From: MH on
Mark V. wrote:
> On Jul 8, 9:53 am, "Karamako" <monsieur.karam...(a)nawadoo.fr> wrote:
>> Alkamista a �crit :
>>
>>> Two best NT's of our times. Who is/was better?
>>> Discuss!
>> Like others, I prefer France 2000 over France 98 that was too defensive with
>> 3 DM.
>
> Was France 2000 any better than Netherlands 2000?

Toss up on neutral ground, but at home I would have expected NL to win
the final. I would not attach too much significance to the group match
NL won though, as both teams had qualified.
From: Adama on

"MH" <MHnospam(a)ucalgary.ca> a �crit dans le message de news:
i15uc1$mjr$1(a)news.ucalgary.ca...

> Toss up on neutral ground, but at home I would have expected NL to win the
> final. I would not attach too much significance to the group match NL won
> though, as both teams had qualified.

That game was not that meaningless.

France needed to lose to keep playing in Belgium and accordingly fielded the
B-team (no Blanc, Desailly, Thuram, Deschamps, Petit, Zidane, Henry or
Anelka who started all the other games, except one for Anelka I think)
On the other hand, Netherlands needed to win (a draw would not have been
enough) to keep playing in the Netherlands.

The french subs gave the dutch a run for their money (taking the lead twice)
and everyone was happy in the end.


From: Mark V. on
On Jul 8, 6:34 pm, MH <MHnos...(a)ucalgary.ca> wrote:
> Mark V. wrote:
> > On Jul 8, 9:53 am, "Karamako" <monsieur.karam...(a)nawadoo.fr> wrote:
> >> Alkamista a écrit :
>
> >>> Two best NT's of our times. Who is/was better?
> >>> Discuss!
> >> Like others, I prefer France 2000 over France 98 that was too defensive with
> >> 3 DM.
>
> > Was France 2000 any better than Netherlands 2000?
>
> Toss up on neutral ground, but at home I would have expected NL to win
> the final.  I would not attach too much significance to the group match
> NL won though, as both teams had qualified.

Also, France was resting more starters than the Netherlands.