Most Arab countries don't have resources to develop youth to play football, the ignorance rich countries have about the world is astonishing.
Countries that should be better at football
- Thread starter RedDevilCanuck
- Start date
I mean there are plenty of poor countries who have golden generations or develop star players with some regularity because of how popular football is. Money plays a big part but it doesn't explain everything
Yes, I think team sports where there's different positions, roles and tactics are going to be less affected by genetics than any individual sport where everybody is essentially trying to do the same thing.
You can play football in so many ways. Not even considering actual football skill there's room for nimble players with low centres of gravity, tall players with great jumping reach, strong players who can hold others off, rapid players who can sprint, players with tons of stamina who can run all day etc.
Some teams (countries) verge more towards one of those archetypes slightly more than others and it can be because there's more of those types in their nation. They'll look to implement suitable tactics which is one of the beauties of football, there's different ways to play and to win. Even within that most teams will still have a good mix of different body types, everyone on the team won't be exactly the same. Then there's obviously all-rounders who are not noticeably situated at any of the physical extremes.
Last edited:
Already been mentioned several times in this thread but to me no country comes close to underperforming as much as Mexico given their passion for the sport compared to many of the others mentioned.
While money is the biggest part because of the shitty facilities among other things, there's also the corruption in the system that makes pursuing a career in sports pointless in most of our countries. Additionally, even if you somehow become a pro in any sport there's a good chance you won't get paid regularly or a good amount that worth risking it all for a career in football there.
I was around a lot of pro basketball players in Syria and they went months without pay at a time, and that's at the biggest club in the country.
The USA are the joint third greatest soccer nation of all time, by world cup results.
Yeah corruption is a big one. The biggest reason why Bosnia is a bit shit these days while the other ex Yugo nations are way more organized
Well, considering how simple the concept of kicking a ball in a net is it’s far from crazy. It’s not like other countries had to decypher enigma codes to figure it out.
I guess it's not about glory hunting but more about nationalism?
Now, that explains why Germany is more successful than they should be.
India and China. 35% of the world’s population and a combined all time XI worse than Iceland (0,00005% of the world’s population.)
Regardless of culture, economics etc. it’s crazy how they’ve never produced a single good player and that’s only a mild exaggeration.
Regardless of culture, economics etc. it’s crazy how they’ve never produced a single good player and that’s only a mild exaggeration.
Is it even an exaggeration? Honestly can't think of a single Indian or Chinese player that isn't Dong Fangzhou, and him I only know because he was at United briefly.
Mexico has declined but they used to perform good in Copa America, reaching 3rd place and going out against the likes of Argentina/Brazil. I think they have declined and their clubs no longer participate in Copa Libertadores and because of their (clubs) economy most of their players are ok with staying in mexico and don't sell their players as cheap as other latinamerican countries.
There was a few others who played in the Premier League. Sun Jihai at City was probably the most famous, but he wasn't that great. Everton had a Chinese player too, Li Tie. One or two more I think.
Sun Jihai pisses me off but not his fault.
Xi Jinping was visiting the UK a few years back and the government were trying to suck up to China, looking for favourable trade deals. Xi is a big football fan and it was around the time the Chinese Superleague were kicking off that spending spree they had. They only went and inducted Sun Jihai into the English Football Hall of Fame at the National Football Museum in Manchester to coincide with his visit despite him being a completely unremarkable player. David Cameron was PM at the time and no doubt had influence over that. There's no way he makes it in for any other reason.If the USA had the same passion and timescale that Europe and South america had towards football then I would expect them to dominate the sport due to the vast array of ethnicities, the money, exposure, global influence, geography... list goes on.
There was a few others who played in the Premier League. Sun Jihai at City was probably the most famous, but he wasn't that great. Everton had a Chinese player too, Li Tie. One or two more I think.
Sun Jihai pisses me off but not his fault.
Tyias Browning too. Chinese mother but moved from Everton to the Chinese league and then got called up to the national side.
I actually think the lack of public places to play football really counts against the US. Everything is divided into different districts so in the suburbs you have nowhere to play football. I don't think kids can have a casual kick about in a lot of places.
In the UK you're never that far from a field and often there's goalposts or something.
Colombia.
Big football fans, one of the largest populations in South America. Generally don't do much in tournaments, and won jack shit other than a Copa America at home that Argentina refused to participate in and Brazil sent a B team to.
Big football fans, one of the largest populations in South America. Generally don't do much in tournaments, and won jack shit other than a Copa America at home that Argentina refused to participate in and Brazil sent a B team to.
Last edited:
Scotland. Probably mentioned already but we’re of the founding nations of football.
And as has already been mentioned China, as well as India and Pakistan. Those three countries have over a quarter of the global population. There will surely be someone out there who’s potentially a future GOAT.
And as has already been mentioned China, as well as India and Pakistan. Those three countries have over a quarter of the global population. There will surely be someone out there who’s potentially a future GOAT.
Yeah good point actually.
I was going to counterargue you by saying that why is a massive (vast geographical) nation like Brazil such a football powerhouse then? but the vast majority of their players were raised in very densely populated cities.
Brazilians will play football on lava
Despite have vastly less money, people can just kick a ball about for fun, arguably playing on the streets makes them even better.
Americans can't really do that, the police will come and shoot you.
Don’t give Piqué any ideas.
This. In living standards you would have to factor in the weather, availability of open spaces to play, but also safety and organisation around football.
In Uruguay we have what we call "baby football" leagues starting from age 6 or so, with almost every kid joining a local team and competing in local leagues.
U8 is largely fun and games with your mates, but that's when they start learning basics of playing as a team and not chasing a ball around like a herd. U10 gets a bit more serious, there's more selection and by U12 you start getting an all-stars system of sorts whereby the best players from each league/catchment area get selected to represent it. It is only at this point that the pro clubs youth setups start getting fed.
As parents we go watch them every week. It's a family and social event. I even have a monthly "asado" with the fathers of my kids' club, which makes it a supportive team-oriented atmosphere rather than individualistic.
Just so we are clear on the capilarity and how deeply embedded this is: we are talking 58 leagues with 600 baby football clubs in a country where 30.000 kids are born every year. Half being male, you have 25 newborns per club per year.
It's also the level of competition within certain countries.
You could have a potentially elite level player in India/China growing up as a kid but if they are playing against terrible players every week as a youth player then they aren't going to develop. You'd need at least a few good teams within a country to establish any sort of youth development or the ability to travel abroad to play other teams which isn't always viable for economic reasons.
You could have a potentially elite level player in India/China growing up as a kid but if they are playing against terrible players every week as a youth player then they aren't going to develop. You'd need at least a few good teams within a country to establish any sort of youth development or the ability to travel abroad to play other teams which isn't always viable for economic reasons.
England
One thing that is pretty constant is that if countries are smaller and/or not in good condition (economy, infrastructure, etc.), then to compensate, they tend to need a huge love for the game and to have not only gotten into it but also built a big participatory culture at the right time historically while the sport was still developing globally. The latter is really important for a high quality coaching tradition to form. Being geographically and culturally close to some of the powerhouses helps a lot as well. Once you've got a consolidation of countries that are seen as elite footballing nations, it's harder to muscle in on that later on. The Netherlands of the late 60s/early 70s is probably the last time a country went from irrelevance to a respected top nation. Since then, you get a few who take smaller steps in one direction or another, but a big drop-off or improvement is rare.
On the Balkans, i think some nations there (mostly Croatia and Serbia) just preserved their football culture better than many of the rest in the region (or slavic/communist Uefa nations in general) have strong tradition in some other sports (basketball, handball, water polo) were less isolated and developed a culture of constantly moving to the best leagues early on. The Olympic records of Balkan countries, even though a few are pretty good, certainly don't suggest uncommon sporting super-genes.
A lot of nations have the potential to be much better if we look at the domestic popularity of the sport and their population size, but most have various things going against them...poor overall political condition of the country; geographically or culturally more isolated or unsuited; a low or ineffective participatory culture that is usually brought about by combinations of the others; or, in the case of wealthy countries like USA/Japan, simply getting into the sport much later than is ideal (probably also an issue for much of the developing world, who had more important things to focus on during the first half of the last century).
On the Balkans, i think some nations there (mostly Croatia and Serbia) just preserved their football culture better than many of the rest in the region (or slavic/communist Uefa nations in general) have strong tradition in some other sports (basketball, handball, water polo) were less isolated and developed a culture of constantly moving to the best leagues early on. The Olympic records of Balkan countries, even though a few are pretty good, certainly don't suggest uncommon sporting super-genes.
A lot of nations have the potential to be much better if we look at the domestic popularity of the sport and their population size, but most have various things going against them...poor overall political condition of the country; geographically or culturally more isolated or unsuited; a low or ineffective participatory culture that is usually brought about by combinations of the others; or, in the case of wealthy countries like USA/Japan, simply getting into the sport much later than is ideal (probably also an issue for much of the developing world, who had more important things to focus on during the first half of the last century).
One for the players you'd forgotten existed thread.
I never understood saying China and India should be good at football, it's like saying USA should be good at cricket. No matter the population and resources, if your country just doesn't have a culture in the sport, it's not gonna happen.
People saying Ireland are mad. We done well in the past and produced good talents but we are a small population and there is no money put into football here. League of Ireland winners get about 100k which is why we don’t produce any talent anymore.
I wish we did invest in the sport as the biggest league in the world is across the pond so should be able to develop easily while being close to home
I wish we did invest in the sport as the biggest league in the world is across the pond so should be able to develop easily while being close to home
Thought Kim Min-Jae was chinese for some reason
Did a little research; Turns out the best chinese player oat is some squad-player for City 02-08. India listed a GK with 3 caps for a mid-table Norwegian club. They literally have no one.
Funny quote from one of the articles:
«China has always produced talented players […] Many Chinese players now play in the best foreign clubs and establish themselves as key figures in world football.»
Also the real answer here is England. While they are a top side so it’s harsh the fact that they don’t have a euros and no WC since 1966 while producing some of the best players is a letdown.
This current team have the PL player of the season, the best #9 in the world, the CL winners superstar and still feel they won’t win this tournament says it all.
Foden, Kane, Bellingham, Saka, Rice and Walker are some of the best in the world for their position mix this in with the fact there back ups to these are still all class.
This current team have the PL player of the season, the best #9 in the world, the CL winners superstar and still feel they won’t win this tournament says it all.
Foden, Kane, Bellingham, Saka, Rice and Walker are some of the best in the world for their position mix this in with the fact there back ups to these are still all class.
Exactly. England should have won a lot more than only one trophy considering that its league is the best in Europe and that it’s produced some world class players, as well as the fact that it’s the birthplace of football (arguably).
There are many reasons more important than population. In Brazil and Argentina's case, they had a mini-colonization by the British in the turn of the 19th century, they created the first clubs, leagues. Football was far more popular in those countries than the northern hemisphere countries like Colombia, because of the British influence.
In simple terms, British popularized football in Brazil and Argentina, and then Argentina popularized football in Mexico, Peru, Colombia decades later. They have a founding father effect in a lot of those countries (not 100% sure about Mexico). In Brazil's case, another curious aspect, it was probably the only established footballing nation that had a sizeable amounts of black athletes competing in world stage. Up untill late 90s and 2000s where we started seeing European teams fielding 3, 4, 5 black players. Of course there were the African nations but they never were organized enough domestically.
In simple terms, British popularized football in Brazil and Argentina, and then Argentina popularized football in Mexico, Peru, Colombia decades later. They have a founding father effect in a lot of those countries (not 100% sure about Mexico). In Brazil's case, another curious aspect, it was probably the only established footballing nation that had a sizeable amounts of black athletes competing in world stage. Up untill late 90s and 2000s where we started seeing European teams fielding 3, 4, 5 black players. Of course there were the African nations but they never were organized enough domestically.
The English league only became the best recently. The commercial side of the Premier League in combination with all the foreign club owners investing made the Premier League the current best league. Before that it was Italy and Spain with the best leagues. I dont think that having the best league is an argument for all the tournaments that were played more than 10/15 ago.
Exactly. It’s only been the best league for about 20 years. And England have been a lot better over the past 8 years.
Actually I think it is more relevant as the EPL was still elite more than 15 years ago and it had less foreign players so most players that made the league so good where English.
Being Irish people think I just have a go at England because of rivalry or because I don’t like them but I feel the fact they are such a letdown their own fans underrate them.
Watching England with that team in 06 or 04 mixed in with the last few years of losing to Belguim twice in WC and knocked out by Croatia then it being called a success due to a SF shows the bar is low due to being letdown over and over.
Losing to France in the last WC and matching them on the day was fine as that is acceptable due to the level of France. England of the last 20/30 years for me have produced for me the same level of players as France so I would expect some of the same results but it is much lower
Erm, this is all tripe, really… have a look at the heritage of so many small, historical and even very big clubs in Argentina: half are “Italiano”, “Audace”, etc… the other half are “Deportivo” and similar Spanish heritage. Brazil’s on the other hand was half Spanish, half Portuguese and their colonies… British were the Caribbeans instead.
Well Turkya came 3rd in 2002. Which is an accomplishment.
Arabic countries are crazy about football but the infrastructure is not there (Algeria and Egypt). Plus some countries (like Iraq) always faces setbacks because of war.