Tahiti are officially better than everyone in the OFC (I know New Zealand threw it away) else y wouldn't be in Brazil in the first place. The problem is that unlike San Marino and Andorra they have a go and attack! Tahiti would hands down beat both of those teams comfortably
Spain could have scored about 15 if their final ball wasn't so bad in the first half. I'm not stupid, I don't think England are anywhere near the level of Spain, but you don't have to be to put several goals past Tahiti, using the Confederations Cup as evidence. England are better than Nigeria, and even they put 6 past them. I just don't see how anyone can say so confidently that Tahiti would beat San Marino; both are dreadful.
It should also be added that it was Uruguay's and Spain's second XIs that put 8 and 10 respectively past Tahiti, so I'm sure England's first XI could do something similar.
It should also be added that it was Uruguay's and Spain's second XIs that put 8 and 10 respectively past Tahiti, so I'm sure England's first XI could do something similar.
Some second team the Spanish put out - David Villa, Torres, Silva, Mata were the goal scorers. I reckon those four alone would be automatic first choice players in most national sides.
It should also be added that it was Uruguay's and Spain's second XIs that put 8 and 10 respectively past Tahiti, so I'm sure England's first XI could do something similar.
Some second team the Spanish put out - David Villa, Torres, Silva, Mata were the goal scorers. I reckon those four alone would be automatic first choice players in most national sides.
Yes I'm sure they would. What about Uruguay's second XI then? Better than England's first XI?
To be fair to Tahiti they came and had a go this tournament. First time playing against any opposition with the quality of spain etc, no point sticking 11 behind the ball for 90 mins and losing by 5 or 6. They played a high line and tried to get people forward.
San Marino get to enter qualifiers in Europe, so play against better opposition on a regular basis, so keeping the score down is what they do.
I'm guessing that as Tahiti have actually won competitive fixtures that they would be San Marino. However, Tahiti's wins come against the likes of New Caledonia and Solomon Islands, and I'm sure San Marino would give them a decent match.
I'm sure I saw that Tahiti won a game 13-0 against Samoa recently. San Marino are at a level where a single goal would be seen as one of their all time greatest moments, regardless of whether it was a friendly or competitive match.
They've won only one single game in their entire 24 year history, which was a 1-0 friendly win over Liechtenstein (ranked 148th in the world).
I'm sure I saw that Tahiti won a game 13-0 against Samoa recently. San Marino are at a level where a single goal would be seen as one of their all time greatest moments, regardless of whether it was a friendly or competitive match.
They've won only one single game in their entire 24 year history, which was a 1-0 friendly win over Liechtenstein (ranked 148th in the world).
Tahiti would hammer San Marino.
But thats exaxtly it, Tahiti are playing against teams like Samoa, both sides are semi pro (Tahiti have one professional player). You can't compare that to San Marino who have been immersed in playing against the very best teams in the world.
San Marino have a number of either current or former professionals who've played at lower levels in Italy - they even had a player who played in the European Cup final.
I think that in terms of organisation and experience, plus the sprinkling of professionals mean that San Marino would beat Tahiti.
Doesn't matter that San Marino have been immersed in playing the best teams in the world, they're still hopeless.
From what I saw of Tahiti in this tournament, they looked like they were willing to run with the ball (albeit not very far) and actually have a go, whereas San Marino's only plan is damage limitation. You could count on one hand the amount of times they had possession in the England half when we played them earlier this year.
I'd say they're pretty equal, as mentioned teams have reached double figures against San Marino. FIFA should organise a tournament for all the worst countries in the world, only losing lets you progress.
Doesn't matter that San Marino have been immersed in playing the best teams in the world, they're still hopeless. From what I saw of Tahiti in this tournament, they looked like they were willing to run with the ball (albeit not very far) and actually have a go, whereas San Marino's only plan is damage limitation. You could count on one hand the amount of times they had possession in the England half when we played them earlier this year.
But isn't this how eight year olds would approach the game ? As I said I'm pretty sure the professionalism and experience of San Marino would win out in what would be a very, very bad game of football.
Doesn't matter that San Marino have been immersed in playing the best teams in the world, they're still hopeless.
From what I saw of Tahiti in this tournament, they looked like they were willing to run with the ball (albeit not very far) and actually have a go, whereas San Marino's only plan is damage limitation. You could count on one hand the amount of times they had possession in the England half when we played them earlier this year.
If San Marino played Tahiti I'm sure they would go into the game thinking they could win it.
New Zealand beat Tahiti 5-0 on aggregate the last time they met (home and away World Cup Qualifiers last October). The only reason they are not representing Oceania in the Confederation Cup is because that messed things up against New Caledonia in Honeira losing 2-0 in ridiculously hot temperatures on a dodgy pitch. It's the only time I can ever recall them losing to another pacific neighbour who isn't Australia.
Comments
No.
San Marino get to enter qualifiers in Europe, so play against better opposition on a regular basis, so keeping the score down is what they do.
Tahiti would beat San Marino.
Oh, and San Marino would beat Tahiti.
They've won only one single game in their entire 24 year history, which was a 1-0 friendly win over Liechtenstein (ranked 148th in the world).
Tahiti would hammer San Marino.
San Marino have a number of either current or former professionals who've played at lower levels in Italy - they even had a player who played in the European Cup final.
I think that in terms of organisation and experience, plus the sprinkling of professionals mean that San Marino would beat Tahiti.
From what I saw of Tahiti in this tournament, they looked like they were willing to run with the ball (albeit not very far) and actually have a go, whereas San Marino's only plan is damage limitation. You could count on one hand the amount of times they had possession in the England half when we played them earlier this year.