Group G Matchday 3 - 28 June - England 0-1 Belgium, Panama 1-2 Tunisia

[Honey Honey]

1 hour ago, The Artful Dodger said:

I don't see the conspriacy theories, England play a harder game to get an 'easier' game and then get Spain? It's no better route at all.

As Machado alluded to in the other thread England have no excuse not to make the semi's now. You couldn't say that if England won the group so there is definitely a overall difference in my opinion. 

I don't think who you get in the semi finals can be taken into consideration at this point, you can't look at that draw and say that Spain are vastly harder than the other side of the draws likely semi finalists. 

 

[The Artful Dodger]

I think it's incredibly arrogant to say it is inexcusable to lose to Colombia or Swizerland/Sweden, which is essentially what you are saying.

[Honey Honey]

1 minute ago, The Artful Dodger said:

I think it's incredibly arrogant to say it is inexcusable to lose to Colombia or Swizerland/Sweden, which is essentially what you are saying.

It's not arrogant, it's football, it's part of what we are in it for, it's part of the emotion that makes the game what it is. Every match has a favourite, fans of the favourite expect their team to win and when they don't they experience emotions of anger. When they are not the favourite and they lose fans experience emotions of disappointment. You see this every week in football. The concept of who is favourite does not come from the fans it comes from the wider game, the neutral, the commentator, the betting shop.

Machado for example isn't English so he can't be arrogant, but he has already described England not making the semi's as being shameful.

I've seen this arrogant tag going around on twitter coming from people who primarily don't like England. There is a creation of a caricature of the English as some separate species rather than exactly like everyone else in football.

[bozziovai]

14 hours ago, Bluewolf said:

This is just showing me that we are still to be found wanting.. This is the first side with any bite to them and we are coming up short, I don't knock the enthusiasm or the effort of the team but we are lacking that killer instinct when those chances come... 

It's great when we can wallop a team like Panama but is a meaningless stat if we can't do it when it matters against better teams... 

exactly.      i've seen the reaction of the media claiming that england has finally found a team that could win the world cup after those wins against tunisia and panama, they're all in cloud nine.    but after last night, the sad reality has kicked in.   england still has a lot do.     you english people can relax that it was a meaningless game last night, but if you analyze the game, england is still weak.   yes the chances are there but it was only in the last quarter of the second half.    and belgium wasn't in it's strongest team, no lukaku and no kevin but they still won.      

[The Artful Dodger]

He's not arrogant but I think he's fanning the flames a bit, 'it's so easy for England', only increases the pressure. It's a fairly kind route but this side is hardly packed with talent, to say it is inexcusable to go out to two decent, if not exceptional, sides is madness. 

#itscominghome. 

[DeadLinesman]

9 minutes ago, bozziovai said:

exactly.      i've seen the reaction of the media claiming that england has finally found a team that could win the world cup after those wins against tunisia and panama, they're all in cloud nine.    but after last night, the sad reality has kicked in.   england still has a lot do.     you english people can relax that it was a meaningless game last night, but if you analyze the game, england is still weak.   yes the chances are there but it was only in the last quarter of the second half.    and belgium wasn't in it's strongest team, no lukaku and no kevin but they still won.      

England made 8 changes, it’s not like they had their strongest team out either was it? People seem to keep conveniently forgetting this. It shows we lack a certain depth in quality for sure, but your analysing this like ‘no Lukaku, no De Bruyne’ so you were beaten by a poor team. England consistently play with Kane, Henderson and Sterling. You can’t 100% say it would have made a difference, especially with Sterling’s form, but let’s not make out yesterday was anything more than England B vs Belgium B.

[DeadLinesman]

9 minutes ago, The Artful Dodger said:

He's not arrogant but I think he's fanning the flames a bit, 'it's so easy for England', only increases the pressure. It's a fairly kind route but this side is hardly packed with talent, to say it is inexcusable to go out to two decent, if not exceptional, sides is madness. 

#itscominghome. 

Would you describe England as decent though? Colombia have some exceptional talent, but are very hit and miss. Switzerland/Sweden couldn’t be described as world beaters as such. I think what this whole conversation is alluding to is that it’s not necessarily no excuses, but we’re not facing a dominant world footballing power where it can be easily excused if we lost. If you get what I mean?

[The Artful Dodger]

4 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

Would you describe England as decent though? Colombia have some exceptional talent, but are very hit and miss. Switzerland/Sweden couldn’t be described as world beaters as such. I think what this whole conversation is alluding to is that it’s not necessarily no excuses, but we’re not facing a dominant world footballing power where it can be easily excused if we lost. If you get what I mean?

Honestly don't know. I find this team quite likeable in comparison to previous ones but dont know how good they are. I just get uncomfortable with looking beyond anything but the next game, I don't fear Colombia but I fear the building up of the team. I do think Southgate will manage it well though. 

If England do go out before the semi final it will probably create some sort of undue backlash.

[Honey Honey]

16 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

England made 8 changes, it’s not like they had their strongest team out either was it? People seem to keep conveniently forgetting this. It shows we lack a certain depth in quality for sure, but your analysing this like ‘no Lukaku, no De Bruyne’ so you were beaten by a poor team. England consistently play with Kane, Henderson and Sterling. You can’t 100% say it would have made a difference, especially with Sterling’s form, but let’s not make out yesterday was anything more than England B vs Belgium B.

Agree with this, there has been absolutely no reality check. Both line ups were made up of players who have never played together before outside of training and never will again. There was no real expectation of them. 

In terms of depth though it doesn't matter much. You need 11-14 players for the world cup. Everyone else is there to make up the numbers in training sessions. 

[Bluewolf]

This England side is great to watch no doubt about it but when they fielded a B team against our B team we still got beat... As I said earlier the enthusiasm and will to win is there and you can't ask for much more than that. Go down fighting for every ball and put in all your effort then you wont find me complaining... 

There were a good number of decent chances created and nearly all them were pretty wide of the mark... It's almost as if we wanted to lose 

[bozziovai]

34 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

Would you describe England as decent though? Colombia have some exceptional talent, but are very hit and miss. Switzerland/Sweden couldn’t be described as world beaters as such. I think what this whole conversation is alluding to is that it’s not necessarily no excuses, but we’re not facing a dominant world footballing power where it can be easily excused if we lost. If you get what I mean?

actually for me, this world cup doesn't have a clear dominating side.    none has played good consistently.

[DeadLinesman]

17 minutes ago, bozziovai said:

actually for me, this world cup doesn't have a clear dominating side.    none has played good consistently.

Which is why some people have a genuine belief that if we got lucky, we could win. It’s probably the best chance we’ve had since ‘90. It’s be like Greece at the Euros 

[Honey Honey]

I think Croatia have to fancy that they might be in with a shout as well.

[DeadLinesman]

4 minutes ago, Harvsky said:

I think Croatia have to fancy that they might be in with a shout as well.

They’re certainly a better team than us, especially that midfield. It’d just be nice to see what would benefit classed a smaller nation to win (and I class us in that category). Just as long as it’s not Brazil, Spain etc

[Dan+]

5 hours ago, Harvsky said:

It's not arrogant, it's football, it's part of what we are in it for, it's part of the emotion that makes the game what it is. Every match has a favourite, fans of the favourite expect their team to win and when they don't they experience emotions of anger. When they are not the favourite and they lose fans experience emotions of disappointment. You see this every week in football. The concept of who is favourite does not come from the fans it comes from the wider game, the neutral, the commentator, the betting shop.

Machado for example isn't English so he can't be arrogant, but he has already described England not making the semi's as being shameful.

I've seen this arrogant tag going around on twitter coming from people who primarily don't like England. There is a creation of a caricature of the English as some separate species rather than exactly like everyone else in football.

Completely agree with this. There's such a stigma now with England and their fans that any kind of positive is deemed arrogance. There's nothing arrogant about thinking we have a better chance of getting past Colombia and Sweden than we do Japan and Brazil. If anything it's the opposite. Arrogance would be thinking we could roll Brazil over.