I think the top 4 English teams are as strong as if not better than the top 4 in Spain , but I think the Top 10 overall in Spain would be stronger than the top 10 in England. Not sure that makes sense , but i think the likes of Zaragoza , Valencia and Atletico Madrid would beat their English equivelants in terms of league places Everton , Reading and Bolton.
EDIT basically what Over the post said
I think itc omes down to whether you enjoy football where there is a lot of competition, as in there being 6 points between the top 5 teams in La Liga, or a league crippled by the big 2 having more money than everyone else. I find it depressing that outside of the madness of the 1995 season, the Premiership has always been contested between United, Chelsea and Arsenal, with Leeds, Newcastle and Liverpool providing the odd distraction.
All I'll say to anyone judging on whether or not the best league in the world should be determined on one season's Champions League results is to ask whether ot not you thought the Portugese League was the best in the world back in 2004?
[QUOTE=jebus;665476] or a league crippled by the big 2 having more money than everyone else. QUOTE]
Would that be Real and Barca ? or AC and Inter ?
Real bought nine European Cups, did they.Originally Posted by anto1208
They had Kopa and di Stefano (robbed from Barca) but they had NINE Spanish players in their team for the first four wins. Puskas replacing Kopa for 1960 Final.
In 1966, the entire starting eleven were Spanish born.
In 1998 they had Carlos, Mijatovic and Redondo, but the other foreigners Illgner, Panucci and Karembau are hardly world class. Players like Raul, Morientes, Hierro and Sanchis pretty much came through the ranks.
In 2000 you can add Campo, Helguera, Cassillas and Salgado to the Spanish contingent of Raul, Morientes, Hierro and Sanchis, thats 8 Spanish players. Anelka replaced Mijatovic. McManamen was there too.
The only time they won it that you can claim they bought was 2002. When they had Carlos, Figo, Makelele and Zidane (McManamin sub).
Remember, Ronaldo has never won the European Cup.
As has been said La Liga offers much better depth than the Premiership. The Premiership may have 3 out of 4 semi-finalists in the CL but Spain has 3 out opf 4 in the UEFA. Seville beating Spurs als indicates that the level of depth is much better there.
If you go on the standard of just the top teams then the SPL could quite realistically proclaim itself to be one of the top 5 or 6 leagues in Europe.
I think that that shows it to be the other way round. The second best team in Spain (1 point off the lead) can only narrowly beat the team 7th in the Premiership.
How does that show it to be the other way around? It doesn't matter how many goals they won by, they still won and thus proved themselves to be a superior side.
All UEFA Cup teams are going to be good teams and lest we forget what happened in last year's final? Boro absolutely outclassed by Seville.
Also, the fact that Seville only qualified for the UEFA Cup this year yet are 2nd in the league serves only to highlight my point about depth. Can you see Spurs finishing top 2 in the Premiership in the forseeable future? Not with Chelsea and Man Utd around that's for sure.
I think it's obvious that how it shows it to be the other way round. If La Liga was a higher standard than the Premiership do you not think the second best team in Spain would beat the seventh best team in England by more than a goal over two games?
The 5th best team in Spain at the time against the 14th best team in England at the time- hardly surprising or a fair comparison to make.All UEFA Cup teams are going to be good teams and lest we forget what happened in last year's final? Boro absolutely outclassed by Seville.
Your point there about Seville is irrelevent as no one team is the same year after year, even with the same personnel.Also, the fact that Seville only qualified for the UEFA Cup this year yet are 2nd in the league serves only to highlight my point about depth. Can you see Spurs finishing top 2 in the Premiership in the forseeable future? Not with Chelsea and Man Utd around that's for sure.
I think that just shows that the standard is higher in the Premiership and that's why it's so difficult for teams to break-up the current top 4 quartet. Barcelona, the best team in Spain, lost to Liverpool, the third best team in England. That, along with Seville's narrow victory over Spurs, shows the difference in standard between the leagues. La Liga may have more teams involved in the title race which provides more excitement as the season comes to a close, but this is only because the top teams in Spain aren't as strong as the top teams in England.
[QUOTE=anto1208;665490]Are you talking about Barca (We were **** a few years back), Real (We haven't won anything in years) or AC (we might scrape into the Champions League qualifiers) or Inter (we are going to win our first proper league in nearly two decades)?
If you're going to make a comment like that anto at least watch European football for more than a season
No. I can't believe you're suggesting a league is of a higher standard than another because one of its teams lost to one in that league. Where's the logic in that? Obviously the gap isn't huge between those two sides, but I'm not claiming a huge gulf between the two leagues.
Again, see above point. It hardly shows that the Premiership is of a higher standard. You're logic's all wrong. Not to mention, Boro were absolutely hammered in that one which just makes my case stronger rather than weakening it.
Your point about Barcelona's defeat to Liverpool is all well and good, but your second (about the Premiership being stronger because one of its sides lost to a Spanish side by a low margin) is rubbish, as said earlier. Also, how can you claim the top teams aren't as strong in Spain when it is a Spanish sides that currently holds the European Cup, UEFA Cup and European Super Cup. When was the last time an English side won all three of those?
Also:
Spain boasts the highest UEFA coefficient and its clubs have won more European trophies.
I could also use your above point:
"Your point there about Seville is irrelevent as no one team is the same year after year, even with the same personnel."
to say that despite Barcelona having gone out of this year's competition they won it last year and could very well do it next year. It's basically the same argument you used.
At the end of the day in a debate over which of two leagues is the stronger/where two leagues stand in relation to each other all you can go on is facts. They speak for themselves.
But it's a debate, so opinions and differing judgment criteria will have to come into play. A match between teams from different leagues cannot, despite being the most objective test, conclusively prove anything in my view. That's why I would look elsewhere to try solve the conundrum.
In my mind the technical finesse of La Liga is inordinately supreme vis-a-vis the Premiership, and is the reason I rate La Liga higher. It is said the Premiership attracts the best players, but I don't think they are the best ball players, maybe physically, mentally superior but not the most skillful. One of the reasons I would give for this is the origin of the players. In La Liga there are an awful lot of Argies and Brazilians - definitely the best countries for producing footballers - who would rather not delve into the hurly-burly world of the Premiership. This is an indictment of the league's style as much as a player's whims.
This question has no right answer, just a series of thoughts that can vary wildly from person to person that can draw on multiple factors. Attempting to categorise a 'best league' is nigh on impossible. What do you look at? Players, managers, clubs engendering community spirit, stadium atmosphere, too many, or not enough, imports? Within which you could further make classifications. But I guess the ultimate answer lies in the question 'if you have to watch one match from a league, with randomly selected teams, which league would you choose?' For me, that league is La Liga because I know I've a better chance of seeing players of a technical quality light years away from my own humble endeavours! That match may not have the cut and thrust of a Premiership tie, the raucousness of a hopping Bundesliga ground or the tactical manoeuvrings of a Serie A spar, but its what I want, I think
Opinions are all right if you have no hard facts or evidence to go on. You can just simply agree to differ in those instances because there's no way of settling it in a reasonably agreeable manner.
But you can't say 'my opinion is right cause I say so'. I went through the same thing in the debate we had over the relative levels of the Welsh league and the League of Ireland, where I was getting a lot of people who disagreed with me just dismissing the facts. It's so easy to do that, so opinions shouldn't be sufficient to prove something.
In this case I have quoted the two most objective things you can use to settle such a debate: European coefficients and trophies won. These count all results from a given period and give a better indicator of actual league strength as opposed to one season's results.
I've also shown that the depth in the Spanish league is better as shown by their recent dominance of the UEFA Cup and if pushed feel reasonably confident I could back up my opinion that the top teams in both leagues are pretty much on a par.
Although in this case we actually agree on the subject matter, so I shouldn't really be arguing with you.
And by the way, in my opinion, on entertainment value, La Liga also wins every time for me also. Though I am also a fan of the Premiership, less so the Italian Serie A. Find it too slow paced and not enough goals, though it can be interesting to watch.
I don't see why Bolton and Everton would be big underdogs there.
TO TELL THE TRUTH IS REVOLUTIONARY
The ONLY foot.ie user with a type of logic named after them!
All of this has happened before. All of it will happen again.
I've heard some daft reasoning in my time, but to suggest that the Spainish league is better than the english premiership (at the moment) because it's more 'competitive' is rubbish. The only yardstick to use is the Champions league, and, there are 3 english teams in the semi final. Maybe the word competitive could be replaced with average.
"I just came in to buy a stamp"-Padraig Pearse, April 24th 1916
Your logic isn't necessarily correct. Let's say for the sake of argument the top 4 English clubs are excellent and the rest are rubbish, does that make the league the best in Europe? The results in the CL and UEFA Cup would tend to show that the top English teams are better while the mid-ranking Spanish teams are better. I suspect if all the English Premier league teams played all the La Liga teams there wouldn't be much between the two in the overall results.
Forget about the performance or entertainment. It's only the result that matters.
That's not what I was suggesting. I said that the top teams were just as good in Spain as in England and the 5th-12th placed teams were stronger.
Again history would tend to back that up, as ould the UEFA coefficient.
Not forgetting 13th placed, and UEFA Cup semi-finalists, Osasuna!
A league is not simply its top few teams. A league can be better on average but weaker at the top, making it more competitive and overall a better league
Of course!
Quite obviously the top teams in Spain aren't as good (this season) as in england. If the top 3 teams in Italy or Germany or Spain were in the semi final of the champions league nobody would argue that they had the best league.By the way, I've no particular bias for or against any league.
"I just came in to buy a stamp"-Padraig Pearse, April 24th 1916
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks