- Messages
- 9,606
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just what I said to the lad
It’s coming home… maybe.
Well, I am hopeful but it takes a huge leap of faith for me to believe that.
Don't really want to be a 'killjoy' but common sense tells me we haven't played a really good team yet. We lost to Belgium's reserves, albeit with a reserve team of our own.
I think Sweden are a really poor team, hardworking and honest but 'journeymen' really. When I think of the teams that have gone home and England get to play Sweden.
Still cannot forget that really 'shaky' period when Columbia scored and England lost their belief and composure.
Still whatever happens now it has been a success and Gareth Southgate has earned enormous respect.
Agree with everything you’ve said. Anything else for me now is a total bonus. Hopefully my bonus will pay dividends!
I agree, but he's not on his own, even some of ours started doing it in the last match. Until they are red carded for trying to cheat this will continue, and until FIFA grow a set that won't happen. Unfortunately the players have become bigger than the game, and it's the they were reminded that without the game, most of them would probably earning a month what they earn in an hour! Football is the archetypal example of money ruining a sport.
I agree with what you say about cheating. Harry Macguire threw himself on the floor and then probably realised his error and got up very quickly. Henderson got head butted and had a ‘delayed reaction’ fall. Maybe others are far worse but we need to cut it out. Sadly Ref’s are cupable, they are inclined to play on if players retain their feet. Win with humility or lose with honour.
Puzzled ? are England playing to a masterplan ‘ slow, slow, quick, quick slow ‘ but cannot get the ‘quick’ bit going ?
Really???? We went down, rolling around for ages after EVERY challenge???? You must have been watching a different game to me!
Henderson was butted, he was correct to go down. Today Sterling could have gone down after a challenge by the keeper. To say we are even in the same league as Neymar is laughable!
Well, I am hopeful but it takes a huge leap of faith for me to believe that.
Don't really want to be a 'killjoy' but common sense tells me we haven't played a really good team yet. We lost to Belgium's reserves, albeit with a reserve team of our own.
I think Sweden are a really poor team, hardworking and honest but 'journeymen' really. When I think of the teams that have gone home and England get to play Sweden.
Still cannot forget that really 'shaky' period when Columbia scored and England lost their belief and composure.
Still whatever happens now it has been a success and Gareth Southgate has earned enormous respect.
I think if we reach the final we have a chance. A 1 off game anyone can win it.
So give me time to do the maths er ** 100 - 51 = give me a minute. ... 49 so if England had 51% then Columbia had 49%
That’s right England dominated possession.
So glad I paid attention during arithmatic
Shame you didn’t pay attention in English lessons then you might have got arithmetic right
Bit like saying “we dominated possession” against Columbia, when England actually only had 51% of the possession eh.
Why?Thank goodness Croatia was able to come through for the win.
Why do people keep harping on about football going back to China?
They don't, association football (the game and rules as now played) was invented in England in the 1800s, the various round ball games prior to that weren't association football that is played now...
Just please, drop sterling for the next game. He is pants!!!
I would have preferred Russia for both the atmosphere and I think they would not be as difficult as Croatia who are dangerous. Tough game but they will not be keen to play us either!!!
Just please, drop sterling for the next game. He is pants!!!
I would have preferred Russia for both the atmosphere and I think they would not be as difficult as Croatia who are dangerous. Tough game but they will not be keen to play us either!!!
It's funny how, whenever England win a match, there is this tendency for people to dismiss the opposition. If we beat them, they can't be any good.I think Sweden are a really poor team, hardworking and honest but 'journeymen' really.
It's funny how, whenever England win a match, there is this tendency for people to dismiss the opposition. If we beat them, they can't be any good.
Remember how Sweden qualified for Russia? They beat France, they finished above Holland in their group, and then they beat Italy over two legs in the play-off. It seems amazing that neither Holland nor Italy is at the World Cup, but Sweden were responsible for both of them. Then in the last couple of weeks they topped a group which contained Germany and Mexico, and they beat Switzerland who had been ranked #6 in the world coming into the tournament. That's a pretty solid set of achievements and I think calling them "journeymen" does the team a disservice.
No, I didn't hear Radio 5L, but I didn't need to because I knew all that stuff already. I have Dutch friends and Italian friends, and I had discussed with both sets how strange it was that their country wasn't going to be at the World Cup, and in both cases it was Sweden who put them out.Well, I am not that knowledgeable about Swedens football team, you are because you heard all your facts on Radio 5L yesterday, I heard that report. Well done on remembering the fact that Switzerland were ranked 6th in the World.
Like I said. England beat them, so they must be rubbish.My view on the Swedish football team was based solely on their match against England.
It's funny how, whenever England win a match, there is this tendency for people to dismiss the opposition. If we beat them, they can't be any good.
Remember how Sweden qualified for Russia? They beat France, they finished above Holland in their group, and then they beat Italy over two legs in the play-off. It seems amazing that neither Holland nor Italy is at the World Cup, but Sweden were responsible for both of them. Then in the last couple of weeks they topped a group which contained Germany and Mexico, and they beat Switzerland who had been ranked #6 in the world coming into the tournament. That's a pretty solid set of achievements and I think calling them "journeymen" does the team a disservice.
Just please, drop sterling for the next game. He is pants!!!
Just please, drop sterling for the next game. He is pants!!!
It's interesting, isn't it. Sterling is provoking more debate than anyone else, by far.Really..? I thought he did well, done his job pretty much except for not sticking the ball in the back of the net.
I'd play him.
It's interesting, isn't it. Sterling is provoking more debate than anyone else, by far.
I watched the Sweden game with my niece, who doesn't know very much about football but is keen to learn more. When Sterling muffed his one-on-one chance, I groaned aloud. Surely it doesn't really matter, she said, because he was offside anyway? (She's a fast learner.) As a former striker myself I explained that it does matter, you have to beat the keeper and put it in the net even if it is disallowed. Because then next time, when it's not offside, you know you can beat him and just as importantly, he knows you can beat him. Little did I imagine that Sterling would prove my point barely two minutes later!
And yet... and yet... Southgate sticks with him, and I think Southgate knows what he's doing, and why - and I think he has done well not to get dragged too much into discussing the reasons behind his selections.
I think the reason he plays Sterling are that:
1. He drags defenders all over the place, and that wears them down mentally and creates opportunities for gaps in their coverage.
2. He gets us a long way up the pitch quickly, which means we're pressing to regain possession in their half rather than in ours. (Statistically, on average we have regained possession further up the pitch than 30 of the other 31 teams in the competition!)
3. He wins a fair number of free kicks and corners, and they are great opportunities for us to score.
So he's not scoring goals and he's not getting any direct assists, but I recognise (somewhat grudgingly, since I'm a big fan of Rashford) that he's probably doing a good - if mostly unnoticed - job for the team. Which is perfectly on keeping with Southgate's overall approach.
Having watched the game this morning, as much as he irritates me, I think the inclusion of Sterling is justified. His movement creates space for others, he often has two markers, and his pace can be very useful at points in the game.
However, his decision making does need to improve. That opportunity just before half time, he was in two minds, and a square pass to Kane would have sealed another goal, but he chose the more difficult option and go for goal himself.
It's interesting, isn't it. Sterling is provoking more debate than anyone else, by far.
I watched the Sweden game with my niece, who doesn't know very much about football but is keen to learn more. When Sterling muffed his one-on-one chance, I groaned aloud. Surely it doesn't really matter, she said, because he was offside anyway? (She's a fast learner.) As a former striker myself I explained that it does matter, you have to beat the keeper and put it in the net even if it is disallowed. Because then next time, when it's not offside, you know you can beat him and just as importantly, he knows you can beat him. Little did I imagine that Sterling would prove my point barely two minutes later!
And yet... and yet... Southgate sticks with him, and I think Southgate knows what he's doing, and why - and I think he has done well not to get dragged too much into discussing the reasons behind his selections.
I think the reason he plays Sterling are that:
1. He drags defenders all over the place, and that wears them down mentally and creates opportunities for gaps in their coverage.
2. He gets us a long way up the pitch quickly, which means we're pressing to regain possession in their half rather than in ours. (Statistically, on average we have regained possession further up the pitch than 30 of the other 31 teams in the competition!)
3. He wins a fair number of free kicks and corners, and they are great opportunities for us to score.
So he's not scoring goals and he's not getting any direct assists, but I recognise (somewhat grudgingly, since I'm a big fan of Rashford) that he's probably doing a good - if mostly unnoticed - job for the team. Which is perfectly on keeping with Southgate's overall approach.
The four semi finalists have a total of 92 players in their squads. Of those 92:... Belgium, which was like a Prem League All Star team tonight... I would hazard a guess that the EPL was the most represented league at the WC.