Fascinating. The top five names of the first team either played for Barcelona or Juventus at the time. Van der Sar was falsely promised to develop into Ajax but conceded only 18 goals that year (it was already known it was not a happy marriage with Juve). Barcelona 1999-00 on top here (De Boer and Cocu scored in the 2nd leg semis where they went out) https://theanalyst.com/eu/2024/02/highest-scoring-teams-champions-league-season/ In 24 league starts Kluivert had 16 goals and 10 open play assists for Barcelona, plus two penalties won (says Fbref). Champions League 7 goals, 4 assists, also one or two PKs won. The KO stage as well. Van Nistelrooij was injured but despite his strong CL record until then it is not certain he would play or start (born on same day as Kluivert, maybe manager Rijkaard had a leaning to the Ajax camp/style). Rijkaard provided him his debut, that's true. After those Juve and Barca players you get the England based players like Stam, Bergkamp, also Numan (Rangers, Scotland). Then Cocu, who was Barcelona as well, and a regular (most appearances for a foreigner until Dani Alves and Messi). Numan lost his place to Van Bronckhorst eventually, who has an 8.0 in SC for the semi-final. He is one of the highest rated outfield players on the field (Davids, Cannavaro who had unlike the other two no yellow). Bergkamp the highest rated in SC among the creative and attacking players, including Del Piero, Totti etc. Left the pitch in the 87th minute. The biggest 'flop' must be Makaay, who had been important for Deportivo their league title. Bosvelt was a very good player for Feyenoord. In the 1999 title but also 2002 UEFA Cup. Nowadays best known for relieving Robben vs Czech Reijnders in 2004... edit: Czech Republic in 2004 of course... autocorrect...
Since Nesta had such an impressive Euros in 2000, I checked his other tournaments as well. He was indeed very unlucky with injuries but his overall mark of 6,65 is second to only nine players among the ones I've checked so far (Maradona, Messi, Iniesta, Robben, Xavi, F. Baresi, Rivaldo, Neymar and Arnesen). 1998 World Cup Chile 2-2 : 5,70 Cameroon 2-0 : 6,30 Austria 2-1 : not rated average : 6,00 Euro 2000 Turkey 2-1 : 6,80 Belgium 2-0 : 6,90 Sweden 2-1 : 6,70 Romania 2-1 : 7,30 Netherlands 0-0 pen : 7,60 France 1-2 7,10 average : 7,07 2002 World Cup Ecuador 2-0 : 6,80 Croatia 1-2 : not rated Mexico 1-1 : 6,40 average : 6,60 Euro 2004 Denmark 0-0 : 6,80 Sweden 1-1 : 6,10 Bulgaria 2-1 : 6,20 average : 6,37 2006 World Cup Ghana 2-0 : 6,70 USA 1-1 : 6,40 Czech Republic 2-0 : not rated average : 6,55
That high 7.6 in the 2000 semi final... he was rightly penalized for holding Kluivert in the penalty area. Had already escaped causing a penalty (vs Zenden) before. And so on. Not wanting to do a demolition job here. Not to be too harsh but Oranje had an Xg of at least 3 (maybe 3.6). That is huge. Also when playing against ten. France in 2024 vs Oranje had less than half of this, to give an idea for how big this is. Looks doubtful if that is really his best match of the lot.
CALCIO 2000 1.- Toldo (Italia): 7,17 2.- Zidane (Francia) y Totti (Italia): 7 4.- Nesta (Italia) y Cannavaro (Italia): 6,92 6.- Zahovic (Eslovenia): 6,83 7.- Davids (Holanda) y Zenden (Holanda): 6,80 9.- Nedved (Chequia): 6,67 10.- Rui Costa (Portugal): 6,63 11.- Kluivert (Holanda): 6,60 12.- Barthez (Francia), Bergkamp (Holanda), Stam (Holanda), Figo (Portugal), Munteanu (Rumanía), Rustu (Turquía), Conceiçao (Portugal), Drulovic (Yugoslavia), Milosevic (Yugoslavia), Srnicek (Chequia), Mykland (Noruega), Smicer (Chequia) y Mendieta (España): 6,50
I think Overmars has been missed off the Netherlands list mate? Nice work again anyway, thanks. I guess these include France Football for example, among the Italian ones you have (sometimes some posts on Football-ratings blogspot probably showed averages from just Italian sources I think?) and some others like Kicker and Spanish sources (apologies if you already said this earlier in the thread)?
Not even selected was Jerrel/Jimmy Hasselbaink, who was part of the squad in 1998. He was on the wider list but eventually fell away. He had been Premier League topscorer (and top assister) for Leeds United in 1999. For Atletico Madrid in 1999-00, despite relegation, topscorer in Copa del Rey and second in the league. The topscorer had eleven penalties. This list, with also Makaay and Kluivert on. https://www.worldfootball.net/goalgetter/esp-primera-division-1999-2000/ Two goals and assist by Hasselbaink vs Real Madrid in 1999-00: Later on, after euro 2000, topscorer for Chelsea. He's another one good to enough to be bought, 'stolen' or if necessary intimidated towards England coaching (like how Moggi could ruin Davids his career once he returned to Serie A). But who will not be rated as a player and/or bumped down. The double handicap. Nesta I do rate certainly. Also as an over the hill player, limiting his own team (playing inside own penalty area, hugely outstretched midfield), you could see his ability. 2011-12 season. (no, don't watch the full thing) Inzaghi the winner for 2-1 in the 82th minute. Milan 2nd in the league, four points behind Juventus, 16 points ahead of the next. Probably another indicator Ancelotti was/is not a particularly great league manager.
True, I'll fix that later. The ratings I publish usually have a majority of Italian sources since I lived in Italy until 2019 and I had the University hemeroteca just 500 meter from my home and most Italian daily newspapers had "pagellisti" (journalists specialized in rating players). However I tried to include as many sources as possible: France Football (with the exception of sent-off players who always got a 0 mark). Kicker and El Mundo Deportivo are always included in Euros/WCs, L'Équipe usually and until 2010 Swedish tabloids Aftonbladet and Expressen also rated players in big tournaments (and in Premier League for a few years). El Gráfico ratings are also included whenever I could find them.
Someone has the total ratings of La Stampa. I have located where they are (except for the Sunday ones), but I find it very difficult to read them. Maybe someone with better eyesight could see them and write them down?
Sometimes La Stampa pages are a bit blurry, expecially 8s can be confused with 6s, so you actually need to read the match report to understand.
Marc Overmars' rating was 6,36 (4 rated games). Vincent Candela played two games: rated 6,10 vs Czech Republic and 6,00 vs Netherlands.
Some more teams from the Euro 2000: Yugoslavia ratings in the Euro 2000 6,41 Savo Milošević 6,34 Ljubinko Drulović 6,09 Dejan Govedarica 6,01 Miroslav Đukić 5,99 Dragan Stojković 5,92 Ivica Kralj, Vladimir Jugović 5,86 Predrag Mijatović 5,82 Slobodan Komljenović 5,78 Slaviša Jokanović 5,05 Niša Saveljić 4,91 Siniša Mihajlović 4,76 Dejan Stanković Labels: 2000, DJUKIC, DRULOVIC, EURO, GOVEDARICA, JUGOVIC, MIHAJLOVIC, MILOSEVIC, SERBIA, STANKOVIC, STOJKOVIC, YUGOSLAVIA Spain ratings in the Euro 2000 6,86 Pedro Munitis 6,65 Abelardo 6,57 Gaizka Mendieta 6,51 Iván Helguera 6,44 Fernando Hierro 6,33 Pep Guardiola 6,06 Alfonso 6,00 Paco 5,96 Míchel Salgado, Joseba Etxeberria 5,70 Raúl 5,62 Agustín Aranzábal 5,48 Santiago Cañizares 5,46 Ismael Urzaiz 5,38 Juan Carlos Valerón Labels: 00s, 2000, ABELARDO, GUARDIOLA, HELGUERA, HIERRO, MENDIETA, MUNITIS, SPAIN
Thanks: I guess you are listing players with a minimum amount of games and not others (such as Robert Pires too for example).
Yes, it is a very simple translation that I use in As and Marca: 0 = 4 1 = 6 2 = 7 3 = 9 On occasion, if I understand that there is a big difference with other ratings that use the decimal system, I can lower the 1 to 5.5 or the 2 to 6.5 or even, sometimes, both. I do this when the overall averages are skewed. On other occasions I have weighted the grade to 65 or 70% of those using the decimal system. But, as a general rule, the equivalences I make are the ones I explained at the beginning.
Which solidifies that you have first five Juve/Barca players and then four Britain players (including Numan, who lost his place during the tournament to Gio).
From what I have been able to understand, there seems to be a controversy regarding sofascore ratings, for deviating, for some, notably from the ratings offered by the written press. I'm going to try to come up with a moderately satisfactory explanation, although I don't know if it will be satisfactory for everyone. First of all, I have read some posts against this type of websites (sofascore, whoscored...); personally, I find them useful, as they are based on objective actions of the game, although it is true that the coefficients given to each of these actions are, of course, subjective. For some, a shot on goal is highly valued and an interception is not valued much, or the other way around. Anyway, “the rules of the game” are what they are and none of us will completely agree. In any case, I repeat, it seems to me a perfectly valid source and, in most cases, fairer than those that some chroniclers, in a totally subjective way, give to certain players. I, who have been dealing with these things for some time now, could give some clear examples of some media, but in order not to generate any controversy, I will not refer to anyone in particular. In the table that concludes this post, you can compare 4 data: in the 1st column, the ratings ordered from highest to lowest from sofascore; in the 2nd column from footballratings; in the 3rd column the average that I have obtained from a total of 8 sources, including Sofascore, and in the 4th column, staying with 7 sources, as I have not included Sofascore. I have to clarify that I only include French and Dutch players, as they are the only selections whose ratings come from 8 different sources, thanks to @Krokko's and @Kroos46's advance. For most of the nations involved in the Euro 2000 finals, I currently only have 6 sources, in my opinion, insufficient to draw sufficiently valid conclusions. I will start with France. In all 4 columns there is consensus that by far the best was Zidane. The sofascore ratings are clearly higher than footballratings, of course due to the sources chosen by @Krokko which makes the final average sel clearly less, with an approximate variation of 0.8 on each player. However, whether I take sofascore ratings into account or not, it only means a variation of 0.04, being in very few players higher than 0.1. Blanc is always on the “podium”, but it must be recognized that the Sofascore parameters clearly favor him over Henry, who in the rest of the columns is in second place. As for Vieira, there is not only a clear difference between SofaScore and footballratings in terms of rating (1.07), but also in terms of his position compared to his teammates (3rd and 9th!). In my case, although the difference between taking sofascore into account or not is 0.09, it also means a significant change in the order, as I would move from 4th place to 7th. Therefore, Vieira's case could be a clear example of excessive valuation in Sofascore. Another striking case is that of Barthez. In many years I have had to add a bonus to the goalkeepers because I noticed that practically always, their ratings are, compared to the outfield players, clearly inferior. We can see that in the case of the French goalkeeper, he has a rating of 0.37 lower on footballratings than on SofaScore and very similar in my calculations. Wiltord is also very low on SofaScore, but in this case it may be due to the short time he played, which could mean an excessive penalty. If you look at the table for players from France, it is clear that the ratings that deviate from the similarity of the other columns are indeed due to sofascore scores. Another important conclusion is that the more sources are considered, the less the deviation from the average is, therefore, the less important it is to include or not sources such as sofascore. That is to say, these differences that we appreciate for each source alone with respect to Sofascore, are compensated or dissipated as the final average is increased with more sources. But be careful, if there is not a minimum number of sources, which could be precisely 8, the average can become quite distorted. If I were to do the same with, for example, Romania or Denmark, the conclusion would not be satisfactory, since the specific weight of sofascore with respect to the total would be visibly greater and, therefore, the variation would be greater and the final balance much weaker. We move on to the Netherlands. I understand and understand that those who are reluctant to Sofascore-type ratings have enough reasons to do so (although I insist on respecting them). Just look at the example of Bergkamp. It's not that he didn't have a good championship, on the contrary, since in footballratings he gets 6.48, a more than respectable figure, and in my calculation of 8 sources he goes to 6.76 (pretty good too). But if I go to the column of the 7 sources, I see something that I did not see in any Frenchman, nor in any other Dutchman, and that is that the difference between column 3 and 4 is almost two tenths; that is, in this opposite case, the difference between counting on the sofascore rating and not doing it almost reaches two tenths and, that, with 8 sources is too much. Regarding Kluivert and Davids, both @Krokko and I have them as 1st and 2nd with very little margin always. Sofascore places them 5th and 4th respectively, but far behind Bergkamp and even Frank de Boer, who, in our ratings occupies places outside the “podium”. Cocu and Overmars do not fit well either. In short, as was the case with France, once again, the SofaScore ratings are clearly out of line with the print media averages, especially in the case of Bergkamp. It would be a matter of taking a closer look at the detail to better understand these ratings. Main conclusion: If someone wants to rely solely and exclusively on SofaScore to say who was the best or the worst in a particular competition, he is wrong. But it is also wrong to rely solely on one or two newspapers, whatever they may be. Let's not forget that they are only opinions. However, if we put together, the more sources the better, the exaggerated notes (above or below) have to be compensated and give a much more realistic chance to draw much more reliable conclusions. The few differences (in order above all) that exist between @Krokko's work and my own I think strengthens that theory. If anyone interprets things differently, I provide the tables so that they can do so.
A shot on goal (inside the penalty) is certainly valued more as an interception in midfield, with a shot 45 seconds later. Being accurate with your shots and not causing loss of posession, like Van Nistelrooij in the Champions League, is also valued. Other than this of course I agree it is not 100% watertight. Like say Ballack/Essien vs Lampard, with the former clearly playing in the service of the other. For some positions it works better as other positions. The goalkeeper, the lone striker. On other things, like Davids vs Cocu, Sofascore actually aligns with how I have seen it (and how Voetbal International saw it in 2018, however, in their data driven all-time Oranje team of two years later Davids was included as DM in midfield and Cocu was merely among the list of honorable mentions; Reiziger was right-back by the way, which also overlaps with your table above).
Vieira certainly played very well vs Portugal, so his Sofascore '2nd behind Zidane' rating seems reasonable in that case I'd think: At one moment at the end of the first half the commentator is beginning to say Vieira had been the best on the pitch at that point I think.
Not to hate on him but Davids had his figure on a Rotterdam skyscraper at the time, by Nike, the place of the final (think here about Cantona '96 and Zidane '98 too). This are important sponsors for magazines. Around that time something like 30-50% of their income came from sports related companies as Nike and Adidas. Is it too crazy to think this has an (indirect) influence? Magazines that need to connect to the public as well; Davids with his glasses, bad ass image and combination of silk and steel was cool. Compared to others from the hosts and his country. In Brazil they said he was a Brazilian (South-American born, certainly) playing in an orange shirt. He played for Juventus, and we know now they definitely tempered with the ratings (not always working in favor of their players... to show power...). People can still have integrity, just less so in football and less so in certain regions and organizations. In South European countries they had more of a ratings culture anyway, compared to England and Scandinavia (and Northern Germany). When you then as Davids play there it is a multiplier. In the other thread, as a response to the DBScalcio list, I saw this comment: At the risk of applying the stereotypes too much: I'd say it works like this yes in most parts of the Benelux, parts of UK, northern Germany, Scandinavia. More or less Protestant Europe. The tally poppy syndrome. The 'above ground level' anti-culture and 'high trees catch air' mentality. It works less like this in Catholic Europe, with (somewhat-)secularized France somewhere in between (they can be merciless, too, in their ratings). Davids himself has some interesting things to say about all those teams he has played for, from Milan to Barnet, from Ajax to Inter Milan. And like Van Gaal has said, he is a half-decent field trainer now. He isn't sitting there as a token guy. There is a discussion with everyone directly affected by a decision and in case of 60-40 or 55-45 Van Gaal had/has the final say but that does not mean there is no input or work autonomy. That Davids is someone to fill the minority quota. "Besides, the best managers often encourage tactical discussion and debate among their players because they want footballers to think for themselves. This was always a fundamental part of the Dutch school of football, the approach that — more or less — has come to dominate the European game over recent decades. Dutch managers didn’t simply tolerate disagreement, they actively encouraged it. There was always a danger the dressing-room power would eventually result in the manager being overthrown, but that was considered a natural part of a healthy dressing room dynamic." https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/3145571/2022/02/26/player-power-the-biggest-misnomer-in-football/ https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/2218743/2020/11/24/bielsa-influence-pochettino-guardiola/ (the second half of this article is actually about Van Gaal, his approach and his 'influence'; again, will the narrative and history change further in subsequent editions and revisions?) Bergkamp, again, really overlaps with the original OPTA Index of 2000. This makes it less likely they are cheating. He had 0 goals this tournament. It shows he could play very well and do useful things without scoring (best rated midfielder/forward of all players in the France game and Italy game). We can see the same for the early phases of the 2004-05 season (eventually he'd be top three per 90 'non-PK G+A' - Henry and Robben top two, Bergkamp third - and cumulative at the end of the season, joint-third with Hasselbaink on a cumulative base, behind Henry and Lampard, but not then). Or possibly also that famous first dozen games for Arsenal in 1995-96. It doesn't look as an oddity to me, how he ranks in Sofascore here (he's also the #1 forward for 1992, 1994, number three 1996, number two 1998 and 0.05 behind Ortega). I was in a different city today and there they had the English edition of FFT. I saw they had a top 100 all-time of the Premier League. While Bergkamp is not number one there, he does have a very lengthy article about him (for real 'fans' like me not a lot new stuff; that Henry, Pires, Campbell etc. invariably see him as the best they played with and even up there with Zidane and Messi). The lengthiest article maybe, when excluding the photos. Ian Wight was the more flamboyant figure around 1997, more like a dream for the media. So he was nominated for PFA player of the year, while he himself said it should be 'Dennis'. 'Dennis' had Reebok as sponsor, had by 1996 switched to a really small agent. He wasn't like Gullit. That said: I do think 1999-00 (despite his heavy contribution to another UEFA Cup final; by then he was excluding penalties pretty much the all-time topscorer in the UEFA Cup) was of a somewhat lower level as all the Arsenal seasons before (PDG1978 is less sure). But that's my perception. He was 29 when he played in the European Cup/Champions League for the first time (Ajax banned in 1990-91), that is often forgotten when people think about him. Arsenal was unbeaten in the away games he did play, which includes Bayern, Barcelona, champions Dortmund etc. In terms of French players you can say Vieira is still the highest placed England-based player (excluding Henry, who had been there for half a year). Higher than Desailly, who was close-ish to his prime years still and had a good club season if I am not mistaken (Desailly was 31 years old in the tournament, 32 in september). The rating for Petit looks off, compared to Deschamps. Deschamps had actually some 6 or lower ratings for the last number of matches by L'Equipe and France Football. The Portugal semi final had a poor grade by L'Equipe and by far the lowest of his team (possibly unfair).
Someone as Paul Scholes (16/11/1974) is a bit....meh in the Index. Not as good as e.g. Davids no, or Lampard/Gerrard. But that will not stop the likes of FFT to place him higher than any Benelux EPL player or any Benelux midfielder overall. Tournaments: 1998: 7.10 2000: 6.97 2002: 7.28 2004: 7.25 CL 03/04: 7.22 04/05: 7.32 05/06: 7.04 06/07: 6.89 07/08: 7.23 08/09: 6.93 09/10: 7.69 (7 rated games!) 10/11: 7.01 11/12: N/A 12/13: 7.00
For comparison. His overall rating is 6,43 which translates very good indeed and certainly the best among the English players I've "tested" so far. Paul Gascoigne's average is 6,33, David Beckham's 6,12, Wayne Rooney's 6,08 and Harry Kane's 6,06. The white jersey is a heavy burden, it seems... Paul Scholes's ratings in World Cups and Euros 1998-2004 1998 World Cup Tunisia 2-0 : 7,30 [1] Romania 1-2 : 6,30 Colombia 2-0 : 7,00 Argentina 2-2 pen : 6,40 average : 6,75 Euro 2000 Portugal 2-3 : 6,70 [1] Germany 1-0 : 6,70 Romania 2-3 : 6,10 average : 6,50 2002 World Cup Sweden 1-1 : 5,50 Argentina 1-0 : 7,00 Nigeria 0-0 : 6,70 Denmark 3-0 : 6,20 Brazil 1-2 : 5,50 average : 6,18 Euro 2004 France 1-2 : 6,60 Switzerland 3-0 : 5,60 Croatia 4-2 : 7,20 [1] Portugal 2-2 pen : 6,10 average : 6,38
Different 'Opta Index' example from March 2005 (when he was close to 36 years old). That I only see now. Didn't know this before. Third for 'player of the month'. https://www.skysports.com/football/news/2328240/opta-player-of-the-month Corroborated by this: https://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsl...7e4b00319-1000--bergkamp-offers-arsenal-hope/ Then again, I am a fan (especially for someone to never have played for Feyenoord, so Larsson, Gio, RvP, Tomasson etc. do not qualify)