baboon2004 said:
What game was that then? Sorry, that moment of sporting immortality must have passed me by cos I've never heard of it, let alone it remaining long in my memory (or those of my friends who follow sport).
Anyway comparing the rugby 'world cup' with football is just silly. In rugby you have a grand total of five nations - england, france, south africa, australia and new zealand - who are going to win it, and the rest just make up the numbers. I think this World Cup is showing just what a truly global game football is. And while I see this 'the game is about glory' line you're spinning, it's not the full story. You say England's defeat against Brazil in 2002 was a shameful capitulation - well, maybe, maybe not. Perhaps they didn't have enough in the tank to compete with the team who went on to win the trophy. There's no shame there. Against Argentina in France '98 we played brilliantly with 10 men, but still went out. Does that 98 defeat live long in the memory? Or give succour in dark times? Eh, well, not that I've noticed. We still lost. And it still grates. But there you go. That's the way it's been with England for about as long as I can remember: medicore but victorious against the smaller nations, often glorious, but defeated against the bigger teams. With that record I'd settle, albeit reluctantly, for a decent run of results even if the performances aren't all that great.
