Wardy's twin
Well-known member
- Oct 21, 2014
- 8,461
It would have been more exciting...
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Drinking] Англия против Бельгии (England vs Belgium)
- Thread starter Dick Head
- Start date
It would have been more exciting...
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
Only in England can the manager have no suspensions or injury's for the next game, have racked up a record world cup win. Have the golden boot leader in his squad. Have a potential route to a WC semi of Cololmbia and Sweden and then be criticised for daring to rest players in a game where the opposition also rested all their players and which, actually, was better to lose. 
"Cant even test a keeper" Rashford was through one on one. But for a fingertip it would've been 1-1. ENG 11 shots to BEL's 14, ENG 7 corners to BEL's 2.
We learn nothing from this game whatsoever, positive or negative. Other than that Belgium's reserves are possibly slightly better than England's reserves, but that there's not much in it.
There is now no excuse for our fully rested first 11 not to come racing out of the blocks on Tuesday and if they do, no one will give a solitary shit about this game.
Last edited:
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Well yes, its certainly a factor. Other elements on Tuesday will also come into play of course (conditions, tactics, luck, sharpness, form, VAR) but Southgate decided that resting all his best players was the best way to manage the squad. We regularly see managers throw Cup games in lieu of a big impending League game - sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, but the manager has to stand or fall on his decision to do that. You can't just say its an irrelevance to how we perform once the more important game comes along. If we stink the place out against Colombia then it won't ALL be because he binned off the 1st team last night - but it'll certainly be a prime factor.
And Kane could twist his ankle in training today. This is a World Cup, its not a time to wrap players up in cotton wool when they're fit and firing and raring to go.
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Teams that go deep tend not to chop and change their entire XI during a tournament (albeit you don't often have a "dead rubber" in a World Cup that allows the opportunity). Would Brazil have changed 8/9/10 players in their final group game, even if they were already through (as they often are ?).
In my opinion, when you get to a World Cup, you play as close to your strongest XI in each game as fitness and yellows will allow. This enables the team to gel, for partnerships around the pitch to form, galvanises them and (hopefully) brings momentum and allows the team to grow into the tournament. We've chosen a different way. Maybe it'll work, maybe the players will have benefited and will be fresher and chomping at the bit on Tuesday. We shall see...
Absolute nonsense I’m afraid.
It could be a prime factor but there’s no way of knowing that.
I could say that we will play better on Tuesday for not putting a first XI out last night. I could say the 3-0 defeat we suffer to Colombia would have been 5-0. I’m no more able to prove that than you are able to prove this supposed Prime factor.
I’m struggling to believe that the best XI players available to Gareth Southgate on Tuesday night, that have been training together every day, will perform much differently on Tuesday for not playing last night.
Only in England can the manager have no suspensions or injury's for the next game, have racked up a record world cup win. Have the golden boot leader in his squad. Have a potential route to a WC semi of Cololmbia and Sweden and then be criticised for daring to rest players in a game where the opposition also rested all their players and which, actually, was better to lose.
Yep. If we win the WC, he’ll be a hero for life and get knighted. Pretty much anything else - he’ll be vilified and hounded from the job. I spose that if we make the semi or final and then lose he’ll have another tournament before he’s fired.
Totally ludicrous, of course, but there it is.
Rashford's shot was going wide anyway
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
You don't think the first XI is still a work in progress ? Personally I think they still need game time. REAL game time, and against better opposition than they've faced so far (which even Belgiums 2nd XI would've been). They're not going to get that sat on their arses watching the ressies.
I don't much like it when Hughton throws the entire team up in the air for a Cup game, and I certainly don't much care for it when England do it in a World Cup. I don't think it helps, you don't think it matters a jot, and it can't be catagorically proven either way so its an 'agree to disagree' I think.
SweatyMexican
Well-known member
- Mar 31, 2013
- 4,101
Can we actually make it to a semi-final?
That’s not the England I know. We’d have come along way if we can put Colombia/Sweden/Switzerland to the sword. I’d be extremely impressed.
That’s not the England I know. We’d have come along way if we can put Colombia/Sweden/Switzerland to the sword. I’d be extremely impressed.
I agree with nearly all you say, yes.
Where I disagree is that there is any way to link what happens on Tuesday to what happened last night. As I've already said however, I don't doubt that a load of thicko fans and the lovely sensationalist British media will be rounding on Southgate if we put in a poor performance, and lose, against Colombia, more so if Belgium stuff Japan.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
We are quite clearly making good progress under Southgate. I'll admit he's won me round somewhat, as he just looked to me like a classic, safe, inoffensive "blazer" appointment by the FA in the wake of the Allardyce fiasco. However, these last 2 years he's made a tangible difference to our style of play and the whole atmosphere and perception of the England team. There actually seems to be a plan.
He shouldn't be above criticism, but whatever happens on Tuesday only a complete buffoon would call on him to be axed.
He's played a dangerous game I think.
If we go on to lose to Colombia, this world cup campaign will go down as even more disappointing than some of the others in the past - scrape past middle-tier Tunisia, thrash a pub team, lose to decent Belgium, lose to ordinary Colombia. More trees failing to be pulled up then. However, if we now pick up where we left off after Panama, it would all looking quite rosy (although Sweden and Switzerland would both fancy their chances against us because their playing styles will combat our own).
I think on balance, I'd like to consider Southgate has weighed all this up and concluded the risk of that damage to his reputation was a risk worth taking, but surely he could have been a bit smarter and simply rested the two players on yellow cards, plus Harry Kane and John Stones - and then played his best team from the rest of his squad? Even if we had lost, we surely would have played a lot better than that.
We do look utter gubbins up front when Kane isn't playing don't we? Vardy seems to be the international equivalent of Craig McKail-Smith, Rashford is either outstanding or utterly dreadful, and Welbeck was just a waste of a squad place.
If we go on to lose to Colombia, this world cup campaign will go down as even more disappointing than some of the others in the past - scrape past middle-tier Tunisia, thrash a pub team, lose to decent Belgium, lose to ordinary Colombia. More trees failing to be pulled up then. However, if we now pick up where we left off after Panama, it would all looking quite rosy (although Sweden and Switzerland would both fancy their chances against us because their playing styles will combat our own).
I think on balance, I'd like to consider Southgate has weighed all this up and concluded the risk of that damage to his reputation was a risk worth taking, but surely he could have been a bit smarter and simply rested the two players on yellow cards, plus Harry Kane and John Stones - and then played his best team from the rest of his squad? Even if we had lost, we surely would have played a lot better than that.
We do look utter gubbins up front when Kane isn't playing don't we? Vardy seems to be the international equivalent of Craig McKail-Smith, Rashford is either outstanding or utterly dreadful, and Welbeck was just a waste of a squad place.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Personally I'm delighted. During this cosmopolitan sportsfest it is essential to sample the opposition specialities.
For the Tunisia game we gorged on Lablabi, whilst last Sunday we sported Panama hats.
Last evening saw beer, chocolate and lace.
Just making a suggestion list for Tuesday
For the Tunisia game we gorged on Lablabi, whilst last Sunday we sported Panama hats.
Last evening saw beer, chocolate and lace.
Just making a suggestion list for Tuesday
was always a chance England / Belgium would be a bit of a damp squib under this format---need a new way to make every game in the WC played to it's fullest---elimination matches all of them.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
You'll need to expand on that. Are you suggesting that the Group stage is binned completely, and all 32 teams go into a hat for a straight knockout competition ? 4 years (and 2 years of qualification) is a hell of a long time for half the teams there to play ONE game before going home, dontcha think ? And you'd only have a 23 game World Cup.
Needs work.
portlock seagull
Why? Why us?
- Jul 28, 2003
- 17,199
I definitely think Southgate made a naive mistake last night. If we now don’t beat Columbia, the Press will slaughter him for killing momentum. Had we played our strongest 11 last night and still been beaten then press would said ‘fair enough’ and Columbia match is still a win win even if we lose. But now...
Last night smacked of arrogance. England were like a fine dinner last night without enough cash to pay the bill. Bit like this chap (any excuse to play!)
Last night smacked of arrogance. England were like a fine dinner last night without enough cash to pay the bill. Bit like this chap (any excuse to play!)
Whether you go home after one match or three matches what is the true difference? It will come down to one play or one call by a referee---all matches must be played as if your life depends on it. You are simply afraid to change the format for fear of being different.
Last edited:
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
What absolute bobbins. Are you suggesting there's no difference between playing 3 group games and 1 knockout game ? You could fly halfway round the world, get royally shafted by the ref or VARS or chronic bad luck in your one and only game at the tournament, and be on the next plane home. And thats that for another 4 years. Terrible idea.