Not all Latin American countries are they same. There is Brazil and then there are Argentina and Uruguay. The rest of the region is a wasteland of futbol-hangers-on.

Ricardo a Mexican and Herve from France got along very well both on and off set.

Why you ask?

Because Ricardo's family was from Spain and Herve was from France and they were both Latin. They had a lot in common.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1970 Brazil
1974 West Germany
1978 Argentina
1982 Italy
1986 Argentina
1990 West Germany
1994 Brazil
1998 France
2002 Brazil
2006 Italy
2010 Spain
2014 Germany
2018 France

Going back to the past 50 years 10 of the last 13 world cup tournaments were won by Latin Countries.

What is it about the Latin style of soccer that makes them so dominant?

The world cup is not a great indicator of soccer prowess. It is every 4 years meaning World Cup play misses prime years for many players(and injuries). Many of the best players in the world’s team do not qualify, do not get out of group play because the surrounding players are not up to it or they are just from a smaller country. Over the years the best players in the world have never played in a WC final.

Then there was the formate of the WC. It depends on what region you play in. Brazil(and Argentina) are almost guarantee to make the tournament. While in Europe some very good teams get left out. Some good teams get stuck is a death group while other teams play against cupcakes. Lastly over 50 years soccer has evolved. Saying a country won the WC 36 years ago shows dominance in soccer is rich. The game has moved on.

World Cup qualifying in South America is not easy. Argentina didn’t qualify until the final match day last WC and Chile - who went to the KO stage in WC 2014 and won the Copa in 2015 and 2016 - didn’t qualify in 2018. I don’t think people appreciate how much talent there is in SA outside of Brazil and Argentina.

Anonymous wrote:Big difference between “Latin” and “Latin American.”

Latin nations (which include countries from Europe and South America) have indeed excelled at soccer.

I’m not sure there will ever be a clear explanation as to why. I suspect that many of these countries are in a sweet spot where soccer is part of the Latin culture, the climate is decent for year round play, and physically the phenotype for most Latin players is a ideal for soccer. Small differences around the edges might make the difference like we’ve seen between Latin versus other teams.

They are good. Damn good.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know why the Central American countries suck so bad ? It’s claimed to be there their culture as well.

Because they have relatively small populations compared to Brazil, France, Germany, etc... and because they're relatively poor and don't invest heavily in coaches and the infrastructure required to be soccer powerhouses.

The Economist has a nice article about what makes a country good at "football". They found that, unsurprisingly, wealth, country size, and interest are highly predictive of a country's success. Some of the overachievers by this measure are Uruguay and the Netherlands. One of the biggest underachievers is the USA.

By the way, Spain, Italy and France might speak romance or latin-based languages, but they play very different soccer from each other and from countries in Latin America.

The origin of a language doesn’t translate to soccer styles.

Exactly which is why OP is dumb.

+1. I completely agree. Why is the US so dominant in basketball? Why is China so dominant in badminton?

The percentage of people in the world who play soccer and who play basketball is not even close. Soccer by far is more popular. All you need is a ball of some kind to kick around. That's it. Nothing else.

Anonymous wrote:Latin is a language not a people.

Say that 100 times

They are very much a people my dear.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1970 Brazil
1974 West Germany
1978 Argentina
1982 Italy
1986 Argentina
1990 West Germany
1994 Brazil
1998 France
2002 Brazil
2006 Italy
2010 Spain
2014 Germany
2018 France

Going back to the past 50 years 10 of the last 13 world cup tournaments were won by Latin Countries.

What is it about the Latin style of soccer that makes them so dominant?

The world cup is not a great indicator of soccer prowess. It is every 4 years meaning World Cup play misses prime years for many players(and injuries). Many of the best players in the world’s team do not qualify, do not get out of group play because the surrounding players are not up to it or they are just from a smaller country. Over the years the best players in the world have never played in a WC final.

Then there was the formate of the WC. It depends on what region you play in. Brazil(and Argentina) are almost guarantee to make the tournament. While in Europe some very good teams get left out. Some good teams get stuck is a death group while other teams play against cupcakes. Lastly over 50 years soccer has evolved. Saying a country won the WC 36 years ago shows dominance in soccer is rich. The game has moved on.

Ok.
Fair enough.
The #1 player in the world is still Latin though regardless if he was born in Argentina or Spain.
Pope Francis is still Latin regardless if he was born in Argentina or Italy.

Anonymous wrote:Google is your friend. All this power at your fingertips and people are still to lazy

Lionel Messi has dual citizenship, one of which is for Spain. He received his Spanish citizenship in 2005, as a result of the fact that the team could only contain three non-Spanish players.

He was living in Spain long before he went pro. He has Spanish ancestry.

My neighbor her parents were of Latin descent. Her mother was Italian. Her father was Portuguese. She was born in Argentina. They were all Latins.

Latin is a language not a people.

Say that 100 times

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So did we ever establish what a “Latin style of soccer” is?

It seems to be speaking a Romance language, but not Romanian (or any of the much smaller Romance languages, like Romansh) but not if you're in Africa. Basically it seems to be being a European (other than from Germany despite their success) or from a large South American country. But no, nothing about how they actually play the game, that's not been discussed at all, really.

LOL!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me the last time a team from South or Central America finished in the top 3 of a WC.

2014 GER v ARG. GER won so traditionally that makes ARG #2. This was literally the cup before last. What is wrong with you?

And to continue that, here's the top 4 since 1930. Either ARG or BRZ (or both) has made it to top 3-4 at least 65% of the time. So pretty much every other World Cup you have ARG or BRZ in the final rounds.


Year Winner Score Runner Up 3rd Place Score 4th Place Host Country
2018 France 4-2 Croatia Belgium 2-0 England Russia
2014 Germany 1-0 Argentina Netherlands 3-0 Brazil Brazil
2010 Spain 1-0 Netherlands Germany 3-2 Uruguay South Africa
2006 Italy 1-1(5-3)* France Germany 3-1 Portugal Germany
2002 Brazil 2-0 Germany Turkey 3-2 Korea Republic Korea/Japan
1998 France 3-0 Brazil Croatia 2-1 Netherlands France
1994 Brazil 3-2 Italy Sweden 4-0 Bulgaria USA
1990 West Germany 1-0 Argentina Italy 2-1 England Italy
1986 Argentine 3-2 West Germany France 4-2 Belgium Mexico
1982 Italy 3-1 West Germany Poland 3-2 France Spain
1978 Argentine 3-1 Netherlands Brazil 2-1 Italy Argentine
1974 West Germany 2-1 Netherlands Poland 1-0 Brazil West Germany
1970 Brazil 4-1 Italy West Germany 1-0 Uruguay Mexico
1966 England 4-2 West Germany Portugal 2-1 Soviet Union England
1962 Brazil 3-1 Czechoslovakia Chile 1-0 Yugoslavia Chile
1958 Brazil 5-2 Sweden France 6-3 West Germany Sweden
1954 West Germany 3-2 Hungary Austria 3-1 Uruguay Switzerland
1950 Uruguay 2-1 Brazil Sweden --* Spain Brazil
1938 Italy 4-2 Hungary Brazil 4-2 Sweden France
1934 Italy 2-1 Czechoslovakia Germany 3-2 Austria Italy
1930 Uruguay 4-2 Argentine United States --* Yugoslavia Uruguay

Anonymous wrote:Remind me the last time a team from South or Central America finished in the top 3 of a WC.

2014 GER v ARG. GER won so traditionally that makes ARG #2. This was literally the cup before last. What is wrong with you?

Anonymous wrote:1970 Brazil
1974 West Germany
1978 Argentina
1982 Italy
1986 Argentina
1990 West Germany
1994 Brazil
1998 France
2002 Brazil
2006 Italy
2010 Spain
2014 Germany
2018 France

Going back to the past 50 years 10 of the last 13 world cup tournaments were won by Latin Countries.

What is it about the Latin style of soccer that makes them so dominant?

The world cup is not a great indicator of soccer prowess. It is every 4 years meaning World Cup play misses prime years for many players(and injuries). Many of the best players in the world’s team do not qualify, do not get out of group play because the surrounding players are not up to it or they are just from a smaller country. Over the years the best players in the world have never played in a WC final.

Then there was the formate of the WC. It depends on what region you play in. Brazil(and Argentina) are almost guarantee to make the tournament. While in Europe some very good teams get left out. Some good teams get stuck is a death group while other teams play against cupcakes. Lastly over 50 years soccer has evolved. Saying a country won the WC 36 years ago shows dominance in soccer is rich. The game has moved on.

Anonymous wrote:So did we ever establish what a “Latin style of soccer” is?

It seems to be speaking a Romance language, but not Romanian (or any of the much smaller Romance languages, like Romansh) but not if you're in Africa. Basically it seems to be being a European (other than from Germany despite their success) or from a large South American country. But no, nothing about how they actually play the game, that's not been discussed at all, really.