|
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Video Plus Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities 
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE
|  |
Serie A is supreme
Updated: Wednesday December 13, 2000 4:26 PM
Gabriele, Please solve this puzzle which has caused many sports bar fights in my town. You are the only authority we all have agreed upon to give us an answer which will be all binding: "Which is Europe's greatest soccer league?"
I don't generally like to answer this question, because it leads to never-ending debates, but in the name of avoiding bar fights in your hometown I'll take a crack at it. In my humble opinion, Serie A is still the best league in Europe. There is a greater depth of talent across the board (six or seven clubs are legitimate title contenders). Having said that, based on last season and what has happened so far this year, it is in serious danger of losing its crown to the Spanish Liga. I don't think you can judge based on one season, but if Italian clubs do as bad this year as they did last year, you've got to seriously look at the issue. So much for results. If you look at things cash flow and media attention however, Serie A is still several steps ahead.
With a new stadium on its way, a few major corporate deals, new success in the Champions League and an improved youth system, are Arsenal on their way to becoming one of the "super clubs" or powerhouses of European football such as Barcelona, Man U, and Real Madrid for example?
Arsenal is doing very well in trying to build its brand-name across the world. However, I think it will be difficult to reach the "superclub" level of Barcelona, Manchester United or Real Madrid because these clubs simply have a much bigger fan base. Remember that there are eleven professional teams in London and all are vying with Arsenal for fans and attention. I have listed 11 players who would form the best football team possible, technically and tactically: Gordon Banks; Djalma Santos, Carlos Alberto, Franz Beckenbauer, Paolo Maldini; Roberto Donadoni, Frank Rijkaard; Diego Maradona; Bobby Charlton, Marco Van Basten, Pele. It's certainly not an attempt to answer once and for all this sort of debate, but rather an expedient to introduce a discussion that would increase my knowledge of the history of world football. I'd like to be able to compare players and teams that I had not the chance to see, but of which I've heard a lot about, in the right perspective. So I'm asking you if this team could be bettered, and how. I think that if this sort of argument was brought on for every national team by a panel of experts, justifying and explaining the choices, it would be an entertaining way to discover the history and development of the game.
Thanks for paying attention.
When compiling these lists, you need to define your objective. I think you listed 11 outstanding players. Whether they can be meshed into a coherent team is another issue. For example, you included four forwards and just one defensive midfielder. In today's game, a well-coached, balanced club could defeat your team, not because it is better individually, but because it is more of a team. I'll give you an example of a side that I think could beat your team: Francesco Toldo; Lilian Thuram, Manuel Sanchis, Franco Baresi, Paul Breitner; Didi, Fernando Redondo, Jozsef Boszik, Alfredo Di Stefano, Michel Platini; Ferenc Puskas. Are my players better than yours? Probably not. Would they beat yours? I think so.
Brazil did an extremely poor showing at the 1998 world cup final, and now they were eliminated from the semifinals in the Olympics; who should take the rersponsibility of getting the team back on track? Right now I do not feel that Brazil has played to its potential and that if they keep playing the way they have for the last several months, I do not believe that they will qualify for this next world cup. What are your suggestions?
What Brazil needs more than anything is some tranquillity. Having so much talent at your disposal is often a curse as much as anything else. Don't worry -- they will qualify. Much can change in a few months; I would wait to draw conclusions.
Is the Italian Serie A still the best league in the world? I have been a huge fan of the Serie A for a long time and to be honest the performance of Italian clubs in Europe last year was unforgivable. The style of play used by most serie a clubs has many shortcomings -- the most glaring being the lack of genuine pace & speed down the flanks -- most Serie A wingers lack the penetrating edge provided by their English & Spanish counterparts for instance. What is even more frightening is the seeming lack of appreciation of this fact by Serie A managers. Why are there no world-class wingers -- the likes of Giggs, Overmars -- in Serie A?
You make some very good points. As far as lack of pace and wing play I think there is a tactical reason for it. Apart from Lazio (and occasionally Inter) most top Serie A clubs play some variation of the 3-4-1-2 or 3-4-3 system. Inevitably this means you have just one wide player on either flank rather than the two you have in a 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 (where two of the forwards tend to go wide). Because Italians are still very defensive minded usually the wide players is a recycled defender or, at the very least, a defensive midfielder, since the wide man needs to patrol the entire flank. It depends on how you view it. I'm not sure that is the reason that Italian clubs did poorly last year, but it may have had something to do with it. Going one step further, there are few traditional wingers left. Rivaldo played there for Barcelona last season, but that is not his true positon. Figo and Giggs both like to start wide and cut inside. They are not pure wingers. Overmars is a winger, but he is an exception.
Dear Gabriele,
What are your thoughts on the Olympic football. Blatter wants it open to all ages. Do you think it would damage the world cup. Do you think the Olympic football should only be for the u-23's?
The traditional powers don't seem to care about soccer at the Olympics, mainly because the World Cup, European Championships and Copa America are so important. One would be tempted therefore to limit it to young players, Under-23s or Under-21s. However, that wouldn't be fair to many African and Asian countries for whom the Olympics is one of the few times they get to see their star players represent their country. It's a difficult issue. The more I think about it, the more I think that perhaps the current system isn't so bad: provided clubs are forced to release their star players.
There are no great new Italian talents in the Serie A this year and this problem will only get bigger. Foreigners dominate the "calcio" in Italy, especially the Argentines from Lazio. The national team of Italy is already falling down and I don't think they will be a threat for teams like Brazil or Argentina over two or three years.
What's your view on this?
I strongly disagree. Foreigners have made it harder for young players to emerge, but they still do. Italy has won four of the past five Under-21 titles, which means some talent is coming through. Roma's most influential player (Francesco Totti) is young and Italian. Lazio's captain (Alessandro Nesta) is also Italian. Parma and Fiorentina have two of the best goalkeepers in the world (Gigi Buffon and Francesco Toldo). All but Toldo are 25 years old or younger. Just consider the following list of youngsters: Antonio Cassano, Rino Gattuso, Massimo Troise, Andrea Pirlo, Francesco Coco, Roberto Baronio, Matteo Ferrari, Dayo Oshadogan... To me this is proof that while foreigners can have a negative impact, quality will always rise to the top, whether in England, Spain or Italy.
What National Team made every World Cup?
Brazil has played in every single World Cup.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
