Sport Today

    I don't want to keep beating on the same drum, but my point was that
I do not think that Liverpool would dominate European teams nowadays
as they did in the Keegan era, and I still think I am right.

    Out of those players you mentioned, is there a top five player in the
world? If that was the case, and all those players were standouts, then
what the heck - England, Scotland, and Ireland are full of stars,
yet they keep getting beat in international competition (see last
World Cups and European Cup of Nations). They are just GOOD players,
not standouts, and for my money's worth I'd take Milan and their
Dutch trio over Liverpool, and I think that teams like Real Madrid,
Barcelona, Napoli, Bayern Munich, Anderlecht, Inter Milan, etc.. would
play them to a standstill... Common, who would you rather have:
Van Basten, Gullit, and Rijkaard, or Barnes, Beardsley & Rush???
If you say Liverpool's trio, then you are letting favoritism get in
the way of concise soccer analysis. I mean, I am a Spanish clubs
supporter, but I am a soccer fan above all, and thus I can easily
recognize that at this point Italian teams (natural rivals of Spanish
teams --> right now, this is the best rivalry in European Cups) have
an edge over Spanish teams. My patriotism does not cloud my vision....

  By the way, fellow continental soccer fans, please enter the
discussion. I feel like I am taking the UK on my own here...
For example, Marco: don't you think Milan would beat Liverpool
in a head to head matchup??

   Why not? after all, I enjoy British soccer on Sportschannel every
weekend, I don't miss one show. And the next time I go to England
I'll tell you in advance so that you can tell me where to get Liverpool
tickets in advance.

********************************************************************************
Alex Chacon                       |  "Game over man, game over. We're f*cked!"
Rochester Institute of Technology |      -Private W. Hudson, from "Aliens"
Rochester, NY                     |  
                                  |  "Be Excellent to each other"        
                                  |      -"Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure"
uunet!ccicpg!cci632!ritcv!ultb!   |          
amc3075                           |
             or                   |   In 1990:
                                  |            - AUPA ESPANA!!!

********************************************************************************

Dear uniformed,

Having been a season ticket holder at Anfield for six years, I can quite
honestly say that the present Liverpool side is the best there has been.

To say that they have no standouts in the side is laughable...

What about Barnes, Beardsley, Hansen, Hysen, Houghton, Nicol, Rush, and
even the manager Dalgliesh who is still playing when the occasion suites
him. The talent that plays for the reserve team is capable for starting
on any other team in the league.

To compare this team with the team of the Keegan era is just not on...
Somebody even mentioned the great Alan Kennedy as one of the all time
greats. However at Anfield, his name amoung supporters was the DONKEY.
This was due to his ability, not the size of his ears.

As for the margins of victory/losses in recent weeks. These can be explained
by the fact that the smaller teams rise to the occasion when they play
the champions of the league setup.

If you have any doubts, I suggest you actually go and see this team play.

Dr. Paul Mcarthur

U of Utah      

[ Summary: Alex = 'Liverpool is not the best team in Europe right now"
     Some Brits = 'Right now Liverpol has the best team it ever had,
                   and would be European Champion, would it be allowed to
                   compete' ]

Well, here I take the challenge and step in. I find this discussion quite
futile... Real Madrid, AC Milan, Bayern Munchen, Liverpool are all very
strong teams, but there is no way of telling what would happen if Liverpool
was allowed to compete in Europe. Liverpool is playing very well in England,
but that doesn't mean much. See Real Madrid, scoring more than 3 goals in
average per game in the tough Spanish League but incapable of beating the
European competition year after year. Of course in a good day Liverpool
could beat anybody in Europe, but so could Aston Villa, Barcelona, Napoli
or Marseille, to name only a few.

No flame intended, but isn't there an attitude of superiority in the
English football scene towards the rest of the world? Somebody quoted
some time ago the manager of the English team as saying that he hadn't
much to learn from other countries. This seems to be an extremist point
of view, but may be it shows something about the general view (I hope not!).

I thought that this attitude was something
that had been overcome long time ago... I remember reading that English
football didn't have much international exposure before the '50s, but
after the disappointing Brazil '50 and a couple of tough defeats (3-6
against Hungary in Wembley), the hard reality was accepted. But now
after these years of forced exclusion from team competitions, the same
song seems to emerge: "We are the best, but we can't show it because we
don't compete internationally". Do you follow any other European league
to say that? Do you know about the 3 goals per game of Real Madrid, or
the incredible streak of AC Milan, something like 10 wins and 2 draws in
the last 12 games in the best defensive league of the world? Liverpool
may have a very good team, I've seen some really impressive games this
season, but they have a long way to be considered the best team in
Europe not only by their fans, but by the general football opinion.

***********************************************************************
* Walter Garcia-Fontes   |      Bitnet:             |                  *

* Stanford University    |      Internet:           |                  *

***********************************************************************

This reminds me of the Milan bench. There's as much young talent in
the backups as their are in the starting line-up. Berlusconi wanted
to be sure that if the main players got injured, the bench would allow
the team not to fall to pieces. Anyhow, this is besides the point...

I digress...

I have to agree here. There's no doubt in my mind that the Liverpool
that ROMPED through all the teams thrown at them can't be compaired to
the Liverpool of today...

OK. I'll get in on this one; even at the risk of getting flamed to
a crisp... :-)

Seriously, although I don't follow English soccer as I do Italian
soccer, from the highlights that I see, I'm sure that Milan, Inter,
Napoli, or Real would hold their own, if not beat Liverpool. It's tough
to play games on paper let alone predict the outcome of two teams
from different countries based on league/European Cup games. A
perfect example of this is the Real Madrid/Milan semi-final in
the European Cup last year. I would have never thought that Real
would have lost 5-0 to Milan. Look at Inter's early elimination
at the hands of Malmoe this year, or Napoli's *** at the
hands of Werder Bremen (although a Napoli loss was expected).

When I see Real Madrid game highlights, it just amazes me to see
the ease with which they pass the ball and set up plays. These
guys are a delight to watch; a real (no pun intended) difference
from the '89 European Cup semi-final. I'll stand on some shaky ground
and say that a Milan with all its players in good health, could
beat almost any other team. Although I am Italian and an avid "Milanista",
as Alex says, I am a soccer fan first. I'll add yet another team
to the list of those who could beat Liverpool as I know them. This
team is Bayern Munich. These guys look really
impressive. As a good guage of the "best" teams in Europe today,
just look at the teams in European Cup. The only teams which would
definitely lose against Liverpool, or almost any of
the better English teams would be Mechelen (or Malines), CSKA
Sofia, Dnepropetrosk. The main ingredient that English teams in general
lack is the ability to play in UEFA/European Cup. This is a fact
acknowledged by English soccer players/coaches. They never really
get exposed to really different styles of play which allows a team
to plan their strategies accordingly.

Anyhow, the bottom line is I'd take a Gullit, Van Basten, Rijkaard trio,
or a Matthaus, Brehme, Klinsmann trio, or a Maradona, Careca, Alemao
trio over Barnes, Beardsley, and Rush. I still remember Rush "playing"
(I use the term loosely) for Juventus. He just couldn't adapt to
the style of play in Italy, unlike his predecessors Wilkins, Souness,
etc...

I hope no offense was taken to what I wrote; none was meant...

Now where did I put my asbestos suit? :-)

Just as an aside, here's how the UK and Irish voters voted for
the "Ballon d'Or 1989" maybe this can say something by itself too:

England (Max Marquis, BBC TV and Jack Rollin, Rothman)

1.  Baresi
2.  Van Basten
3.  Rijkaard
4.  Shilton
5.  Matthaus

Ireland (Jimmy Magee, Radio Telefis Eirreann, and Paul Kelly, Irish
                                                       Soccer Magazine)

1. Van Basten
2. Matthaus
3. Baresi
4. Bonner
5. Rijkaard

Scotland (Glen Gibbons, The Observer)

1. Stojkovic
2. Van Basten
3. Rijkaard
4. Papin
5. Snelders

There you go...

Marco...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Marco Petroni                                   | "Dancing is like
  McGill Research Centre for Intelligent Machines |  standing still
  (McRCIM), McGill University, Montreal, Canada.  |  only faster..."
                                                  |  

  UUCP:  ...!mcgill-vision!marco                  |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Commenting on this nonsense about whether Real, AC, Bayern, Napoli etc
would thump Liverpool or not]

Well all I can say is that this is all much ado over nothing.
The beauty of soccer is its unpredictability and diversity. I always
thought that the biggest thing Americans missed from playing in more
international sports (although sociologically, I believe that US sports
have been a critical component in building a national identity) is the
chance to understand the cultures of others. To me soccer has opened the
doors to learn more about the geography, social and national identities,
histories and even psyche of the peoples who play the game. As an example,
I learned something about Spanish regionalism by following Barcelona
and Atletico Bilbao and Real Sociedad; or Scottish sectarianism by
rooting for Rangers among Scottish teams (well, at that time Celtic were
running away with everything and I like underdogs anyway :-)). But I am
digressing here.

Anyway, we know that Liverpool were underdogs to Borrussia in 77, Forest
without Trevor Francis were dead ducks in 80 against Keegan and HSV, Villa
were a class below Bayern, Aberdeen should never have gotten so far and
didn't deserve to be on the same pitch (or quagmire) as Real; Further,
North Korea shouldn't even have been allowed into the WC in 66,
the USA weren't suppose to beat England with Matthews and Mortensen in
the team in 1950 etc. Well, a soccer game is not just 11 individuals, and
physical size, athleticism, or individual skills alone aren't sufficient to
judge who will win. See, that's the beauty of soccer, that's why everyone
all over the world can master it. In the inaugural Rugby World Cup, a
technically superior Japanese team (Asian champions) were beaten by the USA
Eagles down under by (I think) one try or so; the Japanese lost by sheer
weight on the forward line. It didn't matter that they've played rugby for
100 years and the Americans only play it at Cal Berkeley and the Ivy
League. Point is, most other sports are somewhat predictable, but not
soccer-- that is why bookmakers (ahem, I'm an avid gambler) normally
give odds for both teams, not score handicapping, and football pools
are so darned hard to win (the first time I tried NFL pools, I got 12
out of 14 results correct, and have a mini win streak on football
going in Nevada currently).

Well, if we still insist upon arguing on paper, let me tell you all,
since this hasn't been discussed yet, that if the Manchester United team
hadn't crashed in Munich in 1958, Real would never have won all those
European Cups before Benfica broke the streak. United would have
beaten Real at least a couple of times. Remember that despite losing almost
the whole team, they still managed to get into the semifinals that year,
Bobby Charlton being the best of the living. They had also been a
semifinalist the previous year, and with a rebuilt team made it to another
3 semifinals in the following 10 years (winning one). That United team would
also have produced the core of the England team that could have prevented
Brazil from winning the World Cup in 1962. Duncan Edwards would have been
talked about today in the same breath as Pele, Puskas and di Stefano, instead
of being remembered only as the youngest player to represent England then,
and who died in his early 20's. England's center forward (Pearson) was
another who died and was an outstanding CF.

I should also make a related comment about the argument that if AC Milan
has the world's 3 greatest players, it follows that they are better than
another team whose 3 best aren't so great. Don't you think this is kind of
silly? Manchester United and Spurs have been throwing money into the wind
for many years trying to accumulate star material, so that they can
challenge for the English League. United hasn't won the title since 1967,
while Spurs I think has waited a little bit longer (like since 1961).
Also, while Milan may have succeeded in winning by paying for it,
I must say that it took quite a lot of experimenting and money.
How many foreign stars have they traded in the
last 8 years? I can offhand think of more than 1 per year. How many league
titles have they won in that time? I think Juventus has a heck of a lot
better system, just like Real does over Barcelona and Liverpool does over
bigger spending English teams. So, by the time Liverpool gets back to
Europe, they'd probably thump AC MIlan, if Milan are still in the Serie A
;-) But maybe they won't be able to beat Juventus. Who knows?
The point is that there is no point at all to be made :-)
Gotta go, cheers!
--
Himawan Gunadhi

   Good point about Real, Walter. However, they have defeated extremely
tough teams in the European Cup lately only to fall to the team that
eventually became the champ. Two years ago they lost to PSV in the
semis after knocking out teams like Bayern and Napoli, and PSV won it
all. Last year they lost to Milan in the semis, and look what Milan
did to Steaua in the finals. Before that, they eliminated the defending
champs, PSV, in the quarterfinals. This year, well, Milan knocked them
out again (and they may win it again..). Real is a heck of a soccer team
right now with a bit of bad luck in European competition recently (I
can't believe I'm saying this. After all, I am a Barcelona fan).
Anyway, the point is well taken..

    I share your views, Walter, although I have to say that the vast
majority of British fans on the net (most of them English) is pretty
unbiased in their analysis. However, comments like someone made
after last year's Milan trouncing of Steaua in the final of the EC,
something like "watching the game I couldn't help thinking about how
easy it would be for Liverpool to destroy Milan," were so pathetic
and prepotent that it gives continental soccer fans reasons to believe
that English people do have an arrogant attitude of superiority towards
the rest of the world.

   I couldn't have summed it up better myself, Walter. In general,
I think continental soccer fans are more willing to watch English
soccer and make a comparison than English fans to watch continental
soccer and then making up their minds. Keeping an open mind is always
key in these cases, and many people isolate themselves in what they
have and refuse to even look at and analyze what the rest of the world
has to offer. I mean, how many British fans can tell me at least
five or six players that currently play for teams like Napoli, Milan,
Inter, Real Madrid, Barcelona, etc...? Or who is the league champion
in Spain, Italy, France, West Germany, etc..? Well, on the other hand,
I am sure continental soccer fans were planted in front of the tv
last year in the FA Cup final... Also, I hear about Spanish games
being shown in Sweden, Italian games shown in Spain, English matches
shown all thru Europe, etc.. But are continental soccer matched shown
in England?

 Once again, neither Walter nor myself are attempting to flame anyone
by these comments. It's just an opinion I am perfectly willing to
change if I am proven incorrect..

********************************************************************************
Alex Chacon                       |  "Game over man, game over. We're f*cked!"
Rochester Institute of Technology |      -Private W. Hudson, from "Aliens"
Rochester, NY                     |  
                                  |  "Be Excellent to each other"        
                                  |      -"Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure"
uunet!ccicpg!cci632!ritcv!ultb!   |          
amc3075                           |
             or                   |   In 1990:
                                  |            - AUPA ESPANA!!!

********************************************************************************

No flames taken.  But I can't resist a counterpoint  :-)

Thanks for saying we (most Brit fans) are pretty unbiased.  I, at least,
will pan British teams as much as anyone when they deserve it!  The
comment made about how Liverpool could have beaten Milan, in the original
poster's defence, is shear frustration.  English teams were dominating
European Cup competition until the Brussels disaster.   And now all we can
do is watch the Europeans reap the benefits due to the exclusion of English
teams.  You've got to look from our side on this.  It's ***y frustrating!
All we can wonder is how things would be with the likes of Arsenal, Liverpool,
Aston Villa, Notts Forest, et al, in the thick of things.  Well since we've
just gone through a major discussion about if today's Liverpool is any
better or worse than pre-Brussels, I won't go into if English teams could
still dominate Europe today here.  My point is, I don't believe we English
have an arrogant attitude of superiority as you suggest.  As followers of the
best game in the world, the English know who play the game best.  We've had
our arses kicked by great teams from South America and Western Europe enough
to know!  Whenever England have to play Brazil or Italy or West Germany, for
example, *even at Wembley* we English have so much respect for these teams
that we know that England will struggle and if we win it's a bonus.
Similarly we have great respect for the top club teams from South America and
Europe.  We know we aren't just plain superior against these teams.  Even
teams like Liverpool play teams like Real Madrid or Bayern Munich or Inter
Milan, etc, with the utmost respect.

As I said, English teams have lost enough games to show respect to almost
everyone.  When we haven't, we have lost at our peril.  I still shudder how
we let Poland knock us out of the 1974 World Cup qualifers in October 1973.
I say again, it's frustrating not to be able to prove ourselves at the
club level anymore.   Put the shoe on the other foot.  Let's say for the sake
of argument that Italy had the best club teams in Europe, dominating all
the Euro cups, then they were excluded indefinetly from further Euro
competition.  Now the Italian fans sit at home and watch the other nations
win all the cups they could have been winning!  After a few years, wouldn't
they become a little frustrated?  It's only human nature and nothing to do
with an air of superiority.

But here, I have to agree with you.  Generally English fans don't watch
too much European football and virtually nothing from South America.
Instead we only get to see what is shown on British television, and that
is either when British teams are playing or the Finals of a major tournament
which may or may not contain a British team.  And for this reason, many
British fans can't come up with answers to the questions yoy posed above.
Only a few who read magazines and books will be knowledgeable enough to
give the correct answers because that kind of information isn't always
given on television for some reason.

However, since coming to the U.S., I have watched more European league
games and even games from South America (usually on the Spanish Network
when I used to have access to it) than I ever did in England.  So now
I can compare the styles a little more.  And when it comes right down
to it, I still prefer watching British football.  It's more dynamic.
Perhaps I have more of a feel of the atmosphere and I have more understanding
of the traditions and history of the teams of British football.  Whereas
when I watch a game from South America for instance, I can't get quite as
involved, because I don't know the players or how good the teams are.
The only time I have *really* enjoyed South American and European football
is during international club and national games (European Cup, World Cup,
etc.) because then I have more of a feeling of the teams.  I know about
Real Madrid's great history, I don't know anything about Cadiz.  I love
to watch the Italian national team because I know most of the great stars.
I'm lost if I have to watch Lazio or Bologna.  Do you see what I mean?

I'm sure all the continentals do watch the English leagues and cup games.
England is the birthplace of the world's most beautiful game and so it
goes that it should receive such undivided attention!  The analogy is that
nowadays, much of the world tunes in to watch the Super Bowl (American
Football).  Many countries (especially in Europe) have taken American
Football to their hearts and have their own leagues... and yet Americans
don't even care to know the state of "their" came in the rest of the world.
Seen any European American Football results in the newspapers lately?

But I love all football, wherever its played and no matter who is playing.
I can't wait to see the World Cup because I want to see all the great teams
of the world again, not just to see England (or Scotland or Ireland).

I can't believe how long-winded I got.  Many apolgies to readers who
have not hit the 'n' key yet! :-)

Cheers, Mates!

--

Health Systems International,           New Haven, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"An Englishman never enjoys himself, except for a noble purpose." - A.P.Herbert

 As an English football supporter I have to agree with Alex, we generally
are very biased towards the support of our own team, even more so than the
national team. It's probably historical, and now inbred through generations
of English to believe that we are the best.
 I would certainly take the Dutch trio mentioned than any three Liverpool
players throughout history that you could think off. I saw Guillit play for
PSV several years ago (the only time I've seen him live) and to say he was
brilliant would be understatement of the decade.
 Anyhow Rush, Beardsley & Co will be finished, by the time English clubs
are allowed back in Europe.  Even if it is next season, may I remind the
net that Liverpool have a further 3 year ban to serve, so that will take
them to 1993/4 season. I shall enjoy seeing European football live again,
and having mini holidays around Europe although I suspect some Europeans
won't welcome us as much as before, which will be a pity because the
biggest majority of us are well behaved. Certain clubs ie Norwich &
Wimbledon 'qualifed' for Europe during the ban, yet have never played
European competition. My team took 26,000 supporters to the 1979 European
Cup Final and there was not a single arrest. If you can't guess who that
team is, here is a clue: They are the team who have won the European Cup
from the smallest city, in terms of population.
 Back to the main point the World Cup will settle who is the best team
in the world never mind Europe. In my opinion the Brazilians and the
Italians will be the one to watch, and possibly the Dutch, especially
if Guillit is fit (which by all accounts is seemingly unlikely). The
English team will suprise me if they get very far, while we have the
Don Howe school of coaching involved with the team.

Ian Copping

                  ^^^^^
arrgggghhh!!!!

  You sent this just to wind me up didn't you Garry!

We hate being referred to as Notts Forest - its Nottingham Forest,
Nottm.Forest or just plain Forest

 Couldn't agree more

 Well I'm rarely modest regarding the worlds greatest football team :-)
 so make the most of it!

 Correct, should have been the national manager years ago, then England
would have been World & European champions at least once in the last
12-15 years.

-----

Ian Copping

So nice to see a Notts Forest supporter on the net!

(For other netters; I'm a Derby County supporter.  Derby and Forest being
neighbouring cities are big rivals!)

Well, Ian may be modest, but I'll speak up for him.  Forest have won the
cup *twice*, back to back even:

1978-79         v Malmo (Sweden)        1-0  (Francis)
1979-80         v SV Hamburg            1-0  (Robertson)

And Brian Clough is *still* the best manager I have ever known.

--

Health Systems International,           New Haven, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"An Englishman never enjoys himself, except for a noble purpose." - A.P.Herbert

This was the steepest success curve in soccer history (as far as I know)

1976-77 Nottingham Forest promoted from 2nd to 1st Division (in 2nd place?)
1977-78 Nottingham Forest win 1st Division
and then there were the European cups. What a team.

I prefer Derby though. :)
--
Manchester United 0, West Ham 0
A clean and sporting match, marred only by the cynical *** of Cottee ten
minutes in. In the 27th minute, a diving header from Norman Whiteside met
Alvin Martin full in the stomach. Shortly afterwards Mark Ward's head
connected with Gordon Strachan's 31st minute fist.

I have seen Barcelona, Anderlecht, Bayern, Inter and Napoli all play
live (one of the advantages of Dutch cable TV) this season and in my
opinion Liverpool would give any of them a good run for their money. Just
becuase they are big clubs doesn't mean that they have good teams. It's
hard to say with Real Madrid, sure they are walking away with the Spanish
title but they were awfull when they played in Europe this year.

The current AC Milan side are an exception, they are the best football team
Europe has seen for years, but even they can have their off days. OK they
hammered Real Madrid and Steaua Bucharest in the European Cup last year but
don't forget that they struggled to beat the german teamwork of Werder Bremen
in an earlier round and only got through on a suspect penalty. In another
early round they were saved by the fog (I forget the other team involved).

                  |  -----------------o------------------
Donie Collins.    | SERI -  collins:nlwaya01 or COLLINS:NVPNASA

Heh, heh, heh!  Cackle, cackle, cackle! (and other evil laughter...)

Actually I always say Nottingham Forest...

... except to a Notts Forest supporter....

(more evil laughter...)

On a more serious note, I always look out for Nottingham Forest and
Leicester City results besides Derby County (all three cities are
very close together, Leicester being south down the M1 Motorway a bit, while
Derby and Nottingham stradle the M1, west and east, respectively).
Closer to home (Woodville, near Swadlincote in Derbyshire) are Burton Albion
and Gresley Rovers, who aren't in the Barclay's Football League just yet,
unfortunately... one day, perhaps!  (C'mon, Rovers!)

--

Health Systems International,           New Haven, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"An Englishman never enjoys himself, except for a noble purpose." - A.P.Herbert

The other team was ("were" for you, I guess :-)) Red Star of Belgrade.

Marco Valtorta                  usenet: ...!ncrcae!usceast!mgv

University of South Carolina    tel.: (1)(803)777-4641
Columbia, SC 29208              tlx: 805038 USC
U.S.A.                          fax: (1)(803)777-3065
usenet from Europe: ...!mcvax!uunet!ncrlnk!ncrcae!usceast!mgv