YoungGun_UK
20 TIMES!
Kazakhstan Vs. England
Started off rather shite, Kazakhstan could be 2-0 up.
Started off rather shite, Kazakhstan could be 2-0 up.
Last edited by a moderator:
ENGLAND thread
- Thread starter YoungGun_UK
- Start date
matherto
20 times 20 times Man United
Re: England Thread
I just don't anyone to come in here and suggest we'll win the World Cup.
Also think it's rediculous we're fourth favourites.
Still, Capello is doing a great job and the players actually seem to be bonding together for once.
I just don't anyone to come in here and suggest we'll win the World Cup.
Also think it's rediculous we're fourth favourites.
Still, Capello is doing a great job and the players actually seem to be bonding together for once.
- Thread starter
- #3
YoungGun_UK
20 TIMES!
Re: England Thread
Thing is Matherto currently their isn't many good International teams IMO, Spain are ahead of everyone but after that its pretty even with Brazil, Argentina, England, France and Germany etc.
Thing is Matherto currently their isn't many good International teams IMO, Spain are ahead of everyone but after that its pretty even with Brazil, Argentina, England, France and Germany etc.
Re: England Thread
You've always got a chance with refs like this LOL.
No doubt England will be bleating about some ref come next year when they're knocked out but they probably get more decisions than the rest of the top teams put together.
That has to be one of the most ridiculous penalties ever. Rooney rips the jersey off the guy and nearly breaks his ankle and he gets the penalty and get's the guy booked..............LOL.
FD
You've always got a chance with refs like this LOL.
No doubt England will be bleating about some ref come next year when they're knocked out but they probably get more decisions than the rest of the top teams put together.
That has to be one of the most ridiculous penalties ever. Rooney rips the jersey off the guy and nearly breaks his ankle and he gets the penalty and get's the guy booked..............LOL.
FD
Jumbo_
-
Re: England Thread
Bitter!!!
It was a crap decision but it was a friendly and makes little difference in the grand scheme of things.
Bitter!!!
It was a crap decision but it was a friendly and makes little difference in the grand scheme of things.
Cloud1863
Premiership
- 10 December 2004
- Stoke City
Re: England Thread
Take youre tinted specs off for a change. It isnt like are the only team that get the good end of the stick now and again.
I wish you could find the pill that stopes paranoia for Celtic fans.
Take youre tinted specs off for a change. It isnt like are the only team that get the good end of the stick now and again.
I wish you could find the pill that stopes paranoia for Celtic fans.
Last edited:
Re: England Thread
Celtic?
What you on about? Did you mean Scotland?
If you did mean Celtic, then believe me turn on your radio one night and we'll see about paranoia.
And talking about Paranoia, two words...................Michel Platini.
FD
Celtic?
What you on about? Did you mean Scotland?If you did mean Celtic, then believe me turn on your radio one night and we'll see about paranoia.
And talking about Paranoia, two words...................Michel Platini.
FD
gerd
Retired Footballer
Re: England Thread
What do you mean by Michel Platini, Frank ?
About England, just read a brilliant column by Simon Kuper in FourFourTwo...the much hyped England under Capello have exactly the same percentage of wins as under the much maligned Mc laren, only with weaker teams as opposition.
Kuper points out in that article that England's percentage of wins has barely changed the last 40 years...he concludes that England are far from world beaters, but are overhyped by the media.
Of course they are not exactly a weak team...the yare perhaps among the 10 best national teams in the world, but not among the absolute best...never even were (and he proves that even the World Cup winners of 1966 were not better than England usual are...in fact they were very weak in away matches. Kuper concludes that they won the World Cup because they played that World Cup on home soil).
What do you mean by Michel Platini, Frank ?
About England, just read a brilliant column by Simon Kuper in FourFourTwo...the much hyped England under Capello have exactly the same percentage of wins as under the much maligned Mc laren, only with weaker teams as opposition.
Kuper points out in that article that England's percentage of wins has barely changed the last 40 years...he concludes that England are far from world beaters, but are overhyped by the media.
Of course they are not exactly a weak team...the yare perhaps among the 10 best national teams in the world, but not among the absolute best...never even were (and he proves that even the World Cup winners of 1966 were not better than England usual are...in fact they were very weak in away matches. Kuper concludes that they won the World Cup because they played that World Cup on home soil).
matherto
20 times 20 times Man United
Re: England Thread
Thing is, it's the media's fault that we've always been seen as failures. They see us beating everyone in our group and reckon we're the best team in the world, forgetting of course that even Croatia aren't actually that good, regardless of how many injuries they had against us.
I was only just born in 1990 when we reached the semi-finals but I bet it was seen as a failure then, and if we get to the semis now it'll be seen as a failure because of how well we've dealt with our qualifying group.
It's a shame as well because getting to the semis of a World Cup is not to be shirked at.
Any proper football fan in this country will admit we would get beaten by Brazil or Spain in a straight head to head. We're certainly much better now under Capello than we were under McLaren or Sven though.
Thing is, it's the media's fault that we've always been seen as failures. They see us beating everyone in our group and reckon we're the best team in the world, forgetting of course that even Croatia aren't actually that good, regardless of how many injuries they had against us.
I was only just born in 1990 when we reached the semi-finals but I bet it was seen as a failure then, and if we get to the semis now it'll be seen as a failure because of how well we've dealt with our qualifying group.
It's a shame as well because getting to the semis of a World Cup is not to be shirked at.
Any proper football fan in this country will admit we would get beaten by Brazil or Spain in a straight head to head. We're certainly much better now under Capello than we were under McLaren or Sven though.
- Thread starter
- #11
YoungGun_UK
20 TIMES!
Re: England Thread
I think were actually quite good right know, Gerd surely that stat is wrong? we've never won 8 straight qualifiers in a row?! Yes Spain and Brazil are two sides that would probably beat us but other than that its fair game right know and im happy with that. The favourites rarely win the tournament anyway.
I think were actually quite good right know, Gerd surely that stat is wrong? we've never won 8 straight qualifiers in a row?! Yes Spain and Brazil are two sides that would probably beat us but other than that its fair game right know and im happy with that. The favourites rarely win the tournament anyway.
gerd
Retired Footballer
Re: England Thread
I doubt if that stat is wrong, the column was an excerpt of a book Kuper just published with one of the world's leading statisticians. It's a book about football statistics...
Anothe statistic from James Richardson's podcast: every time England won all his matches in the qualifiacation stage of a big tournament, they never came further than the first round.
What i want to say: England is good, bot not quite as good as most English people think....look at thebright side...i'm Belgian...Belgium is bad, but much more bad than even we think.
I doubt if that stat is wrong, the column was an excerpt of a book Kuper just published with one of the world's leading statisticians. It's a book about football statistics...
Anothe statistic from James Richardson's podcast: every time England won all his matches in the qualifiacation stage of a big tournament, they never came further than the first round.
What i want to say: England is good, bot not quite as good as most English people think....look at thebright side...i'm Belgian...Belgium is bad, but much more bad than even we think.
lo zio
International
- 24 October 2005
- Palermo
Re: England Thread
Gerd, never trust a journalist who pretends to judge a team by using shallow, pointless arguments like wins percentage. using the results to argue his point is a symptom of ignorance as, talking about national teams, results are really shallow indicators (italy right now is doing well "results-wise"... yet this team looks horrible).
every match has its own hostory. england could play 10 consecutive times against the same rival (say croatia), with the same formation, the same starting 11 and the same coach.... and yet u would still get 10 diffferent matches...different in every level (result and performance).
the only thing we can consider is the quality of the football.... and under this point of view capello's england is light years ahead of maclaren's england. that was one of the most random national football teams i've ever seen. this england instead is composed, well organized and confident.
this is a good team. wheter is among the "best" or the "absolute best"... that's speculation.... i mean let's take a look at those teams which represent that "absolute best"
except the their last performance, italy is playing some really horrible football lately. we have some serious tactical issues and the coach is making the sitation even worse with his callups.
italy has a better team than england.... but i'm pretty sure england could easily beat this italy right now.
and everything i said about italy, can be said about argentina.
spain has a fantastic team wich plays some very nice football (sometimes...)... but they're also the most incosistant team among "the absolute best".... i'm not really sure england would have such a hard time playing against spain right now. spain can outplay, aswell as it can be outplayed by any team.
this brazil team looks much better than it really is. personnel wise, they're nowhere near italy, spain, france and argentina..... right now, they're on fire, they play the best football they could possibly play.... but that doesn't mean this moment will last till the world cup.
france has a great team and a complete fool as a coach.... their situation is pretty similar to argentina's one.
long story short, when it comes to national teams, rankings must be taken with a pinch of salt.
england has a very, very good team and one of the best coaches around. they look confindent and, most important, they "play together", as a team should do.
when u have this features, the only things u need to perform in a competition like the world cup is form, motivations and a bit of luck.... if england will reach the world cup without any major injuries and with the key players in a good form, they might well achieve a better result than all those "absolute best teams".
Gerd, never trust a journalist who pretends to judge a team by using shallow, pointless arguments like wins percentage. using the results to argue his point is a symptom of ignorance as, talking about national teams, results are really shallow indicators (italy right now is doing well "results-wise"... yet this team looks horrible).
every match has its own hostory. england could play 10 consecutive times against the same rival (say croatia), with the same formation, the same starting 11 and the same coach.... and yet u would still get 10 diffferent matches...different in every level (result and performance).
the only thing we can consider is the quality of the football.... and under this point of view capello's england is light years ahead of maclaren's england. that was one of the most random national football teams i've ever seen. this england instead is composed, well organized and confident.
this is a good team. wheter is among the "best" or the "absolute best"... that's speculation.... i mean let's take a look at those teams which represent that "absolute best"
except the their last performance, italy is playing some really horrible football lately. we have some serious tactical issues and the coach is making the sitation even worse with his callups.
italy has a better team than england.... but i'm pretty sure england could easily beat this italy right now.
and everything i said about italy, can be said about argentina.
spain has a fantastic team wich plays some very nice football (sometimes...)... but they're also the most incosistant team among "the absolute best".... i'm not really sure england would have such a hard time playing against spain right now. spain can outplay, aswell as it can be outplayed by any team.
this brazil team looks much better than it really is. personnel wise, they're nowhere near italy, spain, france and argentina..... right now, they're on fire, they play the best football they could possibly play.... but that doesn't mean this moment will last till the world cup.
france has a great team and a complete fool as a coach.... their situation is pretty similar to argentina's one.
long story short, when it comes to national teams, rankings must be taken with a pinch of salt.
england has a very, very good team and one of the best coaches around. they look confindent and, most important, they "play together", as a team should do.
when u have this features, the only things u need to perform in a competition like the world cup is form, motivations and a bit of luck.... if england will reach the world cup without any major injuries and with the key players in a good form, they might well achieve a better result than all those "absolute best teams".
Last edited:
bebo
Looking for a Manager
Re: England Thread
I don`t see England winning ....Spain are great ,but even the US can out play them France nah!they don`t even like each other. Italy w/ Lippi fate! IMO England has improved a lot seeing Lampard and Gerrard getting goals says a right Coach can make it work. Saddest day is when an ex-druggie hero sails a magnificent ship into the ROCKs! I`m talking about the failure of Argentina not to be part of the WC. How can someone have the best of the best players and not qualify .That reminds me to fire my investment broker who went bankrupt 
I don`t see England winning ....Spain are great ,but even the US can out play them
France nah!they don`t even like each other. Italy w/ Lippi fate! IMO England has improved a lot seeing Lampard and Gerrard getting goals says a right Coach can make it work. Saddest day is when an ex-druggie hero sails a magnificent ship into the ROCKs! I`m talking about the failure of Argentina not to be part of the WC. How can someone have the best of the best players and not qualify .That reminds me to fire my investment broker who went bankrupt - Thread starter
- #15
YoungGun_UK
20 TIMES!
Re: England Thread
This is completely false Gerd, The media big up our chances every tournament yes but this "English fans think their going to win the world cup now" isn't true in the slightest and probably the opposite. Whenever our national team does well its "ow don't get carried away now" or "its only against *insert team*" We the English are extremely negative because of that generalization.
We actually need to start being more positive and start believing our national team can do well.
This is completely false Gerd, The media big up our chances every tournament yes but this "English fans think their going to win the world cup now" isn't true in the slightest and probably the opposite. Whenever our national team does well its "ow don't get carried away now" or "its only against *insert team*" We the English are extremely negative because of that generalization.
We actually need to start being more positive and start believing our national team can do well.
gerd
Retired Footballer
Re: England Thread
Gotta agree with Ben. Capello's done wonders with England. At the moment, after Brazil and Spain, they look the best of the bunch. Their football makes sense, McLaren's team was just rubbish.
Capello's had Gerrard and Lampard playing in the same team, getting Rooney playing the best he ever has in his career, and has got Barry gluing the team together.
Obviously, never count out France, Italy, Germany etc, but at this moment England look better than those teams.
Gotta agree with Ben. Capello's done wonders with England. At the moment, after Brazil and Spain, they look the best of the bunch. Their football makes sense, McLaren's team was just rubbish.
Capello's had Gerrard and Lampard playing in the same team, getting Rooney playing the best he ever has in his career, and has got Barry gluing the team together.
Obviously, never count out France, Italy, Germany etc, but at this moment England look better than those teams.
matherto
20 times 20 times Man United
Re: England Thread
I still think at times Gerrard, Barry and Lampard look like strangers to each other, but somehow it's obviously working isn't it?
Might come unstuck if those three decide to have an off game and lose each other on the pitch but if we do hopefully Rooney will bring us back.
I still think at times Gerrard, Barry and Lampard look like strangers to each other, but somehow it's obviously working isn't it?
Might come unstuck if those three decide to have an off game and lose each other on the pitch but if we do hopefully Rooney will bring us back.
- Thread starter
- #19
YoungGun_UK
20 TIMES!
Re: England Thread
Rooney and Gerrard seem to working great together, Both switching up from the left to play behind Heskey.
Rooney and Gerrard seem to working great together, Both switching up from the left to play behind Heskey.
Re: England Thread
It's just worked so well.
It's an asymmetrical system, you've got Rooney and Gerrard cutting in, causing havoc on the left side with quick passing, and you have Lennon and Johnson on the other side, willing to take players on, and run with the ball. He's done so well in getting Lampard to play deeper, where he can run the play, and Barry's there doing the dirty work, and just keeping everything together.
And I don't care what you say about Heskey, but England look great with him. He might not be a great finisher, but he just makes the players around him look so much better. Rooney, and Gerrard thrive on him holding the ball up, and he gives Lennon and Johnson something to aim at, and he's brilliant at bringing others into play.
England just needed a system which complimented their players, and Capello's found the right match.
It's just worked so well.
It's an asymmetrical system, you've got Rooney and Gerrard cutting in, causing havoc on the left side with quick passing, and you have Lennon and Johnson on the other side, willing to take players on, and run with the ball. He's done so well in getting Lampard to play deeper, where he can run the play, and Barry's there doing the dirty work, and just keeping everything together.
And I don't care what you say about Heskey, but England look great with him. He might not be a great finisher, but he just makes the players around him look so much better. Rooney, and Gerrard thrive on him holding the ball up, and he gives Lennon and Johnson something to aim at, and he's brilliant at bringing others into play.
England just needed a system which complimented their players, and Capello's found the right match.
Re: England Thread
i wouldnt get too excited, whenever we've played a decent team we looked like we call collapse.
Toothless against France, outclassed by Spain, but there were signs of improvement against Holland as we bossed the 2nd half.
But this is the strongest as a TEAM (hence Barry and Heskey playing such important roles) that I've seen England rarther than the golden generation of INDIVIDUALS that people were rabbiting on about in 2006
i wouldnt get too excited, whenever we've played a decent team we looked like we call collapse.
Toothless against France, outclassed by Spain, but there were signs of improvement against Holland as we bossed the 2nd half.
But this is the strongest as a TEAM (hence Barry and Heskey playing such important roles) that I've seen England rarther than the golden generation of INDIVIDUALS that people were rabbiting on about in 2006
Re: England Thread
England and their fans are adamant that Platini has it in for English teams.
Stuff like the amount of teams getting through to the CL from various countries, it's all about the big four in English saying he has it in for them. Other countries would be impacted too and to be honest joke teams like Atletico Madrid and Fiorentina should never be in CL.
I like how the recent draw was done to ensure lesser teams got in the tournie.
FD
England and their fans are adamant that Platini has it in for English teams.
Stuff like the amount of teams getting through to the CL from various countries, it's all about the big four in English saying he has it in for them. Other countries would be impacted too and to be honest joke teams like Atletico Madrid and Fiorentina should never be in CL.
I like how the recent draw was done to ensure lesser teams got in the tournie.
FD
Aboutreika18
Too Black, Too Strong
- 5 September 2006
Re: England Thread
Are you serious? Atletico were a Saint Steve starfish away from winning at Anfield last season and nearly beat them at home had it not been for the width of the post.
matherto
20 times 20 times Man United
Re: England Thread
And they'd play Celtic off the park.
And they'd play Celtic off the park.
Re: England Thread
Might not score though, just like your lot a couple of years ago.
Teams 3rd and 4th shouldn't be in the CL, at the most top 3. If that means the team 2nd in Scotland don't qualify, then so be it, it should have more champions of their leagues in it.
FD
Might not score though, just like your lot a couple of years ago.
Teams 3rd and 4th shouldn't be in the CL, at the most top 3. If that means the team 2nd in Scotland don't qualify, then so be it, it should have more champions of their leagues in it.
FD
gerd
Retired Footballer
Re: England Thread
I tend to agree with FD (not sure about Fiorentina and Atletico though).
English pay more for one player than the entire budget of some Belgian teams.
Look at Standard: they almost eliminated Liverpool, lost 3 players because they were that good.
Yesterday they played (a weakened) Arsenal and Arsenal only managed to win because of a blatant hands ball...
I will repeat what i am saying for years:; despite the fact that English clubs are progressing till the semi's in the CL, i still think they are underachieving in Europe. With the budgetary gap they have with other clubs they should have 4 teams in the semi-finals eacht and every year...
What Platini wants is fair competition...and that is a good thing. Besides if nothing changes, in a couple of years most English fans will agree with Platini...i'm quite sure that the Russian clubs will take over as the best clubs/league in 10 or 15 years...
I tend to agree with FD (not sure about Fiorentina and Atletico though).
English pay more for one player than the entire budget of some Belgian teams.
Look at Standard: they almost eliminated Liverpool, lost 3 players because they were that good.
Yesterday they played (a weakened) Arsenal and Arsenal only managed to win because of a blatant hands ball...
I will repeat what i am saying for years:; despite the fact that English clubs are progressing till the semi's in the CL, i still think they are underachieving in Europe. With the budgetary gap they have with other clubs they should have 4 teams in the semi-finals eacht and every year...
What Platini wants is fair competition...and that is a good thing. Besides if nothing changes, in a couple of years most English fans will agree with Platini...i'm quite sure that the Russian clubs will take over as the best clubs/league in 10 or 15 years...
Re: England Thread
To be honest Gerd the ONLY thing that has stopped us having 4 teams in the semi final each and every year is that we meet other english teams in the Quaters!
Atheltico are hardly a joke club and the same can be said of Lyon. Maybe there is a case for the champions of weak leagues not being there but for me they add something, the CL needs underdog stories and the teams needs the CL revenue.
To be honest Gerd the ONLY thing that has stopped us having 4 teams in the semi final each and every year is that we meet other english teams in the Quaters!
Atheltico are hardly a joke club and the same can be said of Lyon. Maybe there is a case for the champions of weak leagues not being there but for me they add something, the CL needs underdog stories and the teams needs the CL revenue.
gerd
Retired Footballer
Re: England Thread
I agree with the second part of your post (CL needs underdog stories...).
But not with the first: Chelsea was eliminated by Barca and earlier on by AS Monaco...
There must be other examples...
I agree with the second part of your post (CL needs underdog stories...).
But not with the first: Chelsea was eliminated by Barca and earlier on by AS Monaco...
There must be other examples...
lo zio
International
- 24 October 2005
- Palermo
Re: England Thread
i realise the conversation is going a bit off topic, and i also realise that by adding my point, i'm dragging it even more off topic..... but i really can't get any sense in this.
u say that teams like fiorentina and atletico shouldn't be in champions league because they're "joke teams" (i assume by that u mean to say they're poor).... and then u wish more league champions to be in the competition???
do u realise lot of european league winner teams are actually weaker (or, at the very least, on the same level) than fiorentina and atletico?
i would understand your opinion if your point was "i want the champions league to be just for league champions, regardless the quality of the teams" (i might even agree with that) but saying that u want more league winners just because the likes of fiorentina and atletico are joke teams.... that really doesn't make sense.
besides, fiorentina and atletico... joke teams???
if clubs which are just one step behind the very best clubs in europe are "joke teams" to u.... then i wonder what u think about mid-class teams....
of course there's still the chance i just didn't get what u meant to say... if that's the case, my bad
fd1972uk said:
fd1972uk said:
i realise the conversation is going a bit off topic, and i also realise that by adding my point, i'm dragging it even more off topic..... but i really can't get any sense in this.
u say that teams like fiorentina and atletico shouldn't be in champions league because they're "joke teams" (i assume by that u mean to say they're poor).... and then u wish more league champions to be in the competition???
do u realise lot of european league winner teams are actually weaker (or, at the very least, on the same level) than fiorentina and atletico?
i would understand your opinion if your point was "i want the champions league to be just for league champions, regardless the quality of the teams" (i might even agree with that) but saying that u want more league winners just because the likes of fiorentina and atletico are joke teams.... that really doesn't make sense.
besides, fiorentina and atletico... joke teams???
if clubs which are just one step behind the very best clubs in europe are "joke teams" to u.... then i wonder what u think about mid-class teams....
of course there's still the chance i just didn't get what u meant to say... if that's the case, my bad
Re: England Thread
There is no (or only a very small) gap between the English clubs and Barca, Real, Inter, Milan or Juve, though. And there you got all your CL winners of the past 8 years, cept Porto, who were quite a surprise.
Lets look back for a moment, not forgetting RA-Chelsea wasn't even on the radar before 2004 ... (surprise-teams highlighted)
2009: Chelsea, ManU, Arsenal, Barca
2008: Chelsea, ManU, Liverpool, Barca
2007: Chelsea, ManU, Liverpool, Milan
2006: Arsenal, Milan, Barca, Villareal
2005: Chelsea, Liverpool, Milan, Eindhoven
2004: Chelsea, Porto, Monaco, La Coruna
2003: Milan, Juve, Real, Inter
2002: Manu, Real, Barca, Leverkusen
I definitely see a trend here
Only very few upsets ever occured, the further you go back, the more you'll find, obviously, only that the times were different then, too, so a constellation like 2004 back then wasn't considered THAT big of deal as it would be now.
Anyways. I can't see English clubs underachieving at all. There are a few clubs from other countries that are able to spend equally ridiculous sums on transfers and wages, and logically those clubs will be able to achieve similar success.
(And as it has been said already: A single nation will hardly ever have a lucky enough draw to send four teams to the semis.)
There is no (or only a very small) gap between the English clubs and Barca, Real, Inter, Milan or Juve, though. And there you got all your CL winners of the past 8 years, cept Porto, who were quite a surprise.
Lets look back for a moment, not forgetting RA-Chelsea wasn't even on the radar before 2004 ... (surprise-teams highlighted)
2009: Chelsea, ManU, Arsenal, Barca
2008: Chelsea, ManU, Liverpool, Barca
2007: Chelsea, ManU, Liverpool, Milan
2006: Arsenal, Milan, Barca, Villareal
2005: Chelsea, Liverpool, Milan, Eindhoven
2004: Chelsea, Porto, Monaco, La Coruna
2003: Milan, Juve, Real, Inter
2002: Manu, Real, Barca, Leverkusen
I definitely see a trend here
Only very few upsets ever occured, the further you go back, the more you'll find, obviously, only that the times were different then, too, so a constellation like 2004 back then wasn't considered THAT big of deal as it would be now.
Anyways. I can't see English clubs underachieving at all. There are a few clubs from other countries that are able to spend equally ridiculous sums on transfers and wages, and logically those clubs will be able to achieve similar success.
(And as it has been said already: A single nation will hardly ever have a lucky enough draw to send four teams to the semis.)
Last edited: