Who do you think should have won the major football tournaments of your lifetime?

[Hitro]

Or rather, those you actually followed yourself thouroughly (i.e. more than just a handful of matches).

Many people here throw around names of countries so let's make our opinions clear once and for all.

The first tournament I followed was the World Cup in 1986 but I was quite young and only got to watch a handful of matches, most as replays due to the time difference to Mexico.

So the ones I can really comment on start with EURO 1988 in Germany (still my favourite tournament, first time rules ).

EURO 1988: Actual winners: The Netherlands

My view: acceptable. The Soviet Union and Germany would have deserved it, too. But Holland certainly were no underserved winners. Van Basten is still a hero of mine. Too bad he's such a, well, not-so-great coach.

World Cup 1990: Actual winners: Germany

My view: probably correct. There were really few other contestants. Brazil dropped out early to an Argentina they should never have reached the final. England were okay. Italy and Holland probably came closest to deserving it besides Germany.

EURO 1992: Actual winners: Denmark

My view: damn hard to tell. I love underdogs and so - as with Greece in 2004 - there is alot of sympathy for this. But were they really the best team? I don't think so. Teams like Sweden were no worse, Germany and the Netherlands probably better. After all Denmark didn't even qualify. So objective probably not deserved.

World Cup 1994: Actual winners: Brazil

My view: probably correct. My least favourite tournament of all times. But Brazil were deserved winners. Italy came close as they did on the pitch.

EURO 1996: Actual winners: Germany

My view: acceptable. There were a number of teams on a comparable level, in fact all four semifinalists to start with. One of many tournaments in the decade that Holland could have won but didn't even get to the final.

World Cup 1998: Actual winners: France

My view: okay, but there was a clearly better team. That team were - the Netherlands. To me close to the most clearly deserved potential winners ever. Potential...

EURO 2000: Actual winners: France

My view: damn lucky. Awful final, poor Italy. This again should have been won by Holland. In fact probably even more than two years before. That said France had a very good team those years. I just think Holland were a little better.

World Cup 2002: Actual winners: Brazil

My view: damn hard to tell. In all fairness noone was clearly better than Brazil. But then again this was the first and so far only tournament I've seen that didn't have a single team that really deserved it.

EURO 2004: Actual winners: Greece

My view: I loved it but no way. Greece were not the best team in that tournament. Still I probably liked that more than any other win by a foreign team ever.

World Cup 2006: Actual winners: Italy

My view: sorry, but no. Germany or Argentina it should have been and rather France than Italy. My second least favourite tournament of all times.

 

[Pangur Bán]

World Cup 1990: Actual winners: Germany

My view: Snore. I fall asleep just remembering that final. Cameroon should have won it for being the only quarter-finalist that didn't bore me!

EURO 1992: Actual winners: Denmark

My view: yeah, war and genocide got them to the finals, but they were the classiest and most exciting team in the tournament.

World Cup 1994: Actual winners: Brazil

My view: correct. They weren't outstanding, but they were clearly the best team in the tournament. I was hoping for a Bulgaria Sweden final though.

EURO 1996: Actual winners: Germany

My view: England were a better team than Germany; at the time they seemed to have a drive that made it inevitable, but Germany held out for penalties in the real final, and got through to unimpressively complete the business against the Czechs.

World Cup 1998: Actual winners: France

My view: The most deserved win I've seen. They won all their games, and won against Brazil very comfortably. I still believe that this French team was the best European team of all time. My greatest memories of that tournament were the two knock-out games played by Denmark. If they'd won the tournament, it would not have been surprising or undeserved.

EURO 2000: Actual winners: France

My view: Portugal were robbed in the semis, but France weren't undeserved winners because all four semi-finalists would have deserved to win it. That being said, I thought Holland were going to win it and France lost in the group stages to them; I always feel teams that lose any match can only be tarnished champions.

World Cup 2002: Actual winners: Brazil

My view: Meh. Two Asian semi-finalists, neither of whom you'd have said didn't deserve to win it if they'd won two more games. Brazil were admittedly the best team there; Germany gave a brave performance in the final, but I certainly wouldn't have said they deserved to win.

EURO 2004: Actual winners: Greece

My view: CZECH REPUBLIC!!! Do you have amnesia Hitro?! This was robbery. Greece of course did win it through very astute boredom tactics, but the Czechs were by far the most impressive team in the tournament.

World Cup 2006: Actual winners: Italy

My view: Meh. Germany were better in this world cup than they were in 2002. Italy won it, France complained. They had cause, and Italy had a comparatively easy route to the final. Zidane was awesome. France v Brazil! That was a game. France prolly deserved it on that alone, but I don't begrudge Italy who've not won it in quite a while.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Well, I'm born in 1981 in a family of football fan. As a result, the early international tournaments of my life are very important to me, because even if I don't remember them by myself, they were considered as a reference all around me with a French team of a quality which people thought could never be reached again. As a result, I've watched later a lot about these tournaments and think I can still give an opinion on them.

Tournaments with an Asterisk * are those I don't remember as being watched live.

World Cup 1982*: Italy

My view: Played in very young Spanish democracy, it had a special post-Franco athmosphere. Unfortunately, the world cup suffered from a format with two successive group phases. It was actually a rather open competition where Italy was an unexpected winner. Who deserved to win it all? Many people think France, but the team lacked of experience then. Somehow, due to the same lack of experience, I think Spain missed here a historical opportunity to win its first title. The two finalists, Italy and Germany, weren't necessarily the more talented squads of the competitions, but they were clearly the more experienced. This tournament shows well the key importance of experience to reach the final of a world cup. Something which is historically less true for the Euro.

EURO 1984*: France

My view: This tournament has been in a way the revenge of the World Cup 1982. Both finalists, France and Spain, being the two teams who showed the most during the earlier world cup, they could face each others in the final here. Something which I believe wasn't undeserved.

World Cup 1986*: Argentina

My view: A great world cup which is remembered in France for the great show of Guadalajara where France had beaten Brazil on penalty shoot outs. I've recently watched again this game, and it's really a great show! Anyway, I know this will be surprizing, but even if it was indeed a tough call between both teams, I still think Brazil deserved it slightly more than France. Unfortunately, both teams fought so much during this game that they neutralized each others for the semi-final. I think the final of that one should have opposed Brazil to Argentina.

EURO 1988*: The Netherlands

My view: That's probably the sporting event I remember the less. I hadn't followen it as I was still young and I know it sounds awfully chauvinist but I think that was also partly due to the fact France failed to qualify.
Anyway, I'm sure Van Basten's Dutch victory was deserved, or at the very least wasn't undeserved (which is slightly different).

World Cup 1990: Germany

My view: That's the first international competition I remember having watched games live. I keep this image in head of Italy vs Argentina semifinal in Naples, where Napolitans whistled the Argentinian anthem and Maradona was yelling "BASTARDO! BASTARDO!".
Anyway, despite Maradona's revenge on the pitch, I still believe the final should have opposed Germany to Italy... but overall Germany deserved its title indeed.

EURO 1992: Denmark

My view: Yes Denmark was an underdog, but yes they deserved to win it. The reason is simple, at the opposite of Greece in 2004, Denmark won it in playing football. Of course, the Germany lead by Matthäus wouldn't have been an undeserving Champion, but the final opposed both and Denmark won fair and square.

World Cup 1994: Brazil

My view: I have nothing to add to Hitro's comment. Brazil was the team showing the most in a rather boring tournament. I would still be curious to know what would have done France in that world cup. I don't believe France could have won it because the team already proved in failing to qualify that it wasn't solid enough defensively, but they could have been a funny quarter finalist to watch. As a reminder, France finished at the last minute third of a group where Sweden and Bulgaria (two 1994 WC semifinalists) got through.

EURO 1996: Germany

My view: Probably the tournament England should have won. They had everything for this, a fantastic home crowd cheering a fantastic team. I think England has paid its lack of experience here once again. Germany was probably the second deserving team to me so it's not that awful they've won it though. France had a good defence but not a single decent forward, it didn't deserve better than a semifinal.

World Cup 1998: France

My view: I agree with Hitro that the Netherlands were better than Brazil in this tournament. The Brazilians, current world champions, were actually not that impressive during this tournament. Brazil conceded 10 goals overall. Probably the best final would have opposed the Netherlands and France. Overall, I'm not that sure the Netherlands would have won that game considering French defence was really strong then. It's quite uncertain honnestly.

EURO 2000: France

My view: Yes, I agree that the Netherlands were very strong then. France was more offensively minded than in 1998 but it also had (already) an aging defence. It's the last international competition played by Deschamps, who was still a great tactician but who was really old physically. I don't believe it's random that France failed miserably in 2002 once Deschamps was gone. Deschamps was the real boss of the French squad.

World Cup 2002: Brazil

My view: This tournament, starting in may, was played too early, in a too hot and too humid climate, especially in Korea. As a result, none of the favourites played at their expected level. Considering the poor performence of most other teams, I guess Brazil and Germany were the logical finalists, and Brazil the logical winner. However, I've been very frustrated by this World Cup, which didn't offer the quality expected. This being said, it was also nice to see, for once, the hierarchy being disputed.

EURO 2004: Greece

My view: As I've said earlier, it's good to see underdogs winning, but not in playing like the Greeks did. Well, Greeks gave everything they had in their victory, so at least there was courage in their title. But still, they've proven we could win titles in playing with 10 players in the back, and I fear the consequences of such an accomplishment. The final should have opposed Portugal and Czech Republic to me, and I would have actually given the victory to Deco's Portugal.

World Cup 2006: Italy

My view: Well, I'm sad Argentina got caught back by Germany as I think a semifinal between them in Italy would have been interesting. Anyway, Italy had been very lucky to win this. Italy 2006 reminded me France 1996: a good defence (probably even better) but not a single decent forward. Yes, Germany, Argentina or France may have been more deserving world champions, but anyway, it didn't turn out this way.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Let me add in a few for the greyhairs amongst us...

1970: Brazil - unquestionable
1972: Germany - not a lot televised at that point, but Germany were devastating in the final and at Wembley in the QF, so probably worthy winners
1974: Germany - should have been the Netherlands
1976: Czechoslovakia - as good a claim as Germany or the Netherlands.
1978 - Argentina - should have been the Netherlands
1980 - Germany - the real final was the group game between Germany and the Netherlands, who almost came back from a 3-0 deficit. Germany were worthy winners, IMHO
1982 - Italy - well, France were good, and Brazil were magnificent, but Italy's win against Brazil warrants the title, I think. A truly breathtaking game, that one.
1984 - France - Platini almost deserved this on his own. I can't recall as dominant a performance by a single player in any top tournament as this one.
1986 - Argentina Probably right.
1988 - Netherlands van Basten and Gullit. They were the best team overall, and van Basten's destruction of England particularly sticks in the mind.

 

[Stapel]

World Cup 1974: Germany
I was 1 year old at the time, but the lost final seems to have found its way into a collective Dutch memory, even for those who were not born yet. Holland should have won

World Cup 1978: Argentian
Well, I was 5 years old, but have one clear memory of it. After the lost final, my father came into my bedroom (the match was at night) to inform me we had lost.
Holland should have won

World Cup 1982: Italy
From this WC I actually did fill in a scheme. However, I only remember few things of it. Paolo Rossi; Brazil going out, while having a great team; watching the final with my younger brother at my grandfather's place. My grandfather has worked most of his life in Germany, so we were all luke-warmish supporting Germany. One thing still is clear on my mind: Tardelli yelling his heart out fater he scored.
Brazil should have won

European Cup 1984: France
Only few momeries, but France has won deservedly.

World Cup 1986: Italy
The first tourney I really followed most matches. Getting out of bed at 1am to watch the semis between Belgium and Argentina. I remember a penalty shout-out between France and Brzail, where the Frecnh hot the post, but scored becuase the ball went into the net bouncing back from the keeper.
In the end, Maradona's Argentina were the correct winners.

European Cup 1988: The Netherlands
Most correct winners ever . Even today, I can still smell the sweat of fear form the semi-final and the match vs Ireland.

World Cup 1990: Germany
Germany had the least weak team. Therefor correct winners. The semi against England was the greatest game I have ever seen (and I was inside the stadium, with my mother). The organisation failure of the Dutch is what fills my memories....... What a mess.

European Cup 1992: Denmark
Nah... Nice stunt, but no. Germans and Dutch had stronger teams. I'm still puzzled how we lost that semi....


World Cup 1994: Brazil
Clean win. Boring. Though the Dutch did not have a better team at the time, I honostly think we were closed to beating them in the quarter finals. All three Brazilian goals were smelly....
I think Baggio's Italy would have deserved it better

European Cup 1996: England
Should have gone to England, clear and simple.

World Cup 1998: France
We had the best performing team I have ever seen. Maybe not the best team ever, but certainly the best organised and best performing. I would have loved to see a final against France. I'm a bit undecided.
The French performance in the 1/8th (Paraguay, iirc?) and the quarters (Italy) were not those of a World Champion. I don't know why, but I have no memory of France-Croatia...... (weird..). In the final, Zidane showed his all-round class, by making two headers from corners (scoring headers from corners is not how we remember Zizou, right?). However, I agree with Marla, it was Deschamps who was the man to whom France should thank it's title, rather than Zizou.

European Cup 2000: France
Correct winners, though I once again would have loved to see a France-Holland final. That semi against Italy......................... .

World Cup 2002l
Too bad the Worldcup 2002 could not be held. The illegal alternative in Japan/Korea only attracted B-nations, so I can't comment on it, I guess .

European Cup 2004: Greece
What a joke. Otoh, it showed that having a well-organised team is the most important asset in football. Should have been won by either Portugal or Chezy.

World Cup 2006l
I seem to stand alone that they were the the not so persuative, yet correct winners. France showed the best performance in their match against Brazil, but let's be fair to say they weren't that impressive in any other match. Maybe Germany, maybe Argentina, maybe Portugal (they shouldn't be judged alone on the war-like )match against Holland.

 

[Darkness]

Van Basten is still a hero of mine. Too bad he's such a, well, not-so-great coach.

Can I please nominate you for the "Understatement of the Year" award. The man is a disaster. The only reason he's still the coach is because Johan Cruijff has a lot of influence in the Dutch football federation (KNVB), and Cruijff likes him (hell, he even suggested Van Basten as coach to the KNVB)...

[EURO 1988: Actual winners: The Netherlands

Definately correct. Van Basten is a louzy coach, but he was a great player. This Dutch team was actually a real team, with players devoted to winning calling the shots on the field...

World Cup 1990: Actual winners: Germany

Also correct. Italy was also a good contender, but Germany deserved this one.

EURO 1992: Actual winners: Denmark

Not correct. Besides the fact that the second goal in the final should never have been allowed, the Dutch and the Germans were better.

World Cup 1994: Actual winners: Brazil

Correct. But close. If Italy had won the penalty shoot-out I'd also have considered it a deserved win.

EURO 1996: Actual winners: Germany

Not correct. England was better, and one can also make a convincing argument about the Czechs.

World Cup 1998: Actual winners: France

Not correct. I still wonder which alien race kidnapped Ronaldo in the days before the final. Either Brazil or Holland would have been a better winner.

EURO 2000: Actual winners: France

Correct. But Italy was close.

World Cup 2002: Actual winners: Brazil

Worst tournament ever, IMHO.
But Brazil was the best team.

EURO 2004: Actual winners: Greece

Not correct.
The Czechs and Portugal were better, but the German organization of the Greek team won this one.

World Cup 2006: Actual winners: Italy

Absolutely correct. France and Brazil were decent, but besides a pair of good games for each of them they simply didn't have the drive to win it. Germany was a pleasant surprise though.

 

[Berrie]

World Cup 1990: Actual winners: Germany

My view: probably correct. There were really few other contestants. Brazil dropped out early to an Argentina they should never have reached the final. England were okay. Italy and Holland probably came closest to deserving it besides Germany.

World Cup 2002: Actual winners: Brazil

My view: damn hard to tell. In all fairness noone was clearly better than Brazil. But then again this was the first and so far only tournament I've seen that didn't have a single team that really deserved it.

In 1990 England was VERY lucky not to go out in the 1/8 finals against Belgium. The name David Platt is still very hated in my little country.

Again a team was a bit lucky in the 1/8 finals against Belgium. It was a deserved win in the end because of a good second half, but the incorrect disallowed goal by Wilmots had a lot of influence on the game.

 

[dionysos2048]

Should have won the tournament:
since I really follow football:
1986: Argentina
1988: Holland
1990: England
1992: Yugoslavia
1994: Brazil
1996: Czech Republic
1998: Netherlands
2000: France
2002: France
2004: Portugal
2006: Argentina

 

[Hitro]

France in 2002?

 

[Lambert Simnel]

1992: Yugoslavia

Well, they were unfairly disqualified, and the eventual winners Denmark did take their place, but I find it hard to see how they really ought to have won the tournament.

 

[dionysos2048]

I knew this post would draw comments... My opinion is not based on how the teams actually played, but on how they should have played. Since we're in hypotheses I allowed myself to go as far as I wished.
In 2002 France had IMO the best team of its history, had played fantastic football since 1998, had the top scorers of 3 of the 5 top European leagues. Yet they failed to score a single goal. Unexplainable to me, even though there was a massive mental problem.
In 1992, Yugoslavia really would have been able to defeat anyone with the likes of Savicevic, Stojkovic, Boksic....

 

[azzaman333]

2006 World Cup; Won by Italy

Italy were lucky to beat Australia, but were deserving winners in the end.

2007 AFC Asian CUp; Won by Iraq

Considering 0/4 seeded teams made the final, and only 2 made the semi's, most teams were a huge disappointment. Saudi Arabia probably should've won, as Iraq only scored 7 goals in 7 matches compared to Saudi Arabia's 12 goals in 7 matches.

 

[Suppersalmon]

Euro 96 - England should have won this

World cup 1998 - France were the best teams but I also have good memories of the Netherlands in this tournament

Euro 2000 - Just got this right although the Italian team were good

World Cup 2002 - Brazil were the best team but still an awful tournament

Euro 2004 - No real Idea to this one no teams seemed to dominate clearly

World Cup 2006 - I would have to say that Germany as they did play the more enjoyable football maybe Argentina in with a Shout as well

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Not sure why England are seen as such rightful winners of Euro 1996. The quarter-final with Spain was pretty much robbery - the Spanish had two goals wrongly disallowed, and two pretty clear penalties refused. You don't tend to get much of this game shown on English replays and YouTube other than the penalty shoot-out.

 

[Stapel]

Not sure why England are seen as such rightful winners of Euro 1996. The quarter-final with Spain was pretty much robbery - the Spanish had two goals wrongly disallowed, and two pretty clear penalties refused. You don't tend to get much of this game shown on English replays and YouTube other than the penalty shoot-out.

The 4-1 win over Holland was actually a very deserved win over a tough opponent. It was an impressive match. Furthermore, the semi against Germany was a dramatic event. England was better. An England victory was in the air, right until the end of the extra time. It was quite amazing they didn't win thta match.

Otoh, you might be right. I don't even remember the QF between Spain and England.........

 

[Pangur Bán]

In 1990 England was VERY lucky not to go out in the 1/8 finals against Belgium. The name David Platt is still very hated in my little country.

Again a team was a bit lucky in the 1/8 finals against Belgium. It was a deserved win in the end because of a good second half, but the incorrect disallowed goal by Wilmots had a lot of influence on the game.

So I watched rerun highlights of that game. I think you have very ... erm ... skewed memories. England clearly dominated and had a perfectly decent goal chopped off in normal time. If anything, Belgium were lucky to run them so close.