BBZ8800
Senior Member
I am from Croatia, so in theory, I should defend competitions as WC and Euros, but majority of people have probably figured out till now that the quality of football is way lower on the NT tournaments.
Here are some reasons:
1. players play in their clubs for 9-10 months per season and build a lot of chemistry.
In the NT team, there is no such chemistry.
You come, you train for 2 weeks and the bigger emphasis is on momentum, magical moment, lucky goal or motivation than on deep tactics and team's automatism actions and chemistry.
2. in clubs, players are usually united, while in NT teams in some cases, players hate eachother like in Spain (Barca vs Real), England (5-6 big teams), or France/Netherlands due to political and racial problems.
In some other countries though, like Croatia, Brazil, Argentina = players are more united and share a higher level of love towards their country. It often happens in countries who were recently in some wars (Croatia, Ukraine, Israel, Palestine, Kosovo) or with poorer/politically neglected countries, who see World cups as some sort of: "we'll show to the world that our small country exist".
Or in deeply religious countries where people/players are more united.
On the other hand, in some bigger/richer/politically more important countries like England, that motivation to "show to the world that you exist" is way smaller.
3. further, majority of NT tournaments are played after the long season, so players from biggest clubs are often dead tired, mentally drained or injured.
So, again, Euros or WC are the perfect opportunity for some benchwarmers to give 150% and prove themselves or for Pedris, Gavis and Yamal to shine, since the quality is way weaker, there is less team's chemistry, top players are dead tired, and youngsters want to prove themselves (to fans, clubs, sponsors, to potential girlfriends).
So, for example, my country, Croatia, even though we are good, imo we are not THAT good as our results suggest.
Our players are united due to a war in Croatia in the early 90s.
Further, the team is filled with benchwarmers in top clubs like Kovacic, Mandzukic, Lovren, Rakitic.
Who, even though they are good, usually didn't play 55 matches for 90 minutes.
So, they had more energy than English or German starters.
Add some national motivation and "we'll show the world who we are" attitude = and you often get overachieving from smaller/poorer/motivated countries usually filled with benchwarmes + a few top players + a few youngsters playing at 150% to get the dream contract + attract new supermodels.
So, imo, it is hard to judge young players on their NT displays. The quality is poorer, they are usually more rested than starters and have way higher motivation/more to prove.
So, their displays are often "overachieving" and way better than they actually are.
The same happens on a club level when a youngster plays at 150% in his rookie season or two, until his motivation drops and the opponents figure out his main 2-3 tricks.
The same happened with Pedri, Gavi, Fati in their rookie seasons.
Once when they stopped playing at 150%, their form dropped a lot.
Sadly, a huge part of Lamal's form could be a part of that "teenage boost motivation".
If he'll continue to play at the same level (or even improve) for the next 4-5 seasons = then he is consistent.
If he'll play good in his rookie 1-2 seasons and later drops his level = then that wasn't his true level but a mix of teenage motivation, being 100% fit and the opponents not taking him seriously in the early seasons.
Last edited:
