Football 18/19

[Hugh Jass]

14 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

A lot of people have predicted Colombia to knock us out before the quarters so avoiding the winner of Group H is incentive enough. That group is gonna be interesting viewing today.

I've had Poland to win that group, and I think England would beat them.

[ThomThomDrum]

4 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

I've had Poland to win that group, and I think England would beat them.

"Could" is a better word to use. England could also loose to Poland. Easily. England could loose to a lot of teams.

There is no way I put money on England in any game, not even Panama. Not that I dont think England will beat Panama, but I simply dont trust them. Last night proved that to me.

England really need to hope they use that good feeling that those 3 points gives them to act as a platform from which they can improve from. And they will need to improve if they are going to have any real impact in the WC

[sdvruxk]

3 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

And they will need to improve if they are going to have any real impact in the WC

You could say that for a majority of the teams that have played so far. There’s a higher probability that some of the other bigger nations will do so but it’s still all the same. 

[Hugh Jass]

5 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

"Could" is a better word to use. England could also loose to Poland. Easily. England could loose to a lot of teams.

There is no way I put money on England in any game, not even Panama. Not that I dont think England will beat Panama, but I simply dont trust them. Last night proved that to me.

England really need to hope they use that good feeling that those 3 points gives them to act as a platform from which they can improve from. And they will need to improve if they are going to have any real impact in the WC

I don't for a second think we are going to win the World Cup, but I think we will beat Panama. From then I'd say we are perfectly capable of beating any of the teams in Group H (and they would all say the same about us).

Said all along that the quarters were a realistic result for England.

[Hugh Jass]

Colombia have managed to concede a penalty and have a man sent off after 5 minutes.

Now that's impressive.

[pink_triangle]

7 minutes ago, sdvruxk said:

You could say that for a majority of the teams that have played so far. There’s a higher probability that some of the other bigger nations will do so but it’s still all the same. 

I'm not convinced form in the group stages is a huge factor. 

[pink_triangle]

2 hours ago, Hugh Jass said:

We also have a huge advantage over Belgium now in that we can effectively decide our position in the group. Belgium play in the first game on Saturday then after that it's the second round of Group F matches, meaning we will go into the Panama game with (hopefully) a clearer indication of whether there's any advantage to coming second over first. Say Belgium beat Tunisia 1-0, we will know that a three goal victory over Panama would be enough to go top on goals scored. If it looks like Germany will come second we could score twice against Panama then ease off, sending us through but not above the Belgains. That third game already looks like a mortgage job for 0-0.

Or course Germany will inevitably turn the group around and none of the above will matter.

To me it would be a good chance for both to rest players, but I'm not convinced not winning on purpose over 90 minutes is likely.

I think beating Belgium would be a huge confidence boost for England. I also think the big boys would be more vulnerable early on in the knockouts.

[Hugh Jass]

5 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I'm not convinced form in the group stages is a huge factor. 

It's rare that a team blasts through the groups and carries on all the way through to the final. Last few WC's the winners have started slowly and grown into the tournament.

Edited June 19, 2018 by Hugh Jass

[pink_triangle]

34 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

It's rare that a team blasts through the groups and carries on all the way through to the final. Last few WC's the winners have started slowly and grown into the tournament.

I think it's even debatable about teams improving as the tournament progresses. I think France in 98 only really put in one great performance, lucky it was in the final. Most winners recently haven't even played great in the final.

[Hugh Jass]

10 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I think it's even debatable about teams improving as the tournament progresses. I think France in 98 only really put in one great performance, lucky it was in the final. Most winners recently haven't even played great in the final.

Having said all that I just remembered that Germany beat Portugal 4-0 in their opening game last time (although they did struggle against Ghana and Algeria before destroying Brazil).

I don't think there has ever been a "good" final, certainly not in the 30-odd years I've been watching football,  there's just too much at stake for players to relax.

[Ted Dansons Wig]

3 hours ago, Hugh Jass said:

Colombia have managed to concede a penalty and have a man sent off after 5 minutes.

Now that's impressive.

Always thought thats double punishment and above whats fair for a hand ball offence. 11 v 11 Columbia would have won that game easily

[kaosmark2]

4 hours ago, Hugh Jass said:

I've had Poland to win that group, and I think England would beat them.

They'll do well to get a single point this tournament if they play like that against Columbia and Japan.

[dentalplan]

46 minutes ago, Ted Dansons Wig said:

Always thought thats double punishment and above whats fair for a hand ball offence. 11 v 11 Columbia would have won that game easily

For a handball offence, quite possibly, but when it's goalbound I don't see any other outcome. Did kinda mess up the game though, but good on Japan for coming back out and making the win theirs.

Group is now even more open than imagined. Definitely gonna be the most interesting one, and whoever we play in the 2nd round is gonna give us a good run for our money.

[kaosmark2]

8 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

They'll do well to get a single point this tournament if they play like that against Columbia and Japan.

The timing of that comment.

6 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

Group is now even more open than imagined. Definitely gonna be the most interesting one, and whoever we play in the 2nd round is gonna give us a good run for our money.

This was always going to be the most exciting group. I don't fancy England against any of them, even though they're all beatable.

[jyoung]

Tell you what, it keeps you on your toes, doesn't it?!

Salah starts this eve.

[pink_triangle]

Its no surprise that group H looks the tightest. Still wouldn't rule out Columbia and Poland, but can't see them both progressing.

[kaosmark2]

I definitely think Columbia could still qualify, or even top the group, but Poland looked incredibly flat until the last 5 minutes. 

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, kaosmark2 said:

The timing of that comment.

This was always going to be the most exciting group. I don't fancy England against any of them, even though they're all beatable.

I think the English need a bit more optimism! I would fancy wales chances against any of them in a one off game and we didn't even qualify!

[kaosmark2]

36 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I think the English need a bit more optimism! I would fancy wales chances against any of them in a one off game and we didn't even qualify!

England could beat any of them, but I think I'd put the other team as marginal favourites, I just think England labouring to get a win against Tunisia is about as good as it gets.

[Hugh Jass]

2 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

They'll do well to get a single point this tournament if they play like that against Columbia and Japan.

Yeah so much for that.

[CRW5252]

3 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

England could beat any of them, but I think I'd put the other team as marginal favourites, I just think England labouring to get a win against Tunisia is about as good as it gets.

We didn't labour to the win. We created a load of chances and Tunisia barely had a sniff. 

I agree with PT, let's get behind the team and stop moaning. There is plenty of reasons to be optimistic about our chances and there is no reason not to fancy us over the 4 teams in group H. We would be betting favorites against all of them (Columbia would perhaps be near evens). You are letting your biases from previous England experiences cloud your judgement of this years team.

It's the first time in a long time we have had a team that has identity and plays dynamic, modern football. Southgate has done a great job. He's proved a lot of people wrong, including myself. What ever the result from this years world cup, we can look forward to the next major tournament with optimism. 

[pink_triangle]

10 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

n

It's the first time in a long time we have had a team that has identity and plays dynamic, modern football. Southgate has done a great job. He's proved a lot of people wrong, including myself. What ever the result from this years world cup, we can look forward to the next major tournament with optimism. 

I think the dynamic modern football is debatable, it's typical British style with the pros and cons that come with it. As I said the Tunisia match didn't look too different to me than Wales under Hodgson.

I also think after one word cup game talk about a great job and proving people wrong is a bit premature.

.

[kaosmark2]

41 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

We didn't labour to the win. We created a load of chances and Tunisia barely had a sniff. 

I agree with PT, let's get behind the team and stop moaning. There is plenty of reasons to be optimistic about our chances and there is no reason not to fancy us over the 4 teams in group H. We would be betting favorites against all of them (Columbia would perhaps be near evens). You are letting your biases from previous England experiences cloud your judgement of this years team.

It's the first time in a long time we have had a team that has identity and plays dynamic, modern football. Southgate has done a great job. He's proved a lot of people wrong, including myself. What ever the result from this years world cup, we can look forward to the next major tournament with optimism. 

Created a few chances first half and none second half except for from 2 set pieces.

I don't think I'm letting biases from previous England experiences cloud my judgement, I just think England are a 2nd tier team that are a bit one dimensional, like many other teams at the tournament.

Southgate has done a perfectly decent job. Whether it qualifies as good or great depends on the knockout stages.

[CRW5252]

3 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I think the dynamic modern football is debatable, it's typical British style with the pros and cons that come with it. As I said the Tunisia match didn't look too different to me than Wales under Hodgson.

I also think after one word cup game talk about a great job and proving people wrong is a bit premature.

.

I completely disagree. Traditional British (and more specifically English) football is rigid and direct with deep defensive lines (think 4-4-2 and big man, little man up front). Against Tunisia we played very fluid, high pressing and short passing football. The style we played against Tunisia couldn't be more different than a typical British style. Forgive me if I sound patronising, but I don't think this is debatable. It is fact. A book called Inverting the Pyramid is a great read and will detail better than I ever could the progress (or lack of) of British (and more specifically English) football tactics. I recommend you read it if you are interested. 

I'm not basing this one game on how good a job Southgate has done. I have been very impressed with his philosophy and the way he carries himself. He is a huge advocate for stamping out the old fashion attitudes a lot of the English have regarding football tactics and encourages a international style (fluid, high pressing, short passing, wing backs etc...). He is passionate about young players and that can be seen by his time working with the England youth teams. I found this interview very interesting and it may make you think differently about Southgate:

 

[CRW5252]

5 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

Created a few chances first half and none second half except for from 2 set pieces.

I don't think I'm letting biases from previous England experiences cloud my judgement, I just think England are a 2nd tier team that are a bit one dimensional, like many other teams at the tournament.

Southgate has done a perfectly decent job. Whether it qualifies as good or great depends on the knockout stages.

We had a lot of clear cut chances in the first half. The poor finishing let us down. Second half was obviously not as good but we still created a couple of half chances from open play. Alongside the 2 set pieces chances you mentioned. In both halves Tunisia created nothing of note and were never close to scoring. The penalty they won was just a moment of stupidity from Walker rather than them carving us open.

What makes you say the team are one dimensional? We created chances from both set plays and open play. I think the two major limiting factors for us at the moment is a lack of world class players who can turn a game and our defense. I can see the defense really struggling against higher level opposition. 

Regarding Southgate, I agree and of course results in future tournaments as well. It's only early days but I have been impressed so far.