The World Cup Thread *******
- Thread starter alo
- Start date
IdleRich
IdleRich
Aaaaghh
So, predicted three out of four quarters correctly but the one I cared most about was wrong - perhaps I let my heart rule my head.
It's sickening to lose on penalties again but England have only themselves to blame for not winning the match outright. Eriksson got the tactics totally wrong again by putting out a side that was far too defensive in an attempt to nullify an almost non-existent (without Deco) Portuguese threat. With ten men England had better chances to win it and the England defence still looked completely inpenetrable. If Eriksson had had the confidence to play two strikers and start with (the excellent) Lennon they should have had more than enough to beat Portugal, instead Rooney was totally left on his own and the game drifted to stalemate. Of course, part of the reason that he didn't start with two strikers is we didn't have enough strikers in the squad which was a childish error that many people identified from the very beginning.
It's impossible to escape the conclusion (already stated above) that any success from England would be despite the manager not because of him. Most of the individual performances yesterday were good (Hargreaves especially, all of the defenders, Lennon, Crouch when he came on) yet they still weren't an attacking force. Gerrard was ok and only Lampard (again) was really poor, why didn't the manager have the confidence to see that we were the better team and take the game to Portugal from the off? It's frustrating to see such good players being hamstrung by the tactics. Rooney fucked up of course but indirectly I blame the system for that as well, it would never have happened if we had taken more strikers to Germany and played them against weaker teams like Portugal.
Haven't really mentioned Portugal much in that rant but they weren't very good. Ronaldo looked dangerous on the ball (that's all I'll say about him) and Figo was ok to start with but faded quickly. Maniche ran around a lot and the defence was organised in general although there were several bad lapses that could have cost them if the luck had gone the other way. They showed a shocking lack of ambition after England went down to ten and didn't have any ideas about how to make the extra man tell. With the suspended players back in the semi they will be better and will have to be if they are not to get soundly beaten.
ps I know penalties are almost random but it beggared belief that Lampard should take the first penalty, he's had a shocking tournament and his shooting has been awful, you need to score the first penalty so why put your worst player up first?
So, predicted three out of four quarters correctly but the one I cared most about was wrong - perhaps I let my heart rule my head.
It's sickening to lose on penalties again but England have only themselves to blame for not winning the match outright. Eriksson got the tactics totally wrong again by putting out a side that was far too defensive in an attempt to nullify an almost non-existent (without Deco) Portuguese threat. With ten men England had better chances to win it and the England defence still looked completely inpenetrable. If Eriksson had had the confidence to play two strikers and start with (the excellent) Lennon they should have had more than enough to beat Portugal, instead Rooney was totally left on his own and the game drifted to stalemate. Of course, part of the reason that he didn't start with two strikers is we didn't have enough strikers in the squad which was a childish error that many people identified from the very beginning.
It's impossible to escape the conclusion (already stated above) that any success from England would be despite the manager not because of him. Most of the individual performances yesterday were good (Hargreaves especially, all of the defenders, Lennon, Crouch when he came on) yet they still weren't an attacking force. Gerrard was ok and only Lampard (again) was really poor, why didn't the manager have the confidence to see that we were the better team and take the game to Portugal from the off? It's frustrating to see such good players being hamstrung by the tactics. Rooney fucked up of course but indirectly I blame the system for that as well, it would never have happened if we had taken more strikers to Germany and played them against weaker teams like Portugal.
Haven't really mentioned Portugal much in that rant but they weren't very good. Ronaldo looked dangerous on the ball (that's all I'll say about him) and Figo was ok to start with but faded quickly. Maniche ran around a lot and the defence was organised in general although there were several bad lapses that could have cost them if the luck had gone the other way. They showed a shocking lack of ambition after England went down to ten and didn't have any ideas about how to make the extra man tell. With the suspended players back in the semi they will be better and will have to be if they are not to get soundly beaten.
ps I know penalties are almost random but it beggared belief that Lampard should take the first penalty, he's had a shocking tournament and his shooting has been awful, you need to score the first penalty so why put your worst player up first?
nomos
Administrator
confused
I watched the game yesterday. I saw Rooney step on a guy's crotch, then shove his club teammate Cristiano Ronaldo. I saw Ronaldo play an amazing game and I don't remember him doing anything dirty.
So, why is it that people are so incredibly pissed off at him, saying he can't (better not) go back to Man U, etc? Did I miss something or are people just being childish, sore losers?
I watched the game yesterday. I saw Rooney step on a guy's crotch, then shove his club teammate Cristiano Ronaldo. I saw Ronaldo play an amazing game and I don't remember him doing anything dirty.
So, why is it that people are so incredibly pissed off at him, saying he can't (better not) go back to Man U, etc? Did I miss something or are people just being childish, sore losers?
F
foret
Guest
autonomicforthepeople said:
just the hive mind effect of millions of fairly unintelligent people being told by the likes of alan shearer that ronaldo is the cause of all their misfortune
the aforesaid geordie thug even suggested that rooney should attack ronaldo! the sum total of his sins amounts to some strange provocation in the tunnel (after which they were laughing together nervously) and complaining to the referee after rooney's assault (completely normal even for the honourable, upstanding, h'english premiership)
contrary to ignorant wankers on the bbc, he did not directly ask for a sending off by waving imaginary cards
it's worth considering that the pretty boy ronaldo gets the abuse while the lower middle classes' favourite chav is given a bye becuase that's what they expect of him
england were typically fucked over by ericksson but their fans seemingly deserve no better
I think the English fans give Rooney a pass on this one cos he's a world class player who's had every opportunity to perform utterly muted by a manager who has failed to make the most of his greatest asset. Also, whilst Ronaldo hads done noting wrong within the rules of the game, (and played a pretty exciting game all told) his utter smugness was rather insufferable wasn't it?
F
foret
Guest
gek-opel said:
how can being played in an unorthodox position justify what he did? naturally he shouldn't have been scrapping around the half way line, and this reflects the shittyness of the england midfield, but he _is_ a thug cunt who lost it for england
cristiano ronaldo was always seen as insufferably smug, as are most extravagantly gifted people with no apparent deficiencies ripe for popular condesecsion (simian physiognomy for example) and for his contempt for english footballing neanderthalism, even if his stepovers have a higher success rate than shearer's elbows
there really isn't a case to be made against him that isn't almost entirely dependant on post-facto rationalisations for another english fuckup
Er hang on, he did rush over to the ref completely needlessly, so what else would he have been saying other that trying get Rooney booked/sent off?
His smug wink shortly after can't have helped relations either.
I don't think Rooney will get any flak. It would never have happened if we'd have been playing a 4-4-2.
Rooney and Beckham going off just proved how wrong Sven got it all.
By going to two rows of 4 it became immediately clear how much more comfortable they were in that formation, and how we didn't infact need a holding player to protect the back 4 against what wasn't a great Portugese attack. We defended wonderfully with two rows of 4.
Plus, Rooney has never played up front on his own. Crouch has, quite regularly. Crouch is stupidly tall. Rooney's a fat potato (but a very good fat potato). Unsurprising, Crouch played well on his own, held the ball up well, maintained a high line, while Rooney wasn't really doing very much, so it's no wonder he got frustrated.
Lennon was far more effective than Becks, and gave us width rather than just balls straight down the middle.
It's pretty clear that we should have been playing:
Robinson
Neville Ferdinand Terry A. Cole
Lennon Gerrard Hargreaves J. Cole
Rooney
Crouch
With some experimentation around Lennon, Gerrard, Lampard, Hargreaves, J. Cole and Carrick, but sticking to a 4-4-2.
I just hope McClaren has the guts to drop Beckham.
Big Up Alan Green and 5Live for providing WAAAAY better commentary than BBC1. The wonders of digital.
His smug wink shortly after can't have helped relations either.
I don't think Rooney will get any flak. It would never have happened if we'd have been playing a 4-4-2.
Rooney and Beckham going off just proved how wrong Sven got it all.
By going to two rows of 4 it became immediately clear how much more comfortable they were in that formation, and how we didn't infact need a holding player to protect the back 4 against what wasn't a great Portugese attack. We defended wonderfully with two rows of 4.
Plus, Rooney has never played up front on his own. Crouch has, quite regularly. Crouch is stupidly tall. Rooney's a fat potato (but a very good fat potato). Unsurprising, Crouch played well on his own, held the ball up well, maintained a high line, while Rooney wasn't really doing very much, so it's no wonder he got frustrated.
Lennon was far more effective than Becks, and gave us width rather than just balls straight down the middle.
It's pretty clear that we should have been playing:
Robinson
Neville Ferdinand Terry A. Cole
Lennon Gerrard Hargreaves J. Cole
Rooney
Crouch
With some experimentation around Lennon, Gerrard, Lampard, Hargreaves, J. Cole and Carrick, but sticking to a 4-4-2.
I just hope McClaren has the guts to drop Beckham.
Big Up Alan Green and 5Live for providing WAAAAY better commentary than BBC1. The wonders of digital.
Yeah- the Sven problem of loving former big names cos their girlfriends hang out with his misses (or maybe its just utter craven lack of courage) has meant that brilliant and energetic players like Lennon were never in the bloody starting line up, whilst Beckham, now only good for 1 in 4 set pieces, was.
F
foret
Guest
this happens all the time in the premiership, rooney does it quite a lot
and he winked afterwards
this will be sufficient for him to get dozens of death threats and plentiful abuse, whilst rooney's gbh attempt is overlooked because, you know, the poor thing was frustrated
4/5/1 was the best formation england could play yesterday because crouch is shit, but that lineup should in effect be 4/3/2/1 (like portugal!) with wingers rather than a flat midfield (joe cole can do this, and obviously aaron lennon on the right)
ericksson wanted gerrard/lampard to be able to attack instead, but as with every game, the formation disintegrates after ten minutes, no carrick to distribute and g/l being astonishingly inept as they always are when playing together - so rooney clearly gets frustrated and shows what a vicious pikey cunt he is
GBH? You've obviously never had a night out in Nottingham, my friend.
Since the refereeing (and by extension, FIFA) in not only the Portugal game, but the ENTIRE tournament, has virtually encouraged and actively rewarded, pathetic, WWF style drama cheats - Portugal being chief sinners - I'm surprised Rooney didn't kick him into Euro' 08 and slash the team bus tyres.
Since the refereeing (and by extension, FIFA) in not only the Portugal game, but the ENTIRE tournament, has virtually encouraged and actively rewarded, pathetic, WWF style drama cheats - Portugal being chief sinners - I'm surprised Rooney didn't kick him into Euro' 08 and slash the team bus tyres.
IdleRich
IdleRich
Dunno about that, Crouch had a good game against Portugal and anyway the point is that Portugal were weak enough that if we had played any two strikers we would have beaten them. Obviously Eriksson got it wrong by not taking enough/the right strikers but that shouldn't have mattered on Saturday. There is no need to play a holding midfielder against a side so lacking in ambition when we have such a strong defence, 4-4-2 was the obvious way to play it tactically and because the players are familiar with it. It seems criminal that Lennon has frightened the life out of defenders when he's come on and yet only seems to be a back-up plan.
I think that GBH is a bit strong as well, fair enough he had a bit of a kick-out - at a guy who had just fouled him - right in front of the ref which means that you're bound to go but it wasn't especially nasty. It took me three replays before I could see what he had done.
I think that Ronaldo winking has pissed a lot of people off but who knows what it meant? I don't think him coming over had any effect on Rooney getting sent off.
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
England didn't deserve to win - it's just convenient that Rooney was sent off, as it allows certain people to start moaning on about how an extremely average performance was the work of ten 'lions' in the face of adversity.
Hargreaves was great, thus happily silencing all those twats who jumped on the bandwagon against him (um, probably including me at some stage...); Lennon was easily the most exciting player on the pitch; Beckham and Lampard were average to bad, whilst Gerrard seemed to go completely missing for long periods of the game. To be honest, Rooney was behaving like a twat, but he was rightfully frustrated at being asked to play a role that doesn't play to his strengths.
I'm just glad that Sven is finally being called what he has been all along: a charlatan with no record worth spekaing of when he has come up against quality teams (which barely ever happened in the qualifiers due to good luck). I mean, 2-2 against Macedonia? At home?
Hargreaves was great, thus happily silencing all those twats who jumped on the bandwagon against him (um, probably including me at some stage...); Lennon was easily the most exciting player on the pitch; Beckham and Lampard were average to bad, whilst Gerrard seemed to go completely missing for long periods of the game. To be honest, Rooney was behaving like a twat, but he was rightfully frustrated at being asked to play a role that doesn't play to his strengths.
I'm just glad that Sven is finally being called what he has been all along: a charlatan with no record worth spekaing of when he has come up against quality teams (which barely ever happened in the qualifiers due to good luck). I mean, 2-2 against Macedonia? At home?
IdleRich
IdleRich
They did. If you watched that game as a neutral who didn't know who either team was then you would have said that the blokes in white were (slightly) better, they had more chances and they had better chances. Also the maroon team had no ideas and no desire when they went a man up. Don't get me wrong though, being slightly better than a rubbish team is nothing to get excited about and it's what's happened with England in every game in the tournament.
I agree that having a man sent off isn't an excuse, part of the game is keeping your players on the pitch because it's harder without them. Seeing how average Portugal were after that is part of what makes it so annoying that we gave them the respect of concentrating more on negating them than playing our own game.
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
I didn't see much skill or desire ont he part of either team. As a neutral, I think I would have been shocked that those two teams were in a World Cup quarter-final. It beggars belief that Holland couldn't find a way past Portugal with Robben and Van Persie.
Yes, Eriksson's whole gameplan always seemed to involve nullifying the other team, rather than playing a high tempo game with quality players that I genuinely believe could've won us the World Cup. Can you imagine how good England could be with someone like Hiddink in charge?
Yes, Eriksson's whole gameplan always seemed to involve nullifying the other team, rather than playing a high tempo game with quality players that I genuinely believe could've won us the World Cup. Can you imagine how good England could be with someone like Hiddink in charge?
IdleRich
IdleRich
I think Deco was the brains of the team, with him they looked a different proposition. England had the easiest possible run to the quarter-final and they had the easiest quarter, made all the easier becuase Portugal were missing their star player. Although I still maintain England were slightly better than Portugal they blew it because they should have been miles better and they should have been able to do enough to guarantee that they didn't need penalties.
I think Scolari is vindicated in his decision not to become England manager, he would have been in an impossible position on Saturday. I can't say that he would be my dream manager anyway, knocking Sven's England out twice on penalties and once with a great Brazil team does not mean you're a tactical genius. On the other hand he would have probably been better than McClaren. Hiddink was the obvious best choice to me. As far as I can see the future looks bleak for English international football.
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
Forgot about Deco, weirdly enough. One of the world's great players. Was expecting more from Maniche on Saturday though.
I agree that Scolari is overrated - he's done little to mark him out as a tactical genius. Hiddink, on the other hand - with Holland, South Korea and Australia he worked near miracles, especially with the last two. Australia should consider themselves unlucky not to be looking at a World Cup semi-final right about now, with the relatively easy QF they would have had.
I agree that Scolari is overrated - he's done little to mark him out as a tactical genius. Hiddink, on the other hand - with Holland, South Korea and Australia he worked near miracles, especially with the last two. Australia should consider themselves unlucky not to be looking at a World Cup semi-final right about now, with the relatively easy QF they would have had.
IdleRich
IdleRich
Yeah Australia were very unlucky and Hiddink seems to always produce the goods. Having slated Scolari I guess you have to say that his teams have won every single world cup match they've played in so I won't criticise too much - at least until he loses which ought to be his very next game.
France were very good against Spain and excellent against Brazil. I enjoyed the romance of the fading great (Zidane) rousing himself one last time to see off the pretender to his crown (Ronaldinho) especially since in La Liga it's been the younger man who has had it all his own way.
France were very good against Spain and excellent against Brazil. I enjoyed the romance of the fading great (Zidane) rousing himself one last time to see off the pretender to his crown (Ronaldinho) especially since in La Liga it's been the younger man who has had it all his own way.
F
foret
Guest
this 'deserved to win' stuff is infuriating, even in defeat the english sense of entitlement is undimmed
this time founded on two fallacies - that they played well enough to win (an element of irreason there) - or that portugal had mediocre players and should have had the good grace to concede
1) they were absolute shit for 2/3 of normal time with 11 players, while portugal were doing reasonably well without any payoff
2) the portugal side were missing their best player, a playmaker to piss upon any of ingerlund's midfield numpties, and they were still strong enough to leave ferreira (a regular at chelsea) and simao as subs - individually they were not all that far behind england
they don't have any really good strikers though, and this has always cost them, so it isn't surprising that they couldn't find a way through a very defensive england formation when they were playing with a completely alien lineup (three wingers out of position and postiga doing fuck all)
neither side could claim any distinction, and the papers that hyped england to the skies now symbiotically feed the popular idiocy that england were sold down the river by some conniving yurpean pussies and the national self image is refreshed with more emetic crap about courageous defeats and thank god we've got a proper english mananger now and the lads did quality (not suggesting people here buy into this shit)
and the same sense of entitlement will likely fuck them for next 2 or 4 years cos the FA alienated hiddink by expecting him to go through the same interview process as allardyce and curbishley, while hiddink was busy with PSV and australia (see here)
Last edited:
foret said:
Think this is a bit much. There's no denying that Ferdinand, Terry, Ashley Cole, Gerrard, Lampard and Rooney (and Becks back when he was any cop) can all be described as world class players, that would get in to pretty much any top European club team.
Player for player, there aren't many better sides in the tournament. That isn't media manipulated guff - it's almost an undeniable fact.