Football is boring and lacks real superstars

MKirby said:
I once read that now players are so fit and trained compared to 30-50 years ago that the field size is no more adequate for 11 fit players, as they cover too much the ground making the games too blocked and without "flair".
So they suggested playing with 10 man from now on to counter this "issue"...
Click to expand...

Or they could just make the pitches bigger.

Remember Ireland playing in Croke Park for internationals, probably only used about half of the available pitch space.
 
Forgot to add to my previous post that more stringent doping regulations have added to the decline of superstars. There's no way those Italian and Spanish teams of the 90's weren't doping and there's no way Italy just stopped producing world class players pretty much overnight.
 
Not a recent trend but i fecking hate teams taking off their biggest attacking threats the second they go a goal up
 
justsomebloke said:
That's absurd. If your idea of Mbappe is "dull as dishwater", you're living in a fantasy world.
Click to expand...

This didn't age well, did you watch last nights game. a player running fast with the ball doesn't make a worlds best player, he is dull, another example of everything today being the best ever. Sorry, I don't mean to be rude but I do not see what you see in him as a footballer or his character.
 
Last edited:
FOG said:
This didn't age well, did you watch last nights game. a player running fast with the ball doesn't make a worlds best player, he is dull, another example of everything today being the best ever.
Click to expand...

Players can have bad games or tournaments, he’s nursing a broken nose. This is his 4th tournament now for France and two of them he’s been outstanding. Enough credit in the bank. Great players can have off-colour tournaments at their peak, especially around injuries, Ronaldo in 2014 was very poor for example, Rooney in 2010. Henry wasn’t too great in Euro 2004 at his peak, only had one good game etc.
 
FOG said:
This didn't age well, did you watch last nights game. a player running fast with the ball doesn't make a worlds best player, he is dull, another example of everything today being the best ever.
Click to expand...

He is playing with a broken nose on the back of a gruelling season. Ridiculous to judge him based on this game (or this tournament since the injury).
 
Nani Nana said:
He is playing with a broken nose on the back of a gruelling season. Ridiculous to judge him based on this game (or this tournament since the injury).
Click to expand...
gruelling season? Surely he's had an easier season than most, it's France for feck sake.
 
FOG said:
This didn't age well, did you watch last nights game. a player running fast with the ball doesn't make a worlds best player, he is dull, another example of everything today being the best ever. Sorry, I don't mean to be rude but I do not see what you see in him as a footballer or his character.
Click to expand...

"Age well"? You think that one game defined him as a player?

Okay. If you people want to think Mbappe is a dull player, go right ahead.
 
diarm said:
The second game was good, because Georgia are a throwback to a style we see less and less of.

The England game was turgíd, frigid, peel out my eyes with a rusty spoon shite, with a couple of minutes of excitement thrown in at the end.
Click to expand...

Er....what style exactly is it that Georgia is a throwback to? Defend desperately with 11 men and go all in on counters? Because I think that is actually very much alive and well. Just because they did it with infectious enthusiasm and have a couple of attackers capable of extraordinary things on the counter doesn't make it a different style.

In fact, if there's a problem with this tournament's entertainment value, it lies in far too many games with one team playing like that. But the reason for that isn't the level of today's football, it's UEFAs idiot decision to expand the tournament to 24 teams. Europe, as it has in the past and will in the future, has fewer than ten teams of a quality to dominate others and play evenly with other top teams. The rest is more or less competent filler, who perforce have to defend first and hope to capitalise on whatever chances they get. Bring in more of those, and this is the sort of games you get.
 
justsomebloke said:
Er....what style exactly is it that Georgia is a throwback to? Defend desperately with 11 men and go all in on counters? Because I think that is actually very much alive and well. Just because they did it with infectious enthusiasm and have a couple of attackers capable of extraordinary things on the counter doesn't make it a different style.

In fact, if there's a problem with this tournament's entertainment value, it lies in far too many games with one team playing like that. But the reason for that isn't the level of today's football, it's UEFAs idiot decision to expand the tournament to 24 teams. Europe, as it has in the past and will in the future, has fewer than ten teams of a quality to dominate others and play evenly with other top teams. The rest is more or less competent filler, who perforce have to defend first and hope to capitalise on whatever chances they get. Bring in more of those, and this is the sort of games you get.
Click to expand...
The most exciting teams to watch this tournament are the ones that would likely not qualify if it was a 16 team tournament. Austria, Slovakia, Georgia.
The bigger nations have been turd. Germany and Spain have been ok
 
Zlatan 7 said:
The most exciting teams to watch this tournament are the ones that would likely not qualify if it was a 16 team tournament. Austria, Slovakia, Georgia.
The bigger nations have been turd. Germany and Spain have been ok
Click to expand...
What was exciting about Slovakia? They were the same as the likes of Slovenia.

Austria & Georgia had good watchable games.
 
Players are trained to be as fit as possible, tactically aware, do as they are told on the pitch and play to the tune of the manager at all times. Bring back the days when even some of the top stars went out onto the pitch having just finished having a fag and still playing a game full of thrills and incidents before going off to the pub for a pint. Although players are far fitter and tactically aware nowadays there is a distinct lack of flare in the game. Just occasional bursts of brilliance but not enough to keep the fans on their feet. So often nowadays I cannot watch a full game because they are so regimented I turn the TV off. Ah well there goes my nostalgia.
 
MLS, J League, K League and various leagues throughout South East Asia are entertaining as feck, the quality is obviously a step below but for a mixture of systems, mavericks and general "wtf" then there is a lot of good football out there.
 
VorZakone said:
What was exciting about Slovakia? They were the same as the likes of Slovenia.

Austria & Georgia had good watchable games.
Click to expand...
Maybe I’m miss remembering but I thought they looked really good against England untill they scored, constantly attacking and creating chances and could have scored a few. Then sat back the rest of the game which is understandable.
 
There’s definitely less superstars, not just because Ronaldo and Messi have declined either. It feels like around 2010 they just stopped making them.
 
Zlatan 7 said:
The most exciting teams to watch this tournament are the ones that would likely not qualify if it was a 16 team tournament. Austria, Slovakia, Georgia.
The bigger nations have been turd. Germany and Spain have been ok
Click to expand...

Well, Georgia is fun to watch because they are essentially a crap team with a top goalkeeper and an attacker who can do amazing things on his own, plus another 9 guys who give 2000% effort every minute. You root for them, but it is what it is. Plus, they wouldn't get to a 24-team tournament either, if it wasn't for UEFA's special rule to bring in one team from pool C in the Nations League.

Austria might very well have qualified for a 16-team tournament. They certainly represent a refreshing alternative to the approach of the other mediocre squads, preferring to press high and attack directly to sitting back and countering. Not that it worked out a lot better in the end. But sure, a fun team to have in the mix.

Slovakia? I must confess I don't even have a theory why you'd mention them as one of the most exciting teams to watch in the tournament.
 
Oranges038 said:
Or they could just make the pitches bigger.

Remember Ireland playing in Croke Park for internationals, probably only used about half of the available pitch space.
Click to expand...
That's going to be difficult considering most stadia have stands which are build right up to the pitch.

My solution is to make players play in ski boots.
 
Zlatan 7 said:
Maybe I’m miss remembering but I thought they looked really good against England untill they scored, constantly attacking and creating chances and could have scored a few. Then sat back the rest of the game which is understandable.
Click to expand...

To my recollection they essentially did the latter the whole game. It's not like they scored off a period of sustained pressure - they had one shot (off target) prior to scoring.

In any case, even if you were right, you're rating Slovakia as one of the most exciting teams of the tournament on the basis of looking lively for 25 minutes against England?
 
justsomebloke said:
To my recollection they essentially did the latter the whole game. It's not like they scored off a period of sustained pressure - they had one shot (off target) prior to scoring.
Click to expand...
I’m not going to watch it again so I’ll take your word for it but i remember it differently. It seemed like a goal was always coming for them. Other games I’ve watched seem to have nil nil written all over it
 
I think overall the average standard might has raised...so you could say the floor has raised but the ceiling has lowered.

Sport science and analysis has turned a lot of players into robots programmed to do the statistical best move to get the result. But on the eye test it is not the most entertaining or watchable sadly.
 
It all boils down to the goalkeepers and defenders spending too much time on the ball. Doing that horseshoe passing pattern at the beginning of every move.

From there every other entertainment negative follows.
 
Marwood said:
It all boils down to the goalkeepers and defenders spending too much time on the ball. Doing that horseshoe passing pattern at the beginning of every move.

From there every other entertainment negative follows.
Click to expand...

My dad keeps complaining about the same thing, as if anyone could just have whipped through a perfect through ball if only they wanted to.

The simple truth is, the alternative to that is to mostly lose the ball again quickly. There are different levels of risk willingness and I'm not saying it couldn't or shouldn't sometimes be higher, but generally speaking, when the other team's well set up and organised you don't really get many passing opportunities and it's usually necessary to wait for an opportunity. It's not fun to watch, but that's the game.
 
Just look at the current crop of young strikers, let's say U25. It looks fecking dire aside from a couple of players like Haaland.

The likes of Jonathan David, Vlahovic etc are bang average.
 
justsomebloke said:
My dad keeps complaining about the same thing, as if anyone could just have whipped through a perfect through ball if only they wanted to.

The simple truth is, the alternative to that is to mostly lose the ball again quickly. There are different levels of risk willingness and I'm not saying it couldn't or shouldn't sometimes be higher, but generally speaking, when the other team's well set up and organised you don't really get many passing opportunities and it's usually necessary to wait for an opportunity. It's not fun to watch, but that's the game.
Click to expand...

No there's a middle ground between that and the football we're seeing now.

It'll change at some point. A manager will come along, play it differently, get a lot of success and everybody will adopt that style.
 
[
Marwood said:
It all boils down to the goalkeepers and defenders spending too much time on the ball. Doing that horseshoe passing pattern at the beginning of every move.

From there every other entertainment negative follows.
Click to expand...

Making refs stop giving soft free kicks every single time a defender throws himself to the floor at the slightest touch would go a long way towards fixing this.

People go on about defenders being better technically and more press resistant than they used to be, but it’s easy to take that touch under pressure when you know the ref will blow for you if you dive at the smallest hint of a press.

Forwards get a hard time for simulation but for me, it’s a way bigger problem with fullbacks, centre backs and deep lying midfielders doing it in their own half. Cut that out and make pressing more effective - you won’t be long seeing teams use it quicker from the back.
 
Marwood said:
No there's a middle ground between that and the football we're seeing now.

It'll change at some point. A manager will come along, play it differently, get a lot of success and everybody will adopt that style.
Click to expand...

That's what I meant when I said that there's different level of risk willingness and you can always discuss whether a specific team is playing too risk averse in their passing. I just wanted to make the point that there are very real reasons why we're seeing that, and it's not just a stylistic choice, still less a lack of ability or ambition.
 
justsomebloke said:
That's what I meant when I said that there's different level of risk willingness and you can always discuss whether a specific team is playing too risk averse in their passing. I just wanted to make the point that there are very real reasons why we're seeing that, and it's not just a stylistic choice, still less a lack of ability or ambition.
Click to expand...

Yeah agree there's a certain reasoning behind it and to be fair it does overall result in less goals being conceded.

But I still think that somewhat depends on the other team also playing the same way.

We hear about how organised teams are, how aware players are of systems etc. But when both teams spend silly amounts of time knocking it about the back how can a team be disorganised. You've got to be really bad to do so.
 
This Euro has sucked the joy out of football for now. But we need to remember the last world cup too. That was exceptionally entertaining.

If anything it shows the world cup/international tournaments should be played midseason when players are fit and 100%. Go on bash me now.
 
diarm said:
[


Making refs stop giving soft free kicks every single time a defender throws himself to the floor at the slightest touch would go a long way towards fixing this.

People go on about defenders being better technically and more press resistant than they used to be, but it’s easy to take that touch under pressure when you know the ref will blow for you if you dive at the smallest hint of a press.

Forwards get a hard time for simulation but for me, it’s a way bigger problem with fullbacks, centre backs and deep lying midfielders doing it in their own half. Cut that out and make pressing more effective - you won’t be long seeing teams use it quicker from the back.
Click to expand...

Yeah definitely. It's a real blight on the game. I just don't understand at all what the decision makers are thinking by practically encouraging it.
 
I wonder to what extent one's upbringing factors into the greatness of the player.
Do the majority of the greats come from poverty?
Perhaps that drive and desire to achieve has shifted from the places that we have seen it come from in abundance(e.g. Brazil) and is now coming from untapped parts of the globe.

I'm not sure if this factors into the seeming lack of emerging talent, or if it's that the types of footballers being picked for academy teams are based on athletic ability/willingness to fit a system over outrageous skills at younger ages?
Just a thought.
 
Football just seems more mid now. The technical standards at the bottom have gone up significantly. However, the top level seems to have fallen.

We've levelled out well above what was once average but everything coming out of academies is basically identikit, generically good footballers with no exceptional qualities.

You can see that basically all players are trained to play in a number of roles and only specialise later. How many central defenders are there at Nesta's level or Sol Campbell's? How many strikers like Eto'o or David Villa? You used to get players who excelled at something. Instead now most players don't excel at one thing, they're just not weak at anything.
 
I've often seen people say "footballers today didn't play street football" as an argument for why they lack inventiveness and a bit of magic. But footballers today weren't born today. Does this mean that in the 90s we already saw a trend of creativity being either managed out of kids or kids not playing street football enough?
 
Judging the state of football by the quality of big summer tournaments is ridiculous. 18 months ago we had the highest quality World Cup since 1970. Why? Because it played in November, when players were fit

Now they're running on fumes. Of course the quality is crap
 
You must log in or register to reply here.