Is the World Cup a measure of top quality?

mike65 · 02-07-2006 1:27pm #1

Or put another way could any of the top Champions League sides win the World Cup?

It sems to me that the WC is the third highest tier of football competition with the Euros second (of the heavyweights only Brazil and Argentine would be missing) and the Champions League top as it has 95% of the worlds top players in it every season with again just a few of South American stars missing.

Discuss!

Mike.

KdjaCL · 02-07-2006 1:32pm

The World Cups best feature is the fact thats it the World (ireland T&T nations going ballistic etc) The best country usually wins it and thats unquestionable as once you leave the groups there arent really any easy games.

The Euros are similiar but harder to get into , but you cant really compare the WC to the CL as a CL team could buy a striker or a left back whereas the WC its the best available players that the country can pick.

kdjac

el rabitos · 02-07-2006 1:34pm

its more a coming together of alot of elements, ie, good coach, right tactics, teams priming at the right time, pacing, tactics etc

the team that wins usually has the right ballance, and a bit of luck.

it is a stage though for any individual to show top quality imo

Attractive Nun · 02-07-2006 2:05pm

The Champions League is of course the highest quality competition, and Barcelona, Real, Chelsea, Milan, Juve, Man Utd, Lyon, Inter, Bayern, Roma, Liverpool, Valencia, Athletico, Arsenal and probably more would all have a shout at winning the WC, mainly because they can pick and choose the players that suit their tactical outlook etc. The World Cup is special, though, precisely because you're basically stuck with what you've got and you have to make the best of it. Because of its prestige players will generally give 110%, so it is - as said above - a stage for individuals to shine and drag their countries through the tournament if needs be.

Unearthly · 03-07-2006 11:12am

This is something I was thinking of before

Often you hear "I don't think Peter Crouch is upto International football"(just using him as an example)

Now I know people will say he isn't good enough for Champions League, but you can't deny he gave Betis a tough time. Now people were saying he wasn't good enough to face the likes of Paraguay/Trinidad and Tobago??

There is no such thing as step up to international level for the World Cup. Quality is worse if anything

vorbis · 03-07-2006 5:26pm

World Cup is not worse, its just different. Club teams have the distinct advantage of training and playing together all year round. When it comes to the world cup, a team does not have that level of understanding.

The lack of understanding is felt most in terms of attacking. Players don't know the runs others will make, knock downs and flick ons won't be as smooth. Therefore, international level requires a player who can make something happen on his own.

PHB · 03-07-2006 5:35pm

I prefer club football, for me, the WC has one thing going for it, it is a festival of football. A month non-stop. The CL can't compete with that.

That said, if there was a World Cup with clubs involved, I think it would be a lot better than the WC.

As a measure of quality, I think there is similar quality between the group stages (sans the really ****e teams), but in the knockout stages the CL just edges it.

I've always wanted to see a top club play a nation in a competitive match, but it'll never happen so

Is the World Cup a measure of top quality?

Comments