Euro 2020
- Thread starter version
- Start date
-
- Tags
- a sterling performance craner's column forza italia gomorrah hundred more years of hurt is that kate moss? it's coming home kane is able matey & acid nigella's twitter takes no more years of hurt pedri though shaw thing something is rotten in the state of denmark southgate's redemption the enthusiasm of roy keane the referee's a wanker v-a-rlinist v-a-rse we still believe zeal of the convert
version
Well-known member
Group A: Turkey, Italy, Wales, Switzerland.
Group B: Denmark, Finland, Belgium, Russia.
Group C: Netherlands, Ukraine, Austria, North Macedonia.
Group D: England, Croatia, Czech Republic, Scotland.
Group E: Spain, Sweden, Poland, Slovakia.
Group F: Germany, France, Portugal, Hungary.
Group B: Denmark, Finland, Belgium, Russia.
Group C: Netherlands, Ukraine, Austria, North Macedonia.
Group D: England, Croatia, Czech Republic, Scotland.
Group E: Spain, Sweden, Poland, Slovakia.
Group F: Germany, France, Portugal, Hungary.
version
Well-known member
Life savings on Finland and North Macedonia.
IdleRich
IdleRich
Oh man that was a terrible terrible day. Just loads of bad stuff happening in my personal life right then, then Brexit and then that final humiliation leaving me in utter despair.
I would question the word "shock" though, I'm never shocked when England lose. I really don't get those people who really believe that England are gonna win something. I mean, I´m not one of those annoying pricks who smugly explain that England will never win, but I just don't understand people who truly expect them to win tournaments.
IdleRich
IdleRich
Oh, your comment above - the dreary football bit - reminded me of something I meant to say which is how, at the moment, there are a lot of fairly exciting young English players around the fringes of the team which has led to something of a permanent argument, bubbling away in the background at all times and then rising exploding to the surface every time a particular game makes it relevant again. I´m talking about he way that Southgate picks extremely cavalier swashbuckling sides bristling with exciting attacking talent on both sides right the way to the fullbacks - as long as we are playing San Marino or another country that would fit inside Swindon, but, when England faces someone who is ranked within the top two hundred he reverts to a more moderate formation involving seventeen holding midfielders, playing them on the wrong side or even in goal just to get a few more in there.
And what annoys me is the stark black and white nature of the way that this argument is presented (er, rather like me above come to think of it) - especially by those who urge caution. It feels that anyone who has the temerity to suggest we should roll the dice and live a little, maybe even throw caution to the winds and risk playing a striker against Denmark is normally castigated as hopelessly naive.
I can reveal my hand a little here and say I'm one of those crazy fools who believes that we don't always need to allocate a defender specifically to cover the goal just in case the keeper slips and boots it into his own net when taking a goal kick. That doesn't mean - contrary to the hundreds of articles I've read on the subject say - that I would be in favour of playing all our strikers cos I envisage them one-twoing their way effortlessly through Germany and not giving a shit if we concede seven cos we know we'll get eight.
The so-called realists present a false dichotomy where the options are
a) We pick our most easy on the eye players who will put together some nice moves and even win some games for us, but will ultimately not be enough for Belgium or France and we will leave empty handed once again
b) We pick the most dour and unlovely side imaginable who will grind out a one nil against minnow and world champion alike and will win the tournament for us as the ugliest champions since Greece.
But to me that's the false dream, the point is, whichever side we pick, we will still likely lose to France, Belgium etc so can we please avoid being incredibly dreary while we do it?
There could even be an answer in the middle ground, I think that most would agree that it would be perfectly possible to put out a side a little bit more adventurous than the one that faced Denmark without totally abandoning defending altogether. I don't think anyone really thinks that we have to play all our attackers at once, there is plenty of space to be a little bit disappointed at the lack of attacking options in some games witout being completely gung ho.
And what annoys me is the stark black and white nature of the way that this argument is presented (er, rather like me above come to think of it) - especially by those who urge caution. It feels that anyone who has the temerity to suggest we should roll the dice and live a little, maybe even throw caution to the winds and risk playing a striker against Denmark is normally castigated as hopelessly naive.
I can reveal my hand a little here and say I'm one of those crazy fools who believes that we don't always need to allocate a defender specifically to cover the goal just in case the keeper slips and boots it into his own net when taking a goal kick. That doesn't mean - contrary to the hundreds of articles I've read on the subject say - that I would be in favour of playing all our strikers cos I envisage them one-twoing their way effortlessly through Germany and not giving a shit if we concede seven cos we know we'll get eight.
The so-called realists present a false dichotomy where the options are
a) We pick our most easy on the eye players who will put together some nice moves and even win some games for us, but will ultimately not be enough for Belgium or France and we will leave empty handed once again
b) We pick the most dour and unlovely side imaginable who will grind out a one nil against minnow and world champion alike and will win the tournament for us as the ugliest champions since Greece.
But to me that's the false dream, the point is, whichever side we pick, we will still likely lose to France, Belgium etc so can we please avoid being incredibly dreary while we do it?
There could even be an answer in the middle ground, I think that most would agree that it would be perfectly possible to put out a side a little bit more adventurous than the one that faced Denmark without totally abandoning defending altogether. I don't think anyone really thinks that we have to play all our attackers at once, there is plenty of space to be a little bit disappointed at the lack of attacking options in some games witout being completely gung ho.
Last edited:
The guy on the left is Ian broudie from the lightning seeds. Scouse mastermind who I think wrote the actual song. I used to love the lightning seeds, went to see them when they supported the beautiful South. Weird band really.England/Scotland in the same group like Euro 96
Frank Skinner should get publicly glassed, look at that shirt and fringe, i forget the doss cunt on the left (possibly Baddiel's brother)
But for some reason I really liked them, like way preferred them to oasis or blur.
My favourite britpop band was elastica. I got the t shirt.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
Not enough right backs