year after the World Cup ... the Copa America could shift to an even year cycle, coinciding with EURO years (the time difference would mean that there would be no overlap of TV coverage even if they happened during the same month -- which doesn't have to happen, but wouldn't matter anyway) ...

Thing is this isn't meant to replace the Confederations cup , it's supposed to be a 1 off thing held every few decades.
I'm pretty sure it would be the same format as the 1980 tournament. 2 groups, winners move on to final.

Though the $$$ that would come from this would be incredible. Even though most of those countries mentioned make the WC , they don't necessarily play each other often. (IE: Brazil played Germany for the first time...EVER in 2002. Brazil played England in 1970 and then in 2002, etc.)


I like the Confederations cup, it's cute. But to be honest, you must be on crack to pass on a 1 every 30 years tournament featuring potential classics from the most historic football nations on the planet.

Spain vs. Argentina final , 99,000 people , for the Cup winner's cup held every 30 years or......
Not dissing on Cameroon, MExico , USA's out there, but it's a no brainer.

If it's a one off every 30 years I guess I can get on board. But with all due respect to Spain I don't think they should host it. I'd put it in Dubai assuming they can control the temperature on the field.

If it's a one off every 30 years I guess I can get on board. But with all due respect to Spain I don't think they should host it. I'd put it in Dubai assuming they can control the temperature on the field.ditto, but with "Qatar" replacing "Dubai" ...

Is Qatar flying under the radar for super rich Middle Eastern countries?

it's not under the radar here

Those are good places to have it. Though from what I read on MARCA, it seems that Brazil wouldn't lose the right to host a tournament that summer (since the confed. cup is scheduled at this point).
It would most likely be in Brazil.
It's interesting, but from what I read, FIFA are seriously considering this

FIFA ****s everything up. The Maracana would be a great place for the final.... IN THEORY, but if you want to maximize revenue and make it 100% sure that everything is PERFECT, you can't do better than one of the oil/investment utopias (for the rich) on the Arabian Peninsula.

One of the most stupid ideas I've ever heard.

Just cause these teams got the best talent in the world doesnt mean it will make a great tournament. England, Italy and France both just had a **** world cup. England vs France would be a borefest. Argentina didnt even turn up against a tough team.

Seems to me the only reason you would be in favor of this is because Uruguay is in it, latching onto their WC wins from a century ago.


Brazil always qualifies to the Confed out of South America...


I don't think nations would take this seriously. Times have changed.

Hi everybody,

I am German and I created an account just to say that i would love to see such a tournament. It would definitely kick ass.

I am quite sure that at least the german squad would take that cup serious as hell. They are waiting desperately for facing Spain again to finally defeat them.
And for the other teams, I believe they would also burn to win as there is so much rivalry between theese nations.

But FIFA would have to give the dutch guys a champions title honoris causa :cool:

Hi everybody,

I am German and I created an account just to say that i would love to see such a tournament. It would definitely kick ass.

I am quite sure that at least the german squad would take that cup serious as hell. They are waiting desperately for facing Spain again to finally defeat them.
And for the other teams, I believe they would also burn to win as there is so much rivalry between theese nations.

But FIFA would have to give the dutch guys a champions title honoris causa :cool:

You're German?!?! Listen to this man, for he speaketh the truth.

You're German?!?! Listen to this man, for he speaketh the truth.

Sure, we always do except of a few years in the last century. You are allowed to doubt what was said then.

Haha (H)

Haha! (H)

Brilliant.

But FIFA would have to give the dutch guys a champions title honoris causa :cool:damn straight! they deserve it (Y)

Seems to me the only reason you would be in favor of this is because Uruguay is in it, latching onto their WC wins from a century ago.


Brazil always qualifies to the Confed out of South America...


I don't think nations would take this seriously. Times have changed.

HOLY !@$@$#% #$%#$%#!!!! FIFA HAS APPROVED THE TOURNAMENT!!!!
Blatter says it will take priority over the Confederations Cup (they will either scrap it or have reserve players from the top nations show up).

2 groups, semis and final. No decision on location.

This is HUGE!!!


(and you, yankee, I'm at Uni in Australia and every European here shat their pants collectively (as well as the 1 Argentinean) when they just heard FIFA approved it.) :cool: There's an unspoken bond between people from the traditional football nations you'd really never understand (kind of like explaining sex to a virgin).

I love it, and not just because Spain is in it. It's not as if the winner of this tournament is going to claim any special honors, it's just an entertaining summer friendly tournament between big names. As a one-off, I don't think anybody has anything to complain about except countries that would have participated in the Confederations Cup, and I suspect they won't be terribly disappointed either.

This is incredible! Days after I post the link about the first "Mundialito" movie being released, THIS happens.

Funny how some of the nations outside of the champion nations are reacting. Many of my friends are Americans who love football and they seem totally against it. "It's boring". "I'd rather watch Iran vs. New Zealand. Much more heart in that!!!"
I read a similar comment from 1-2 americans here funny enough. What they really mean is: "We're not invited :( " :p

Well, truth be told, it's going to be huge. The first ever Mundialito is an official FIFA title and was taken 100% seriously in 1980. This won't be a "friendly tournament". It's a once every 3 decade thing to see the Champion among Champions, pitting the greatest football nations of all time , many of whom rarely get to play each other.
I am 100% going to this tournament , wherever it is being held. It will be huge.

I love it, and not just because Spain is in it. It's not as if the winner of this tournament is going to claim any special honors, it's just an entertaining summer friendly tournament between big names. As a one-off, I don't think anybody has anything to complain about except countries that would have participated in the Confederations Cup, and I suspect they won't be terribly disappointed either.the "lesser" champion nations from "lesser" continents would be gutted! it must have been one of the proudest moments for the Iraqi players to have been on the pitch as equals with the megastars of world football from Spain ...




HOLY !@$@$#% #$%#$%#!!!! FIFA HAS APPROVED THE TOURNAMENT!!!!
Blatter says it will take priority over the Confederations Cup (they will either scrap it or have reserve players from the top nations show up).

2 groups, semis and final. No decision on location.

This is HUGE!!!am I missing something? I don't see any mention, let alone confirmation/approval, of this on FIFA's website ... point to me to the appropriate links, please ...

HOLY !@$@$#% #$%#$%#!!!! FIFA HAS APPROVED THE TOURNAMENT!!!!
Blatter says it will take priority over the Confederations Cup (they will either scrap it or have reserve players from the top nations show up).

2 groups, semis and final. No decision on location.

This is HUGE!!!


(and you, yankee, I'm at Uni in Australia and every European here shat their pants collectively (as well as the 1 Argentinean) when they just heard FIFA approved it.) :cool: There's an unspoken bond between people from the traditional football nations you'd really never understand (kind of like explaining sex to a virgin).



I'm Mexican, retard.


And congrats, I guess. I hope all nations do take it seriously.

I read a report on Marca. Sounds legit. Few friends of mine said it was mentioned in Spain and briefly in talk shows around Argentina and other south american football shows, saying FIFA delegates called in shows to confirm the "intention" to have it. but it was mentioned for about 40 seconds before they moved on.

From what I read, we won't hear anything about this for months. It's only in the developmental stages, so other than what Blatter said (like 2 lines saying "Yeah, we'd prefer this over the Confed cup"), FIFA refuses to release anything else until they have studied how the hell they are going to do this. :cool:
Only thing that is sure is that Argentina, Uruguay and Spain are all in for this tournament. They are the only media sources that have been vocal about this.
Too early to tell though. Though the possibility of it happening is fantastic.

the "lesser" champion nations from "lesser" continents would be gutted! it must have been one of the proudest moments for the Iraqi players to have been on the pitch as equals with the megastars of world football from Spain ...




am I missing something? I don't see any mention, let alone confirmation/approval, of this on FIFA's website ... point to me to the appropriate links, please ...

read ^^ . Blatter's quote was far from official. But he did talk about it "off the record", and it was mentioned in a bunch of football shows saying that all the nations are very interested in participiating. That's about it :S
For now, there's nothing else to talk about until we get more news in a few months time.

And obviously Spain is only making this stupid proposal because they just won the World Cup. Had they lost to Holland I'm guessing they would think this was as stupid as I do.

^ What he said. ^

They're behaving like "new money"

Question? Did Uruguay win the World Cup before Columbus landed in America?? It sure seems like it.

I sure as hell don't wanna see cheaters like Suarez playing such tournament. But whatever.

What he did wasn't cheating, it was a foul. He was rightly penalized for it. Ghana didn't take advantage.

It's very unfortunate that Gyan couldn't convert that penalty, but Suarez did the right thing. I would have used my hand too. The MOST IMPORTANT THING in football is to win; if you don't win, what's the point? I know some cultures don't have that mentality and they prefer "football d'arte" or whatever, but Uruguay definitely seems to have come up in a culture of "just win baby" that I can respect. I think they've gotten more pragmatic and less artistic as the level of player has gone down... they can't be as stubborn about playing an ineffective style like Argentina because they just don't have as many quality players, but really that's probably a good thing.

What he did wasn't cheating, it was a foul. He was rightly penalized for it. Ghana didn't take advantage.yup, and those are the indisputable facts ...

however, I still maintain that the punishment, according to the current laws of the game, doesn't fit the crime ...



It's very unfortunate that Gyan couldn't convert that penalty, but Suarez did the right thing. I would have used my hand too. The MOST IMPORTANT THING in football is to win; if you don't win, what's the point? I know some cultures don't have that mentality and they prefer "football d'arte" or whatever, but Uruguay definitely seems to have come up in a culture of "just win baby" that I can respect. I think they've gotten more pragmatic and less artistic as the level of player has gone down... they can't be as stubborn about playing an ineffective style like Argentina because they just don't have as many quality players, but really that's probably a good thing.I certainly can't respect it ... I mean, I can understand how one arrives at that level of desperation, but the willful corruption of sporting spirit is nothing to respect ...

sport is about entertainment, not just winning ... it is the means to victory that is the most important, not the mere victory (i.e. winning and style go hand in hand; one without the other is nothing to celebrate) ... the idea that "history only remembers winners" is fairly unintelligent: 1) after all, isn't it about what you remember? why concern yourself so much about what "history" will think? 2) legendary tales are comprised of epic stories (not just winning stories), and they don't merely feature the final scoreboard of who won or lost ...

however, I still maintain that the punishment, according to the current laws of the game, doesn't fit the crime ...


Agreed.

I think this would be entertaining at the very least. Though some of these nations live on the past and have fallen from grace.

sport is about entertainment, not just winning ... it is the means to victory that is the most important, not the mere victory (i.e. winning and style go hand in hand; one without the other is nothing to celebrate) ... the idea that "history only remembers winners" is fairly unintelligent: 1) after all, isn't it about what you remember? why concern yourself so much about what "history" will think? 2) legendary tales are comprised of epic stories (not just winning stories), and they don't merely feature the final scoreboard of who won or lost ...

You're wrong. Winning is the only thing that is important for a player. The only thing. For fans, maybe you want to be entertained, but for a player, for a manager, for a club and for a country, winning is the only important part of the match. I have NEVER grown up thinking of sports as entertainment for myself over actually winning. That's stupid. When I play something competitively I want to win. The idea that history only remembers winners is completely true by the way; the World Cup has been played so few times that it's maybe not easy for you to see, but do you think Argentina cares that they were absolutely disgraceful in 1978? **** no. They won the World Cup and the nation went into ecstasy. Cryuff likes to pollute minds with this "only playing beautiful" garbage, but talk to anyone else on those Ajax/Holland teams and they'll tell you that WINNING is the only thing that mattered to them. Because they were athletes and men, not armchair artists.

World Cup >= Olympics?

You're wrong. Winning is the only thing that is important for a player. The only thing. For fans, maybe you want to be entertained, but for a player, for a manager, for a club and for a country, winning is the only important part of the match. I have NEVER grown up thinking of sports as entertainment for myself over actually winning. That's stupid. When I play something competitively I want to win. The idea that history only remembers winners is completely true by the way; the World Cup has been played so few times that it's maybe not easy for you to see, but do you think Argentina cares that they were absolutely disgraceful in 1978? **** no. They won the World Cup and the nation went into ecstasy. Cryuff likes to pollute minds with this "only playing beautiful" garbage, but talk to anyone else on those Ajax/Holland teams and they'll tell you that WINNING is the only thing that mattered to them. Because they were athletes and men, not armchair artists.


To quote a Mexican soccer coach a few years back when questioned about the way his team was winning games...

"You want entertainment? Go to the circus."

You're wrong. Winning is the only thing that is important for a player. The only thing. For fans, maybe you want to be entertained, but for a player, for a manager, for a club and for a country, winning is the only important part of the match. I have NEVER grown up thinking of sports as entertainment for myself over actually winning. That's stupid. When I play something competitively I want to win. The idea that history only remembers winners is completely true by the way; the World Cup has been played so few times that it's maybe not easy for you to see, but do you think Argentina cares that they were absolutely disgraceful in 1978? **** no. They won the World Cup and the nation went into ecstasy. Cryuff likes to pollute minds with this "only playing beautiful" garbage, but talk to anyone else on those Ajax/Holland teams and they'll tell you that WINNING is the only thing that mattered to them. Because they were athletes and men, not armchair artists.hahaha, condescension once again ... you know, if I didn't pursue a career in sports, it was because my intellect wouldn't allow me to not pursue several serious academic pursuits ... and I hope you recollect a PM I sent you a while back about my working experience in the world of football during the year I took off from school ... so don't sit there thinking you're the guy with the player's angle, talking to some armchair supporter who has no idea of "how it really is" ...

your counterpoint about Argentina misses the point made in my previous post:1) after all, isn't it about what you remember? why concern yourself so much about what "history" will think?the Argentinians are free to think whatever they want about 1978, just as the Uruguayans can think whatever they want about that handball in 2010, as is their respective prerogatives ...

we can all watch the entire 1978 World Cup from archive footage of full match broadcasts (quite accessible through the magic of the internet), and make our own minds up on the style (or lack thereof) of play ... we don't have to depend on the Argentinians providing an "accurate" portrayal of Argentina's triumphant tournament ...

the 70s are most famous for the Dutch team that DIDN'T win anything -- the team that revolutionized football through a philosophy, not just winning ... their story and their impact wasn't forgotten just coz they didn't end up picking up the cup -- boy was it not forgotten! yet here you are arguing that "anyone" would tell you that it's all about winning ... your argument/counterargument falls to crap on that point alone ... while your Cruyff "pollutes" line is laughably pitiful ... but what else did I expect from a philistine?

The issue with Luis Suarez has long been debated, and I feel the matter has been closed.
There is a reason millions upon millions worldwide came to his defense vs. the obviously biased Ghanaian supporters.

...Suarez's move was 100% instinctual and understandable. Mario Kempes in 1978 said he didn't even realize he had done what he had done vs. Poland for seconds.
There was absolutely no corruption of the spirit of the game.

What WAS a corruption of the spirit of the game, was the Ghanaian player looking around and dropping to the floor 2 meters in front of Fucile to get a desperate free kick that led to the penalty.
After that, there were 2 clear offsides in the play. Not that the Ghanaians tried to tell the referee.

Funniest part for me was the image of the Ghanaians celebrating as if they had won the game :D, they really didn't mind the penalty then. What happens? Gyan misses, and suddenly the penalty was unfair. :rofl:

The issue will always be clouded by bias, it all depends on who you wanted to win. Uruguay did, in maybe the most dramatic way in world cup history (fitting of their history). End of story.

I would be furious too if the tiniest of nations took even more glory than their ilustrious history demands, in such an epic/memorable way, ....with a chip shot none the less in the final penalty :cb: .

*edit*

Question? Did Uruguay win the World Cup before Columbus landed in America?? It sure seems like it.

I sure as hell don't wanna see cheaters like Suarez playing such tournament. But whatever.

I never understood when i meet the rare american who wanted Ghana to win. They usually are the ones who didn't see Ghana roll around for 23 minutes after they scored the winner vs. the US.

But here you go lad :) . It really pleases me to see people still crying in their room about this , as I'm sure it does to the Uruguayans haha :)

I never understood when i meet the rare american who wanted Ghana to win. They usually are the ones who didn't see Ghana roll around for 23 minutes after they scored the winner vs. the US.

But here you go lad :) . It really pleases me to see people still crying in their room about this , as I'm sure it does to the Uruguayans haha :)
Keep on posting :p

http://annarborgrocerydelivery.com/shop/images/kleenex-box2.jpg

Un-sportsmanship is like stealing. Regardless of the situation and the excuses it is still WRONG. But what would somebody from a third world country like you understand about this?? Go back to your cheating country you mule.

hahaha, condescension once again ... you know, if I didn't pursue a career in sports, it was because my intellect wouldn't allow me to not pursue several serious academic pursuits ... and I hope you recollect a PM I sent you a while back about my working experience in the world of football during the year I took off from school ... so don't sit there thinking you're the guy with the player's angle, talking to some armchair supporter who has no idea of "how it really is" ...

your counterpoint about Argentina misses the point made in my previous post:the Argentinians are free to think whatever they want about 1978, just as the Uruguayans can think whatever they want about that handball in 2010, as is their respective prerogatives ...

we can all watch the entire 1978 World Cup from archive footage of full match broadcasts (quite accessible through the magic of the internet), and make our own minds up on the style (or lack thereof) of play ... we don't have to depend on the Argentinians providing an "accurate" portrayal of Argentina's triumphant tournament ...

the 70s are most famous for the Dutch team that DIDN'T win anything -- the team that revolutionized football through a philosophy, not just winning ... their story and their impact wasn't forgotten just coz they didn't end up picking up the cup -- boy was it not forgotten! yet here you are arguing that "anyone" would tell you that it's all about winning ... your argument/counterargument falls to crap on that point alone ... while your Cruyff "pollutes" line is laughably pitiful ... but what else did I expect from a philistine?

I'm not necessarily calling you an armchair academic, I'm calling your attitude the attitude of those people and the polar opposite of professional athletes. People sure have fond memories of barefoot NFL kickers who provided hours of entertainment, but they were phased out because it hurt accuracy (i.e. winning). If you can entertain and certainly win, then go ahead an entertain, but the top priority is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS the result. First and foremost. I feel like what I'm saying is advocating some kind of German attitude which you find so objectionable, but perhaps it is better called the Brazil philosophy. See, Brazil had a team in 1982 that was considered one of the best ever. Everyone in 1982 was delighted with the play of Brazil and considered them the best team at the tournament. Even though they didn't win, their legacy is much greater and better than that of the Italian team who actually won the tournament. But you know who doesn't think like this? Brazilians. Sure they have some fond memories, but that team lost and it will never be forgotten. Maybe the 2002 team or the 1994 team wasn't as good, but they won, and that's the MOST IMPORTANT PART. The Italians were at the peak of a very defensive minded il gioco all'Italiana phase (not very attractive), but in Brazil they are respected as the better team.

Your point about "how Argentina wants us to think of 1978" missed the mark so badly it's a wonder you actually have these academic degrees. I was comparing the joy and ecstasy of a nation in Argentina with the dispair and pain for the entire nation of the Netherlands. One team leaves a lasting mark on the sport and one team wins... so why are the Dutch so distraught and why did Argentina pursue a more negative game plan when they certainly had the players to be entertaining? Because... wait for it... sports is about winning.

Johnny Rep: Not every year, but Ajax is a club where the boys played football with style.

Interviewer: Is that more important than winning?

Rep: Winning is always important.

I: Because now people like Co Adriaanse and Foppe de Haan say that the only important thing is to play beautiful football.

Rep: Well, they are crazy. But I don't think they really mean it.

Brilliant Orange is packed full of quotes like this.

Un-sportsmanship is like stealing. Regardless of the situation and the excuses it is still WRONG. But what would somebody from a third world country like you understand about this?? Go back to your cheating country you mule.

I'm Scottish and live in Canada :)

You shouldn't look at things so subjectively. You seem to want to dictate what's right and wrong, but for some reason seem to conveniently forget that what the Ghanaian player did seconds before was much worse.
If you tell me now, that you wouldn't do what Luis did for the United States......then you have no business on this forum, and should forever stop watching this sport altogether.


ps- Best line, Frank Farina *ex Australian manager (on Suarez issue). "If that was Cheating, then it was the first time in the history of the game where cheating was the right thing to do". That play really changed the game forever, and believe it or not, millions upon millions were thrilled by what became maybe the most exciting moment in modern football history. :)

though I get you mate.
I think sometimes I may be forgetting how angry I'd be. Here comes Ghana:, a physically superior team, in front of 90,000 passionate fans, with FIFA and the referries on their side, ready for the party of the century. Unfortunately they met with the 1 nation legendary for putting out parties over and over again , went in with a humble attitude, the best yellow card record in the world cup, and nothing but the heart and mystique that has defined them as one of the greatest football nations of all time. ............not only do they do it so miraculously, but chipping it as they did .........wow, If I was Ghanaian I wouldn't get over this for another 50 years. :\

I'm not necessarily calling you an armchair academic, I'm calling your attitude the attitude of those people and the polar opposite of professional athletes. People sure have fond memories of barefoot NFL kickers who provided hours of entertainment, but they were phased out because it hurt accuracy (i.e. winning). If you can entertain and certainly win, then go ahead an entertain, but the top priority is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS the result. First and foremost. I feel like what I'm saying is advocating some kind of German attitude which you find so objectionable, but perhaps it is better called the Brazil philosophy. See, Brazil had a team in 1982 that was considered one of the best ever. Everyone in 1982 was delighted with the play of Brazil and considered them the best team at the tournament. Even though they didn't win, their legacy is much greater and better than that of the Italian team who actually won the tournament. But you know who doesn't think like this? Brazilians. Sure they have some fond memories, but that team lost and it will never be forgotten. Maybe the 2002 team or the 1994 team wasn't as good, but they won, and that's the MOST IMPORTANT PART. The Italians were at the peak of a very defensive minded il gioco all'Italiana phase (not very attractive), but in Brazil they are respected as the better team.

Your point about "how Argentina wants us to think of 1978" missed the mark so badly it's a wonder you actually have these academic degrees. I was comparing the joy and ecstasy of a nation in Argentina with the dispair and pain for the entire nation of the Netherlands. One team leaves a lasting mark on the sport and one team wins... so why are the Dutch so distraught and why did Argentina pursue a more negative game plan when they certainly had the players to be entertaining? Because... wait for it... sports is about winning.



Brilliant Orange is packed full of quotes like this.

Nimreitz, I agree with your points BUT I think you're portraying Uruguay as the "win at all costs" team, when in reality they weren't. In fact, they played some of the cleanest football in the world cup (opposite of what they've been doing for 30 years now), and their 1 "incident" was an instinctive act of desperation the 100% of (sane) people worldwide would have done.

About Xifio, he strikes me as one of the most arrogant, unlikable people I have ever had the misfortune of reading on a forum. The downfall of intelligence has always been arrogance. However, the truly great ones aren't so insecure that they need to type 6 syllable words and put others down by pronouncing their greatness/degrees. You might have an education, and a reasonable amount of intellect, but you have no class, humility or respect for others.

(Del Bosque on Zidane: "He's the quietest one in the dressing room. Why? He knows he's great. Then you have the loud ones...")

You are such an insufferable faggot.

You are such an insufferable faggot.

I rest my case :rofl: ,and Nimereitz I was defending your argument. lol

Maybe I should start using the quote feature more. I didn't see your previous 2 posts. There's a reason why double posting isn't allowed on most forums. In your unparalleled faggotry you quadruple posted.

I highly doubt any brand of entertaining football would have ever made a lasting impression on footie in the manner that Total Football did, if it wasn't effective. Sure, they lost in '74 and '78, but they also reached the finals, and Ajax were very successful with it. If the guys masterminding it ever thought it wouldn't bring them success, they wouldn't have bothered with it.

The aim of any sport is to win.

I highly doubt any brand of entertaining football would have ever made a lasting impression on footie in the manner that Total Football did, if it wasn't effective. Sure, they lost in '74 and '78, but they also reached the finals, and Ajax were very successful with it. If the guys masterminding it ever thought it wouldn't bring them success, they wouldn't have bothered with it.

The aim of any sport is to win.I'll start of by saying that I agree with your post completely here ...



I'm not necessarily calling you an armchair academic, I'm calling your attitude the attitude of those people and the polar opposite of professional athletes. People sure have fond memories of barefoot NFL kickers who provided hours of entertainment, but they were phased out because it hurt accuracy (i.e. winning). If you can entertain and certainly win, then go ahead an entertain, but the top priority is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS the result. First and foremost. I feel like what I'm saying is advocating some kind of German attitude which you find so objectionable, but perhaps it is better called the Brazil philosophy. See, Brazil had a team in 1982 that was considered one of the best ever. Everyone in 1982 was delighted with the play of Brazil and considered them the best team at the tournament. Even though they didn't win, their legacy is much greater and better than that of the Italian team who actually won the tournament. But you know who doesn't think like this? Brazilians. Sure they have some fond memories, but that team lost and it will never be forgotten. Maybe the 2002 team or the 1994 team wasn't as good, but they won, and that's the MOST IMPORTANT PART. The Italians were at the peak of a very defensive minded il gioco all'Italiana phase (not very attractive), but in Brazil they are respected as the better team.

Your point about "how Argentina wants us to think of 1978" missed the mark so badly it's a wonder you actually have these academic degrees. I was comparing the joy and ecstasy of a nation in Argentina with the dispair and pain for the entire nation of the Netherlands. One team leaves a lasting mark on the sport and one team wins... so why are the Dutch so distraught and why did Argentina pursue a more negative game plan when they certainly had the players to be entertaining? Because... wait for it... sports is about winning.


Johnny Rep: Not every year, but Ajax is a club where the boys played football with style.

Interviewer: Is that more important than winning?

Rep: Winning is always important.

I: Because now people like Co Adriaanse and Foppe de Haan say that the only important thing is to play beautiful football.

Rep: Well, they are crazy. But I don't think they really mean it.

Brilliant Orange is packed full of quotes like this.Dan, Eyal's post is what I was originally getting at, before the whole "history remembers" thing -- which, admittedly, I brought up -- distracted from the original arguments ...

your perspective: winning is the most important
my perspective: winning without style, or style without winning, is meaningless

there is a clear common area there, and of course the idea of beauty being in the eye of the beholder will come up to question my perspective ...

when I said the Dutch didn't win, I meant didn't win the tournament ... in other words, I portrayed some would see the tournament winners as the winners, and the rest of the story as just the details ...

and I'm sure there was a lot of heartache there for the Dutch ... just like there was ecstasy for the winners (Germany and Argentina) ... I still think I didn't need to explicitly acknowledge the nationalistic perspective, but there it is ...

I'm saying that, based on the idea that football is about entertainment for me, I would only celebrate a win if I was entertained, and only truly appreciate the entertainment if it leads to a win; that's all ...

I think this is easier established with club football, because the nationalism that engulfs international events understandably supersedes any other criteria for so many people ...

Well there is where we differ. If I'm on the field and part of a team that wills itself to victory by parking the bus and defeating a much better team, I would celebrate it. Maybe you don't think a win that way is worth celebrating. I don't know.

Interesting debate. I think Nimreitz and Azrael are right. I used to think that style and skill were everything and even set up a 6 a side team with my friends based on that idea. Then we started losing to teams we could have beaten and it felt ****. We changed to be more defensive and organised, and won the league despite not having the most talented squad. Other teams would even bitch about how defensive we were, but what should you do? Let them win?

It is a physical, competitive sport with a clearly defined objective. Style is admirable but it can never be satisfying if it costs you a win. Of course ideally you can be talented enough to win with style, and naturally it is especially infuriating to see teams play negatively when they lose anyway and would stand a better chance by playing more positively (of which there have been many examples).

Well there is where we differ. If I'm on the field and part of a team that wills itself to victory by parking the bus and defeating a much better team, I would celebrate it. Maybe you don't think a win that way is worth celebrating. I don't know.I can appreciate the effort that went into such a win, but I wouldn't celebrate it ...