England National football team thread

Whether Crouch has a good touch or not is neither here nor there for me. The problem is, is he good enough to compete against the very top level teams - or put it another way - do we have better players than him to compete against the very top level teams? I think we do. If you look at it, pretty much all his goals have come against footballing minnows.
 
This is getting stupid. Harry is losing game after game for Spurs and while he may be the best English candidate why is that such a big deal?
The problem with Capello wasn't that he was foreign; it's that he never really bothered learning English.
I say John Terry for manager.
 
The biggest problem we have is that Harry is seen as the solution not as part of the problem.

The solution is finding 15-20 spanish players who can play for England.

Don't matter who manages us the fact remains we are crap, worst footballing team at every tournament we play at,

We are years behind most teams and at 30 ive finally learnt to accept i will never see us win a world cup or euro's.
 
I don't agree with that, simply because of the fact of how we played in the qualifiers before WC 2010. Had we played like that at the tournament, I'm sure we would've fared much better. Something goes wrong at the tournaments - it's not the players aren't capable of more, because they are. No idea why that happens - maybe some of it could be down to the lack of a winter break and so on, but definitely not all of it.

Since 1990, or maybe even before, as the song says there have been many 'oh so nears'. Sure, the England team aren't one of the best around - but to make that even worse, we're easily one of the unluckiest. 1990 and 1996 are two of the prime examples of that. Even 1970. Had Banksy not have got that food poisoning, he would've been in goal - and he would never have let that goal in!

I mean, to say we're the worst team at every tournament is nonsensical. We simply don't play to our full potential - and that was especially the case in WC 2010. Usually, the England team goes out there, starts slowly (even in '66 we started slowly), but gives someone near the top of the tree a damn good game - and usually unluckily - lose on pens. The worrying thing this time was our complete capitulation at WC 2010.
 
Last edited:
It's not about unlucky or full potential though. We're about 8th in the world which means we should normally reach the QFs and occasionally go slightly better.
You could say that we've achieved exactly what would be expected.
 
So 40 years of misfortune? Or perhaps we just get technically played out the game by most of the world's half decent teams.

Excuses are awesome at masking your own deficiences, and England are fantastic at them.
 
Absolute tosh that article in my opinion. Barcelona turn up against every single opponent and pretty much play the same game. They'll have 60-75% possession and almost certainly create a minimum of 3 times as many shots on goal. You just have to hope they don't take their chances.

If Barcelona hadn't missed 4 excellent chances, or hadn't had 25 shots on goal away from home in a Champions League SEMI FINAL, then I'd say that perhaps it bodes well that the "English grit" he seems to think exists (rolling over 4-1 to Germany? Kicking out with a flick of the foot against Argentina? Bottling every penalty shoot-out since they decided to stop flipping coins?) might actually make a difference.

If English grit is defined by some strange ability to occasionally upset the odds after being outplayed at home. Or by a steadfast refusal to look beyond denial for truth, then we'll just keep turning up at tournaments hoping we get knocked out on penalties so we can talk of might-have-beens.
 
So 40 years of misfortune? Or perhaps we just get technically played out the game by most of the world's half decent teams.

Excuses are awesome at masking your own deficiences, and England are fantastic at them.

So you don't think England were the better team against Germany in 1990 - whose opening goal was one of the jammiest I've ever seen? Or in 1996 - when Gazza was literally within inches of knocking Germany out? Or vs Portugal in 2004 before Rooney's injury? Even in 2002 vs Brazil we played very well. Had Beckham not ducked that challenge, maybe that would've gone to penalties as well. What about 2006, when Hargreaves was terrorising the Portuguese, and Lennon did the same when he came on? Another one that ended with penalties. And let's not even go to 1986...

Looking more closely at that one - Portugal were terrified of Rooney - they simply couldn't cope with him - no team could in that tournament. Yet he got injured. Just another example of England's bad luck. These are not excuses, they are facts.

Gordon Banks gets food poisoning before the Germany match and his deputy lets in a goal that Banksy would never have conceded - another example. I've seen all of those 'oh so nears down the years' - either live, or from recorded footage and not once did England get outplayed. If we did, how did most of the above matches end up with penalties? Think about it. ;) Penalties means living with a so-called superior team for 120 minutes. The only time I've seen England so comprehensively outplayed at a World Cup was WC 2010 vs Germany.

----------

If Barcelona hadn't missed 4 excellent chances, or hadn't had 25 shots on goal away from home in a Champions League SEMI FINAL, then I'd say that perhaps it bodes well that the "English grit" he seems to think exists (rolling over 4-1 to Germany? Kicking out with a flick of the foot against Argentina? .

No-one said England showed 'grit' in the 4-1 vs Germany - we were dire and even with the Lampard 'goal', I doubt if the result would've been that different save for one goal less. And as for the flick of the foot vs Argentina? It was just about a yellow card - it was never a straight red. The reason it was a red was because the idiot referee fell for that cheating git Simeone's Oscar Winning Acting.

Since you're going to bring up that Argentina game, I'd like to remind you that even down to ten men, we were a constant threat in extra time - we had a goal disallowed for no good reason - and dragged them kicking and screaming all the way to penalties. With ten men. Hardly being outplayed.

You're right about one thing - we are dreadful at penalties (no news there). But being dreadful at penalties isn't being outplayed. Penalty shootouts are called a lottery for a good reason - but some teams are obviously better at them.
 
Last edited:
Of course it was a red card. The card colour isn't governed by how hard you retaliate.

It's the article that keeps referring to various things that make up "English grit." Hence replying to it :rolleyes

So we were relying on just Rooney before he got injured? What does that tell you about the levels of the team as a whole?

We failed to win at home! At home for christ sake in 1996. Brazil were a far better team than us that day, and for you to suggest that had someone not made such-and-such mistake we might have done x, y, or z just highlights my point about England being excellent at making excuses :p

We have 2 semi-final appearances since 1990 in all competitions. If we're really that unlucky, I'll ask you this. How many times did we get beaten by the winners that weren't semi-finals ;)
 
England fans in denial,, same old story, "if wasn't for the ref", if it wasn't for the injurys, Boring..!!!

We are a country that at best reaches quarter finals, thats it.

Our players are not as good as they think they are..., we are 4th favourites for the euro's what the hell is that about??

Does no one who does the rankings watch our games.??:facepalm
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top