HarryBosch Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Last night I think Terry Butcher played himself onto the TV pundits' trip to Brazil. He was good wasn't he. Refreshing. He spoke like a fan albeit with an inside track. They'll train him in the art of talking utter bollocks by June though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 The only reason I can bare to watch ITV football is the prospect of one day seeing Roy Keane brutally murder Adrian Chiles on live television. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pukka Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 (edited) I am one of the ones who don't care how the national side do. I find it bizzare that real football fans do to be honest.That side are not my players. My players are playing against Carlisle this weekend. I can't support a team full of Rooney, Carrick, Wellbeck and Smalling - no chance. I'll watch the world cup, but I don't care who wins. On the flip side if England do well I wont be spouting off saying how thrilled I am either. (There will be some that do) I watched last nights game and really enjoyed it, didn't bother watching Friday's. I get behind the england cricket team (and go to matches) as that feels like my side. As for football - I just don't care. Never have, never will. Edited October 16, 2013 by pukka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 I wish those who do support England could leave their club prejudices at the door. I was at (old) Wembley for what turned out to be Keegan's last game in charge - a woeful 1-0 defeat to Germany. There was a Leeds fan (you could tell he was a Leeds fan cos he was wearing a Leeds shirt to an England game...) spent the whole game shouting absolute dog's abuse at Beckham (and I do mean genuinely abusive stuff). The abuse had nothing to do with his performance (easily England's man of the match) and was hurled with pure, phlegm loaded vitriol. Until I had a quiet word with him in the second half. I say a quiet word. I think I started with, "Listen you :censored:ing slack-jawed, Neanderthal, Yorkshire :censored:..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forte_Baby Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Fact is we have qualifield we are in it once we get to the finals and see the draw then judge our progress the personally we are good enough to reach the 1/4 finals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 I still don't understand all the wanking going on in the media and elsewhere about Friday's performance vs Montenegro. We were hopeless and needed a colossal slice of luck to come through that as winners. 4-1 was a ridiculous result. Last night, on the other hand, was a revelation. Simple, high tempo, attacking football. The kind of football England should always have been playing. We're shyte at tactics and clever formations, we can't defend that well, but we can load the box, get it wide and create chances, even if that does risk leaving us wide open at the back. Hopefully Woy has dismissed some of the accusations of being boring and negative. Now he needs to throw off the shackles for good, convince the team they have nothing to lose, and actually give us something to shout about and enjoy watching - and frankly, who cares if that's just three games. Have a go and see what happens. I thought we played well against Montenegro, especially in the second half. In the first half, they just seemed to want to frustrate us, and we struggled to break them down as we were a bit too pedestrian and lack a bit of guile. But even still we missed a couple of good chances. In the second half, probably because they had heard the Ukraine result, they opened up a bit more and we found it much easier to get at them. We were always the better side and in the end I don't think the scoreline was flattering at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 (edited) My understanding is the seeds are the top 8 sides in the world rankings that qualified for the WC (or 7 plus Brazil if Brazil aren't in the top 8). If Switzerland are 7 then they'd therefore be a top seed. Exactly why? Netherlands qualified for the last Euros (Switzerland didn't) have got a better record than Switzerland in WC qualifying, yet surprisingly the latter is above the former!!! Edited October 16, 2013 by jimsleftfoot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 (edited) As I said, we all know the FIFA rankings are complete bollocks. Indeed, still amazes me though how bollox they are. Edited October 16, 2013 by jimsleftfoot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted October 16, 2013 Author Share Posted October 16, 2013 Exactly why? Netherlands qualified for the last Euros (Switzerland didn't) have got a better record than Switzerland in WC qualifying, yet surprisingly the latter is above the former!!! Yes but you're overlooking Switzerland's herculean 0-0 friendly draw in Greece in February. Mammoth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=j-fcMS5x3Mw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjk2008 Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 I still don't understand all the wanking going on in the media and elsewhere about Friday's performance vs Montenegro. We were hopeless and needed a colossal slice of luck to come through that as winners. 4-1 was a ridiculous result. Last night, on the other hand, was a revelation. Simple, high tempo, attacking football. The kind of football England should always have been playing. We're shyte at tactics and clever formations, we can't defend that well, but we can load the box, get it wide and create chances, even if that does risk leaving us wide open at the back. Hopefully Woy has dismissed some of the accusations of being boring and negative. Now he needs to throw off the shackles for good, convince the team they have nothing to lose, and actually give us something to shout about and enjoy watching - and frankly, who cares if that's just three games. Have a go and see what happens. Whilst it was no Barcelona-esque performance against Montenegro, your suggestion that 4-1 was a ridiculous result is equally ridiculous. We dominated them pretty much all game. The first half was mainly us having the ball, knocking it about well but lacking that bit of class in the final third. The 2nf half was much better in the final third. Getting in behind their defensive regularly, with Townsend & Welbeck putting the ball into the box to create the opening two goals (despite the 2nd being an OG, a goal is a goal), and their “consolation” was a complete fluke (some might say it was an opportunist toepoke, but it was hit & hope, regardless). We then pressed again, with Townsend scoring a screamer, before Sturridge tore their defender a new one before being hacked down and putting away the resulting penalty. We had 61% of the possession, and had 27 shots (with 12 on target) whereas they had 10 shots (with 2 on target). We also had 14 corners to their zilch. How you can come to the conclusion that we were incredibly lucky to win that match, is frankly nonsense. Your 2nd paragraph is on the button, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Whilst it was no Barcelona-esque performance against Montenegro, your suggestion that 4-1 was a ridiculous result is equally ridiculous. We dominated them pretty much all game. The first half was mainly us having the ball, knocking it about well but lacking that bit of class in the final third. The 2nf half was much better in the final third. Getting in behind their defensive regularly, with Townsend & Welbeck putting the ball into the box to create the opening two goals (despite the 2nd being an OG, a goal is a goal), and their “consolation” was a complete fluke (some might say it was an opportunist toepoke, but it was hit & hope, regardless). We then pressed again, with Townsend scoring a screamer, before Sturridge tore their defender a new one before being hacked down and putting away the resulting penalty. We had 61% of the possession, and had 27 shots (with 12 on target) whereas they had 10 shots (with 2 on target). We also had 14 corners to their zilch. How you can come to the conclusion that we were incredibly lucky to win that match, is frankly nonsense. Your 2nd paragraph is on the button, though. I admit I probably went into Friday's game in a fairly negative frame of mind. I wouldn't mind betting most of that 61% possession was in the last 25% of the game. My view is mostly down to the way we struggled in the first half. I'm still unsure how we would ever have broken them down without the good fortune of those first two goals. We looked much better after that, but only once the game was won. I'm equally bemused as to how they managed to score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_balls Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 (edited) We will struggle against any South American side there. We've got no chance. As a team were nowhere near as good as Brazil, Italy, Germany, Spain, Holland, Argentina, Uruguay. And Argentina & Uruguay are practically at home aswell as Brazil. But, you never know...... I think Hodgson could do what a similarly much maligned Bobby Robson did in 1990. Always makes me chuckle this. How the devil are Argentina and Uruguay "Practically" at home? A quick google search tells me that Montevideo to Rio De Janeiro is 1,474 miles, in terms of Europe, that's similar to England playing in Ukraine. Similarly, Buenos Aries is 1,656 miles from Rio, that's like England playing in Bulgaria. If a WC was in Bulgaria or Ukraine would the South American's be saying.... "We'll struggle against any European side there." Or would we hear "and England and France are practically at home as well as Ukraine" Edited October 17, 2013 by alex_balls Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davegtt Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 I think hes referring to the temperatures/conditions etc in South America rather than distance from home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_balls Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 I think hes referring to the temperatures/conditions etc in South America rather than distance from home. Fair enough, I do see the point there. Can't wait for the groups to be drawn, so we can dream/moan/predict every scenario, love a WC me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 I'll say it again and again. We don't have a chance. Our players simply aren't good enough, and never will be while the objectives of our top division and our national team are diametrically opposite. We do usually manage to raise our game against the traditionally better sides (so we generally lose by the odd goal or pens instead of getting battered), but we're not good enough to consistently beat those around us. We all know FIFA rankings are bollocks - they'll probably have us fourth or something after two consecutive wins. Realistically we are only just top 20. The sooner we realise that and manage to send our team to competitions without the burden of impossible expectation the better. Send them with no expectation, let them play high tempo, attacking football with no fear and they might just surprise us and get to (or even beyond) the second round. Our lack of ball retention kills us, every other top nation can keep the ball for as long as they please, two three passes and our CM gives it away or we hoof it. There's the difference. I'd be happy with the 1/4 finals but getting out of the group like last year will be a bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 Our lack of ball retention kills us, every other top nation can keep the ball for as long as they please, two three passes and our CM gives it away or we hoof it. There's the difference. I'd be happy with the 1/4 finals but getting out of the group like last year will be a bonus. I recall that Ghana kept the ball well against good sides by... always offering a triangle around the man with the ball. We can only dream of such tactical flair. We really are better served by steaming into the other lot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 (edited) Every World Cup hosted outside of European time zones has been won by a South American country. Spain's 2010 win in South Africa is the only time a European nation has won outside of Europe. 1930: Uruguay - won by Uruguay 1950: Brazil - won by Uruguay 1962: Chile - won by Brazil 1970: Mexico - won by Brazil 1978: Argentina - won by Argentina 1986: Mexico - won by Argentina 1994: USA - won by Brazil 2002: Japan - won by Brazil Edited October 17, 2013 by opinions4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davegtt Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 Wheres all this crap about cant keep the ball come from? 64% possesion against Poland and 61% against Montenegro (off the top of my head) IIRC. and for us to create something like a shot on goal every 4 minutes against poland and still have a 64% possession rate shows that our midfield created opportunities constantly for the team. Not a bad stat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_balls Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Every World Cup hosted outside of European time zones has been won by a South American country. Spain's 2010 win in South Africa is the only time a European nation has won outside of Europe. 1930: Uruguay - won by Uruguay 1950: Brazil - won by Uruguay 1962: Chile - won by Brazil 1970: Mexico - won by Brazil 1978: Argentina - won by Argentina 1986: Mexico - won by Argentina 1994: USA - won by Brazil 2002: Japan - won by Brazil Fair enough, when I get chance i'll have a look IF those South American winners did indeed lose at all on their way to winning, and in that time did they lose to a European side because that's more relevant to my point than who won it, I was saying we can beat a South American team any day of the week and that we shouldn't be scared of playing them, I didn't say we'd win the tournament in South America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davegtt Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 FFS stupid internet. typed out quite a detailed response on all the teams in S.A who failed to beat Europeans in all them years listed above. Notably Chile on home soil losing to the W.Germans in 1962, whilst we were out there we also beat the Argies that year. Also in 1930 Yugoslavia beats both Brazil and Bolivia (Who were practically playing at home ;) ) and Romania gave Peru a lesson, as did the USA to Paraguay. 1950 on home soil Brazil failed to beat Switzerland and we beat Chile, Paraguay lost to USA and drew with Sweden. 1970 was in North America but Brazil won every game that year. 1978 in Argentina, Italy beat them in the group stages 1-0, Argentina who won it was still taken to extra time by Holland. Brazil only got a draw from Sweden and Spain. Holland drew with Peru, who also got knocked out of the group stages in a 1-0 defeat to Poland. Again, 1986 was in N.America again but Argentina was held to a draw by Italy again. 1994 in N.A - Brazil only drew with Sweden in the group stages although notably the argies got spanked by Bulgaria and knocked out by Romania ;) but other than Brazil having to win the final on penalties they didnt lose a game either. 2002 - Brazil cruised this WC. BUT, would you say any of the South Americans would say because the tournament is in Europe they dont expect to beat any of us lot? 1934 Italy - won by Italy 1938 France - won by Italy 1954 Switzerland - won by W.Germany 1958 Sweden - won by Brazil 1966 England - won by England 1974 W.Germany - won by W.Germany 1982 Spain - won by Italy 1990 Italy - won by W.Germany 1998 France - won by France 2006 Germany - won by Italy. So there has only been one instance that a S.A team have won it in Europe but we have held 2 more WC's than anywhere else in the world. I dont think theres much of an arguement in this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Wheres all this crap about cant keep the ball come from? 64% possesion against Poland and 61% against Montenegro (off the top of my head) IIRC. and for us to create something like a shot on goal every 4 minutes against poland and still have a 64% possession rate shows that our midfield created opportunities constantly for the team. Not a bad stat. Against top sides we struggle to do that though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davegtt Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 We played Brazil in Feb this year and beat them 2-1 and had exactly 50% possession with more shots on target and 12/15 each at goal. Not to be sniffed at. Not forgetting a 2-2 draw with them on their own patch. Beat Italy one year ago and they only beat us on penalties in the Euros. Wasnt so long ago we beat Spain either. Bottom line is we are capable, lets just go into it and know we can do something so lets just support the lads and hope for the best Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spadam Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Every World Cup hosted outside of European time zones has been won by a South American country. Spain's 2010 win in South Africa is the only time a European nation has won outside of Europe. 1930: Uruguay - won by Uruguay 1950: Brazil - won by Uruguay 1962: Chile - won by Brazil 1970: Mexico - won by Brazil 1978: Argentina - won by Argentina 1986: Mexico - won by Argentina 1994: USA - won by Brazil 2002: Japan - won by Brazil South Africa has the same time zone as Europe so point still right. Climate is similar to europe aswell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 We played Brazil in Feb this year and beat them 2-1 and had exactly 50% possession with more shots on target and 12/15 each at goal. Not to be sniffed at. Not forgetting a 2-2 draw with them on their own patch. Beat Italy one year ago and they only beat us on penalties in the Euros. Wasnt so long ago we beat Spain either. Bottom line is we are capable, lets just go into it and know we can do something so lets just support the lads and hope for the best Italy did only beat us on penalties in the Euros, but how they only beat us on penalties god only knows. They had 63% of possession, 31 shots, 18 on target. We had 8 shots, 4 on target. They should have beaten us comfortably inside the 90 minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.