[Football] To the "England have been shit" crowd...

[Kinky Gerbil]

You're trying to argue that we're as well off facing France and then Germany or Spain than Belgium then Croatia. You're being silly.

Where have I said that?

We wont win it - But I fancy us getting to the Semi's which would be a good result and we wont go out behind a parked bus.

 

[Mowgli37]

Surely the way Russia, Wales and Slovakia approached their matches against us was an indication of our quality?

They knew their best chance was to sit deep and hope for the best or else Rose, Walker, Alli et al would have torn them to pieces.

I for one am delighted that we are trying to play attractive, attacking football and if we stick to our guns and go for it we should do well in this tournament.

 

[Triggaaar]

Well croatia beat spain so they are better perhaps?

Yeah, and Ireland are better than Italy

Germany have looked average and defensively suspect in at least one game.

They're still better than Croatia.

I think between belgium and france i would probably just about rather play belgium but its a close run thing and france are under pressure to perform at home.

Teams are always under pressure to perform at home, but they do better at home. Like the one time France won the World Cup, they were at home. As with us. It's called home advantage for a reason, yet you're trying to argue it's actually a disadvantage.

If you get to the quarter finals you should expect to be facing a top 8 side

It's not about what you might expect, it's about the draw and trying to make the best of it. Winning our group would have been a massive advantage.

 

[Triggaaar]

Where have I said that?

That's what this discussion is about. If you agree that we should have tried harder to win our group, then why are you arguing against it

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

That's what this discussion is about. If you agree that we should have tried harder to win our group, then why are you arguing against it

"England have been shit"

 

[1066familyman]

The side isnt better that ours, the squad certainly isnt.

Hugo aside, would any of the back 5 get in the england team? no.

Granted the have Pogba and Payet but the rest of the midfield is meh and I am confident Dier will b[e able to control One of them

I feel the same about France. IF we end up playing them, and I stress the IF because I refuse to take Iceland and Rep.Ireland for granted, then I relish the chance to play them.

They are easily as vulnerable as us in defence and I fancy us going forward against teams that want to come out and play. They will not park the bus and therefore we should have an open attractive game of football on our hands.

Pogba doesn't always deliver. My biggest fear would be for game changing moments from Payet, because he really is capable of that.

I'd much rather be playing France than Croatia from what I've seen so far.

Edit: Just to preempt Trig....I realise that we would potentially meet Croatia further down the line than France if we were in that side of the draw.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I feel the same about France. IF we end up playing them, and I stress the IF because I refuse to take Iceland and Rep.Ireland for granted, then I relish the chance to play them.

They are easily as vulnerable as us in defence and I fancy us going forward against teams that want to come out and play. They will not park the bus and therefore we should have an open attractive game of football on our hands.

Pogba doesn't always deliver. My biggest fear would be for game changing moments from Payet, because he really is capable of that.

I'd much rather be playing France than Croatia from what I've seen so far.

Much how people ignore it we have those players as well in Alli/Kane/Sturridge and Rooney in the starting 11

Plus our players will be used to Payet - I am not saying that will be able to stop him, but it will help

 

[symyjym]

Surely the way Russia, Wales and Slovakia approached their matches against us was an indication of our quality?

They knew their best chance was to sit deep and hope for the best or else Rose, Walker, Alli et al would have torn them to pieces.

I for one am delighted that we are trying to play attractive, attacking football and if we stick to our guns and go for it we should do well in this tournament.

Yep, Walker, Rose and Clyne are probably the best attacking fullbacks in this competition. No defender wants to, or can, play against them.

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

Yeah, and Ireland are better than Italy

well firstly italy weren't playing for anything so Ireland had the desire and secondly italy made 8/9 changes to the team and had a suspect GK, so in that particular match ireland were better

They're still better than Croatia.

I don't think germany are better than croatia on current form. They haven't shown an ability to hurt a team whereas Modric and Rakiticare on form. Plus croatia beat spain without modric on the pitch

It's not about what you might expect, it's about the draw and trying to make the best of it. Winning our group would have been a massive advantage.

again i feel there may be a small advantage but certainly not massive

 

[Triggaaar]

well firstly italy weren't playing for anything so Ireland had the desire and secondly italy made 8/9 changes to the team and had a suspect GK

That's basically what I'm saying - Spain weren't playing for anything and Croatia had the desire. If it was a knockout game it would have been different.

I don't think germany are better than croatia on current form.

Well we disagree there.

They haven't shown an ability to hurt a team whereas Modric and Rakiticare on form. Plus croatia beat spain without modric on the pitch

The Croatia that lost a 2 goal lead to the Czech Republic - the only point they could manage.

 

[brightn'ove]

The Croatia that lost a 2 goal lead to the Czech Republic - the only point they could manage.

I think there are obviously some mitigating factors there

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

That's basically what I'm saying - Spain weren't playing for anything and Croatia had the desire. If it was a knockout game it would have been different.

Well we disagree there.
The Croatia that lost a 2 goal lead to the Czech Republic - the only point they could manage.

Spain were playing for something, they hadn't secured top spot and didn't rest half their team, they were at full strength. Yes Croatia lost a 2 goal lead but spain didn't even get a point and the czechs aren't a bad side. they kept spain at bay until 90th minute

 

[warmleyseagull]

It was ours for the taking, if we'd won our group.

We knew that finishing 2nd would mean a quarter final against France (if we get through the round of 16).
Finishing 1st meant a quarter final against F1 or E2 - even if that was Portugal, who hadn't won either of their first two games, it would have been preferable to playing France at home.

Now we have to beat France, then Italy, Spain or Germany, instead of Hungary followed by Croatia.

Roy shouldn't have put out a second team against Slovakia, it's cost us big.

You assume the A Team would have done better. It might have but Clyne hardly did badly, and Bertrand was fine. Kane and Sterling were pony in first two games and had to be replaced, so your argument really is down to Rooney and Ali vs Henderson and Wilshire. And even then it is down to whether they play 60.or 30. I agree that Wilshire was a mistake but seems a bit heroic to assume we would have won simply by virtue of 30 or even 60 minutes extra of Rooney and Ali.

Secondly, it is not really as bad as it seems in the half of death because Italy, German and Spain have conveniently bunched themselves together. Yes, we may have to play a SF against a better team than we might have expected, but, hey, we have to get there first. You also assume it would have been QF against Hungary, but more likely Belgium, the highest FIFA ranked team in the competition (2nd). Would I prefer NI and Belgium over Iceland and France (and no guarantee they will overcome Ireland); probably but not much.

Thirdly, the reason we have a half of death is as much due to Spain's carelessness as our inability to break down defences. Had they not lost to Coatia, I would say it would make no difference which half we were in. The tournament is lopsided because only two seeds out of six won their groups: three came second and Portugal third.

 

[Triggaaar]

You assume the A Team would have done better.

We might have lost, but the point is we'd have been better winning the group and we'd have had the best chance of doing that it we played our best team.

It might have but Clyne hardly did badly, and Bertrand was fine.

I've already said Clyne did well (no better than Walker), but Bertrand was not as good as Rose.

Kane and Sterling were pony in first two games and had to be replaced

As I said.

so your argument really is down to Rooney and Ali vs Henderson and Wilshire.

And Rose for Bertrand, at least.

And even then it is down to whether they play 60.or 30.

60? Ali, Rooney, Rose and Walker all played 90 against Wales (when we needed to score) and only Rooney came off against Russia, when we were ahead.

I agree that Wilshire was a mistake but seems a bit heroic to assume we would have won simply by virtue of 30 or even 60 minutes extra of Rooney and Ali.

You've got your numbers wrong, they should have played 90.

Secondly, it is not really as bad as it seems in the half of death because Italy, German and Spain have conveniently bunched themselves together. Yes, we may have to play a SF against a better team than we might have expected, but, hey, we have to get there first.

And getting their first is harder because we'd have to beat France!

You also assume it would have been QF against Hungary, but more likely Belgium

Yeah you can assume Belgium, I only didn't include them as they haven't been playing well, but the point still stands - I'd rather them than France at home.

Would I prefer NI and Belgium over Iceland and France (and no guarantee they will overcome Ireland); probably but not much.

Each to their own.

 

[Hampster Gull]

If england get to the semis then they have had a respectable tournament. Quarters alone is poor

 

[Hugo Rune]

I presume that you mean 'a very large slice of luck'? Two of their goals were deflected and gave the keeper no chance.

That's exactly what I meant. In addition, how their 1st goal didn't take a deflection as it was rifled into a sea of legs was beyond me.

 

[brakespear]

...who, other than Germany, has been any better over their three games?

France? Unconvincing despite going unbeaten.
Spain? Lost to Croatia (who might be the answer to the original question)
Italy? Lost to Ireland.
Portugal? Nah.
Belgium? Nope.

That was Itlay's second team though (although you might say that about England v Slovakia). Italy were class in their other two matches. Croatia definitely better than England. Hungary too.

 

[MJsGhost]

That along with people laughing at Comments about us improving if we play a better side.

I can honestly see us dry humping France if we play them as they will come at us.

I agree with this - I reckon Iceland will be a tougher game for us. I'm not saying they are a better side, just that the difference in styles and circumstances will suit us better against France, IF we get past Iceland

 

[Farehamseagull]

........

 

[TSB]

...who, other than Germany, has been any better over their three games?

France? Unconvincing despite going unbeaten.
Spain? Lost to Croatia (who might be the answer to the original question)
Italy? Lost to Ireland.
Portugal? Nah.
Belgium? Nope.

And now?