My view of the tournament.
England had an easy group to qualify from which flattered them, and also a team (Panama) which they could use for target practice, and another which could have gone the same way, yet was not easy on the eye for fifty minutes.
Our record for the tournament was
Won 3 - Tunisia, Panama, Sweden
Draw 1 (won on penalties) - Columbia
Lost 3 - Belgium, Croatia, Belgium
That is not a good record.
When we won the World Cup in 1966, we drew against Uruguay, then beat France, Mexico, Argentina, Portugal and West Germany - quality opposition.
Today was not very impressive at all.
If Kane was not fit then don't play him.
If Sterling cannot score, then don't play him.
Our defenders cannot defend against good teams, good attackers - Belgium, Croatia.
None of our players seems to know how to play the ball out of defence on the ground, link up with midfield, then put good passes into our attackers.
There has been too much hype about this team, before and during the tournament.
As Gerry S pointed out in an earlier post, most of our players do not seem to possess instinctive skills, passing the ball is at times like watching young, coached players attempting to select a pass - watch ball, control and stop ball, look around, decide who to pass to (usually nearest bloke who is looking at you, who is going to do exactly the same as you have done). At this stage everything should be instinctive - even Columbia managed that after trying to kick us off the pitch in the first 60 minutes of the game.
Belgium's second goal this afternoon was a good example of passing at its best, as was their winning goal against Brazil.
This is not a stupid rant, it is frustration at something we should, could and possibly will be better at, but it will not happen if we mollycoddle this bunch of highly paid Pemier League professionals and refer to them as HEROES.
They aren't heroes, this isn't even the beginning of the end in them becoming heroes, but it might be the end of the beginning in them becoming heroes.