|
I like to see a few football matches once in a while and am looking forward seeing England and Holland perform.But are we ever going to move on,players visiting Auswitch concentration camp.I have worked with people who survived these camps and listened to their experiences which wasn't pleasant.Then the rascist chants against some of the Dutch players but is anybody surprised?They knew this would happen.I wonder how young Germans feel about having their noses rubbed in history which they have no part off.
|
|
Great banner some Irish fans had outside a bar in Poland, "Angela Merkel thinks we're at work".
|
|
Dunno Dutchie - let's hope they have learnt from their past and moved on. Sadly the past keeps repeating itself and we don't learn, we're horrifically blood-thirsty spices.
|
>> the past keeps repeating itself - we're horrifically blood-thirsty spices.
Ah! I se you have visited my local curry house as well.
|
"I like to see a few football matches once in a while and am looking forward seeing England and Holland perform"
Agree, though not a great football fan. But why do main channels have to be taken over by football? BBC1 tonight had Poland v Greece and ITV had Russia v Czech (?)
What proportion of the General public are that interested in these matches - why not stick them on BBC4 and ITV 4?
Wonder what channel the Test match v W Indies is on?
What channel will England v S Africa rugby union be on?
Are we all obsessed by football?
|
With regard to your more important point Dutchie about Auschwitz and racist chants.
I think it is a good thing that they visit these places. They may know little about these events - history teaching is not what it was! Maybe it will bring a realisation of the evils of racism in the same way that young people should visit the WW1 cemeteries in N France and view the graves of all those young men who died to help them realise the evils of war. On the occasions I have visited the WW1 battlefields and also Oradour sur Glane, I have been surprised by the number of Germans who are there (through their own choice) and, of course, there is no reason why they shouldn't be - there are some huge German cemeteries on the Somme also - young men who also gave their lives in a cause.
You could argue that these places can be very emotional and depressing - they bring more than a tear to your eye - and this might not be the best preparation for a football tournament.
I am very surprised that the Ukraine (or is it just Ukrainian football supporters??) has such a reputation for racism given what went on there in WW2 and during the Stalin years.
Regards
P
Last edited by: PhilW on Fri 8 Jun 12 at 21:20
|
|
You have made some good points Phil.Something to think about.
|
I'm not at all sure it was a good idea to make the footer players visit Auschwitz, for several reasons.
Quite a few of them will have no profound awareness of what Auschwitz was about. Some when 'enlightened' won't care much, but others may be upset. Is the eve of a big tournament the right moment from the players' point of view?
Some football players may have difficulty linking Nazi antiSemitism to the sort of racism some of them experience (or practise!) on or off the pitch.
When we were in Prague my wife and I didn't take long to decide to give Auschwitz a miss. But we had been well versed in all that appalling stuff more or less from the time it happened. Some young football players might learn something they don't already know from a visit. But not just before a tournament.
|
I am not drunk (completely sober) but I have woken up at at this hour due to severe tooth ache after an extraction.
Anyway a few years back I have became very interested in the Nazi's and what happened at the concentration camps. I spent a couple of weeks reading up about it all. I was aware of it before then, but it really hit me the more research I did on it. What happened was truly disgusting and upsets me that humans could do that, the sad thing is this sort of thing still goes on in a much lesser scale in some countries.
I watched Panorama before and if true it is truly shocking that the police in these countries just turned a blind eye to the racism especially in Ukraine. I am not sure the same violence will erupt in the Euro though but I would not want to be an ethnic minority visiting that country.
|
True story.
Back in 2003, England played in Durban against the South African football side.
Management arranged a 'dual' visit to jahannesburg - 45 minutes by air - for the players, to meet a certain Mr Mandela.
Several of the England players declined this kind offer, as they were 'tired', and decided to stay in their hotel and relax instead. Unbelievably, many of these players were of Afro-Carribean origin.
True story #2.
At one stage, a player for a certain South London club received an unexpected call-up to the England squad. He was most narked - he'd booked a trip to Disneyland for him and his girlfriend, and now would not only miss out, but would lose money! After some persuasion from other players - including a South African national captain, who was at the club at the time - he decided that wearing the three lions and showing a bit of pride in the nation wasn't such a bad thing after all.
|
>> With regard to your more important point Dutchie about Auschwitz and racist chants.
>> I think it is a good thing that they visit these places.
I think its a waste of time. Not for peoples in general, but for footballers (read professional sportsmen) in particular. They are too self obsessed, too vacuous, and frankly too thick to see anything other than a pile of bricks and rusty barbed wire.
If anyone seriously thinks that the players are disturbed by racist chanting they need to think again, they only raise the point to big up he personal profile and ratchet up the sponsorship scale. Anton Ferdinand only complained about John Terry because his profile as a not very good footballer was not that high.
|
Major scheduling problems today:
Tennis from Paris
Cycling from France
Formula 1 from Canada
plus 2 football matches
|
|
You forgot the Rugby - Wales v. Australia and the TT !!!
|
The England team visited an orphanage in Poland today. "It's heartbreaking to see their sad little faces with no hope" said Igor, aged 6.
(Stolen with pride !)
|
Poland was held back by Russia.The country is moving on.I don't follow this R.P.Why visiting a orphanage?It's like the Polish football team visiting a orphanage in the UK.Young people in care.
What did Igor aged six say?
|
It was a joke, Dutchie. (actually stolen from the 2010 World Cup here).
One thinks the quote about the sad faces is from an England footballer, about the orphans.
But it isn't. It is from a small child who knows that England are rubbish, and won't do well.
|
|
Thanks Ian,never to old to learn.>:)
|
No problem.
By the way, i'll be cheering for the Dutch once England get knocked out!
|
MOOOOS! Can I please change this post?
*grin*
|
|
Good job the Netherlands football defensive coach is not in charge of the Netherlands flood defences.
|
Holland was rubbish the Danes deserved to win.Can't see this bunch beating the Germans.We live in hope.>:) England should do better on monday.
|
>> Holland was rubbish the Danes deserved to win. Can't see this bunch beating the Germans.We live in hope.>:) England should do better on monday.
>>
>>
>>
There is definitely an optimist in our midst.
However, it is probably better to expect little and then be pleasantly surprised. The opinions in the Press & TV before the World Cup was that England would WIN or make the semis / final, when the rest of the world knew the England team were poor (at best!).
I have nothing against supporting your team but 2 years ago the Press and TV were very much overstating the quality of a poor English team and their miracle Italian manager.
|
I'm not a fan of football at all, but I think Scotland failed to even qualify, didn't they?
Pat
|
>> I'm not a fan of football at all, but I think Scotland failed to even
>> qualify, didn't they?
>>
>> Pat
>>
Scotland fans are more realistic about the poor league and national team,
England fans still have to wake up to the reality that they are 2nd division - the Premiership and the quality of English Club sides is based / supported on European and African imports!
|
>> Scotland fans are more realistic about the poor league and national team,
I will just say two words. Ali's Army.
|
>> the rest of the world knew the England team
>> were poor (at best!).
>
FIFA didn't think that way, the England team were seeded, so they assumed they would make the 1/4 finals as a minimum
>> I have nothing against supporting your team but 2 years ago the Press and TV
>> were very much overstating the quality of a poor English team and their miracle Italian
>> manager.
No-one is overstating the chances or quality of the team this time round. In fact everyone is convinced they will do nothing.
|
FIFA didn't think that way, the England team were seeded
Wonder how much that cost someone ? FIFA is corrupt and would seed a flower bed if the price was right.
|
|
FIFA hate the English FA and the English press so much, no money on earth could buy us any favours.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 10 Jun 12 at 09:02
|
|
There is always that. Hating the English press is understandable I suppose given the image they've managed to project.
|
|
And they are really peed off by all the money that flows into the English game, that they can't get their grubby little mitts on.
|
The Dutch team arn't that much better either we get to the final and lose.They have the wrong coach in my opinion.Johan Cruif was always wanted but he never stepped up to the plate.
Good individual players but not a team.I hope they don't lose their temper again. Against Germany on wednesday like the last time they played against the old enemy.
|
old enemy.
Funny to read that Dutchie - the same term is used in Wales "Yr hen elyn" when they play England in the rugby...!
|
|
You have to have enemies Rob.We respect the Duitsers but they are still the old enemy.>:)
|
>> old enemy.
>>
>> Funny to read that Dutchie - the same term is used in Wales "Yr hen
>> elyn" when they play England in the rugby...!
>>
Who do you support when the white shirts come to Cardiff?
|
|
Can't seem to find my red beret, it's a wee while since I had cause to look it out!
|
|
A FB friend's friend drew Brazil in the Office Sweepstake - she works for the council...:-)
|
|
We're winning!! (Can we stop now?)
|
>> A FB friend's friend drew Brazil in the Office Sweepstake - she works for the
>> council...:-)
>>
That's a tough ask for Brazil though, since they are not even in the tournament! :-)
(Mind you, they probably have more chance than England)
|
>> What proportion of the General public are that interested in these matches - why not
>> stick them on BBC4 and ITV 4?
There are 92 league clubs and thousands of amateur clubs, pub teams, works teams...throughout England and Wales plus all the teams in the rest of the U.K. I could be wrong but I don't believe there's another sport with the same level of support/passing interest.
>> Wonder what channel the Test match v W Indies is on?
>> What channel will England v S Africa rugby union be on?
>> Are we all obsessed by football?
>>
Probably due to schooling legacy. Rugby was something public schoolboys played when I was at school. We had football from September through to Christmas, 6 weeks of X-country after Christmas, AAA's athletics badges which ran through to half-term after Easter then finished off the school year with cricket as the football season had finished and we had to try something else, rugby was still a winter sport then.
Last edited by: gmac on Mon 11 Jun 12 at 18:24
|
Rugby sort of "class" varies from country to country in Wales and France it's very much a working class game if such a thing exists these days.
I find myself hoping that England actually wins (a notch up from my usual apathy) - I rather like the new coach - he's been derided by the press, in particular the dreadfully offensive comments by the Sun...so he's an underdog so gains my natural respect.
|
England got a draw against France.Good defence by England,French had a few more changes.
|
>> England got a draw against France.
Technically that's a victory.
|
"There are 92 league clubs and thousands of amateur clubs, pub teams, works teams...throughout England and Wales plus all the teams in the rest of the U.K. I could be wrong but I don't believe there's another sport with the same level of support/passing interest."
No argument from me on that point gmac (although I do remember reading somewhere that angling was the UK's biggest participation sport and I don't remember it being on prime time TV! ;-) )
My main point was not that England v France shouldn't be on prime time but that Friday/Saturday we had Russia/Czech, Poland/Greece, Netherlands /Denmark (sorry Dutchie!) and Germany/Portugal. Tonight there is Sweden/Ukraine (admittedly our group so result is of interest). But I wonder how many of the population were glued to their seats wondering how Poland v Greece would pan out? So why not put it on BBC/ITV4?
"Rugby was something public schoolboys played when I was at school."
Having played and watched rugby in Yorks, Lancs, E.Midlands and North East over the past 50 years that doesn't ring true with me! Nothing very "Public School" about playing on a reclaimed slag heap in pouring rain in Feb in Wigan, or against Ebbw Vale when the steel works were in full swing - those guys were all 15 stone of solid muscle and as hard as nails - and it hurt! But the beer and hospitality afterwards made the concussion easier to bear!
By the way, also played and enjoyed a lot of soccer!!
Regards
P
|
|
Presumably as far as ITV are concerned they show the footy because they make money from it - they can charge more for advertising because more people are watching it.
|
When live football is shown on terrestrial channels it regularly top the viewing figures. See the link viewing figures for a league cup match earlier in the year. Compared with drama it is cheap so popularity and cheapness make a fairly compelling reason to broadcast.
www.combinedmind.com/news/football-tops-ratings-wednesday-nights-viewing
|
|
Fair enough - I'd have watched the footy rather than any of the other stuff as well!!
|
>> Presumably as far as ITV are concerned they show the footy because they make money
>> from it - they can charge more for advertising because more people are watching it.
And even those of us with no access to cable and a moral aversion to Murdoch have all the Freeview channels so it's only really a question of placings in the EPG and loss of what's being displaced by the footie. But we always lost a month's worth to either World Cup or Europe in a biennial cycle for as long as I can remember (Mexico 70)
|
"Mexico 70"
Now that wor proper footy - Moore, Banks, Pele, Tostao, Gerson etc(?)
|
>> I do remember reading somewhere that angling was the UK's biggest participation sport and I don't remember it being on prime time TV!
Angling, along with snooker and darts are not sports.
They are pastimes. By definition a sport requires a degree of violent physical exertion. You can't play a sport wearing a bow tie and a waistcoat!
|
They are pastimes. By definition a sport requires a degree of violent physical exertion.
Who's definition is that? Hunting, shooting and fishing have surely defined the meaning of sport for many people for centuries.
|
>> Who's definition is that?
Well, for a start it is my definition. Do you seriously believe that darts is a sport?
The OED says "Sport. An athletic, especially outdoor, activity".
|
Sport is a very loosely defined word - there's not much athletic about sports cars but we all accept the term.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Tue 12 Jun 12 at 09:29
|
>> Who's definition is that?
>>
;-)
www.elearnenglishlanguage.com/difficulties/whoswhose.html
p.s. I do find it hard following your posts where you quote from other posts, but do not use any form of quotation marks to indicate the quoted part of a previous post.
Last edited by: John H on Tue 12 Jun 12 at 09:50
|
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone. "It means just what I choose it to mean - neither more or less."
|
|
Darts and snooker are sports, that's why they're in the sports section of the newspapers.
|
|
As good a definition as any.
|
|
For me, Darts and Snooker are very athletic! - Stamp-Collecting, now there's a Pastime!
|
|
My favourite sport is Egyptian P.T.
|
>> "Rugby was something public schoolboys played when I was at school."
>> Having played and watched rugby in Yorks, Lancs, E.Midlands and North East over the past
>> 50 years that doesn't ring true with me!
Obviously from the southern bit of the North East :-)
It wasn't until I moved down to Sheffield that I really became aware of rugby and the different flavours.
>> By the way, also played and enjoyed a lot of soccer!!
How did you find America ? I played a bit of soccer when I worked in New England.
|
I played amateur rugby league gmac.Mike Smith who played for Great Britain used to train us.
Smashing lad,I used to cycle home with him.Never been to New England looks like a nice place.
|
My wife's cousing Kevin Bo Bo Watson used to play for Hull Kingston Rovers.He died aged 46.
Her uncle was Athur Bedford he was Captain of Hull Fc and Kingston Rovers.Tough came Rugby League.Got smacked a few times..;) One off the most famous rugby league player is John Whiteley still lives in Hull.A gentleman and a scholar.
|
>> I played amateur rugby league gmac.
I used to drink with some lads who played league.
Funny as anyone I can remember with borderline psycho tendencies. Due to their size off the pitch they were very considered in their actions. Challenging looks though, ears looked like they'd been through a mincer and noses all over their faces. Brilliant blokes !
|
|
Borderline psycho tendencies I like that.>;) Nutcases you mean .Good memories.
|
>> How did you find America ?
That's easy.. its a large land mass the other side of the Atlantic..... Can't really miss it!
|
|
Being there swiss toney.I found them ok if you like burgers.
|
>> >> How did you find America ?
>>
>> That's easy.. its a large land mass the other side of the Atlantic..... Can't really
>> miss it!
>>
Scientist - My findings are pointless when taken out of context.
Daily Mail - Scientist claims "findings are pointless".
:-)
|
"That's easy.. its a large land mass the other side of the Atlantic..... Can't really miss it!"
I think Christopher Columbus might disagree!
Phil
P.S. Where IS America? Can't find it in a list of world countries!
|
|
America is hiding in the same list as Great Britain.
|
|
Isn't GB just a part of a country - the United Kingdom?
|
As you say, doesn't exist in any list of countries but we have Team GB for the 'lympics, a rugby team that represents GB but no entry in a list of countries.
My passport indicates the UK consists of GB and Northern Ireland does that also mean England, Wales and Scotland don't exist either yet we've all heard of them.
Last edited by: gmac on Tue 12 Jun 12 at 20:53
|
|
The official term I think is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. GB is the England/Wales/Scotland mainland and off islands (Anglesey, Wight, Scillies, Hebrides etc.). NI, being part of the Island of Ireland, justifies a separate mention.
|
"NI, being part of the Island of Ireland, justifies a separate mention."
And both are part of The British Isles!
So, GB is "mainland" - Eng, Wales, Scot - though also hundreds of islands included!
UK is Great Britain plus NI
British Isles is UK plus Ireland (Geographical rather than politial term)??
|
Team GB for Olympics is officially Team GB and Northern Ireland ?
GB Rugby League Team is 90% players from W. Yorks, S Lancs and a bit of Cheshire!
British Lions RU team is British and Irish Lions (plus a few New Zealanders, South Africans and Australians whose forebears were British?)
Same for England cricket team (why is that team not GB for tests?)
What will UK be known as if Scotland becomes independent - prob still UK but it was only that after uniting of kingdoms of Scotland and England wasn't it?
If certain politicians have their way all this confusion will soon be solved - United States of Europe!
|
>> United States of Europe!
>>
>>
Hang on, isn't this where we came in? Can't have the United States, some other non-country has that one. We could have the Unreferendumed States of Europe.
I wonder why Northern Ireland gets a special mention under the United Kingdom when they have an Assembly the same as Wales. Scotland has a Parliament the same as England.
Last edited by: gmac on Tue 12 Jun 12 at 21:47
|
"I wonder why Northern Ireland gets a special mention under the United Kingdom"
Don't think it does, does it? - only separate mention under GB ("mainland") and NI???
|
Could be my interpretation but Passport says United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland which to my mind translates as:
UK = GB + NI
|
I see what you mean now - why doesn't it say UK of England, Scotland, Wales and NI?
Don't know except that they must assume that everyone knows that GB is Eng, Scot and Wales. Wonder if it is to definitely differentiate NI from Ireland?
|
Just a word of Caution! the word "Olym****" (world-wide games) has been mentioned a few times, but according to a report on AOL a couple of days ago, a film director was banned from using that word in his new film, by the "Olympic- Committee" as the word was their copy-write and if he used it they would consider it a breach!!
:shakes head in disbelief:
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/06/07/noel-clarke-furious-over-_n_1576796.html
Last edited by: devonite on Wed 13 Jun 12 at 11:36
|
|
Maybe he should call it the Olly games or similair.I wonder if Seb Coe has anything to do with this.He won't be short of a penny.>:)
|
"Maybe he should call it the Olly games or similair"
How about the "Olympics GB, or Olympics UK, English Games , British Olympic Games - hang on, who was granted the Games? GB, UK? - London wasn't it? So, since Olympic Games were named after where they were held - Olympia, these games should be "The London Games" shouldn't they? Feel free to use "Olympic" since Olympia is unlikely to object!!
|
|
Meanwhile - back at the football - it's been a great tournament so far - hope it continues so.
|
|
England only need to score another 54 goals and my new TV won't have cost anything.
|
|
Van Persie just scored a little bit of pride back>:)
|
Well, I've never really got football but finding myself with really nothing better to do and having been assured by a colleague today that the Holland v Germany match would be an outstanding example of the beautiful game I forced myself to watch it.
Most of my suspicions of impending induced catatonia were confirmed. Three or four seconds of excitement maybe while a German ( ? ) called Speedy Gonzales or something kicked the ball in the right direction and a couple while his Dutch opposite number Hertz Van Rental did the same for a brief moment. This all punctuated by interminable, apparently random and pointless passing of the ball back and forth, unneccessary petulance by the players and feigned agony whenever anyone so much as brushed passed them. The crowd chanting predictably inanely and the commentators struggling to find any new metaphors for kicking a ball back and forth.
Sorry chaps, still don't get it.
Deeply and utterly boring.
|
>> Well, I've never really got football
>> Sorry chaps, still don't get it.
>>
>> Deeply and utterly boring.
>>
I'm the same.
The only time I will attempt to watch that utterly boring rubbish, is if I can't sleep.
5 minutes and I'll be well gone.
I've even fallen asleep in the bar of a busy bowling alley....
|
Not only that, Emmerdale hasn't been on this week yet!
Pat
|
Clouds and silver linings spring to mind Pat...
:-)
|
>> Emmerdale hasn't been on this week yet!
On tonight.
Can't wait for the footy to be over though. Get home from work, and it's on the TV, then 20 mins of news, followed by more footy, then another quick round up of the news, follwed by the highlights of the earlier matches that were played - GRRRR
Can't see the appeal in watching 22 overpaid blokes kicking a bag of air around.
|
|
I guess we all agree that Germany is gonna make it :-)
|
|
Nagging me now - the music played at the start of the ITV coverage (theme music) Classical I know - Rossini ?? Help driving me potty !
|
>> Chikoffsky
Err.. AKA Prokofiev
Whoops! - edited out my original post which said 'Peter and the Wolf'
Last edited by: Focus on Thu 14 Jun 12 at 12:46
|
>> Whoops! - edited out my original post which said 'Peter and the Wolf'
But that doesn't make sense - I used the 'quote original' button giving the >>, so where has the post I quoted gone to? Confused.
|
|
Holland meshed up.No good playing fancy football against Germany.Tackle hard upset them show who is boss thats the way to do it.
|
Graham Taylor was the manager when England lost to Sweden.
Sun Headline Swedes 2 Turnips 1
www.onthisfootballday.com/football-history/june-17-swedes-2-turnips-1.php
|
>> I and am looking
>> forward seeing England and Holland perform.
well... England certainly produced the goods tonight.
I was quite expressed.
|
>> well... England certainly produced the goods tonight.
>>
>> I was quite expressed.
Err... me too, thought it was all over when they went a goal down, but they pulled it back, and more.
However, not wanting to be a party-pooper, are Sweden that good?
Last edited by: Focus on Fri 15 Jun 12 at 22:20
|
No.
Expect another quarterfinal exit, with that flat defence England had tonight.
|
>> Expect another quarterfinal exit
A quaterfinal is a bonus! :)
Last edited by: Focus on Fri 15 Jun 12 at 22:32
|
|
Do you think bringing Rooney back for the next game is a good idea now? There's always a danger he might get himself sent off, and the current squad haven't been doing too badly.
|
England won and they only can get better.We haven't got to many individual stars like some teams.
Rooney will play he can make things happen a great player.Iam not sure if he plays the next game very difficult to leave him out.
|
>> England won and they only can get better.
If only that were true...
>> Rooney will play he can make things happen
Yes - like the ref reaching into his pocket.
:)
Last edited by: Focus on Fri 15 Jun 12 at 23:32
|
|
Come on Focus lets be positive.The Dutch team are crap.I've got to believe in the England team.
|
>> Come on Focus lets be positive.The Dutch team are crap.I've got to believe in the
>> England team.
Sorry Dutchie, old habits die hard. I have been pleasantly surprised by England's performances so far - no. not brilliant ('like watching Everton versus Stoke' the pundit said about last night's match on Radio 4 this morning). But we haven't had any goalkeeping howlers or similar sorts of things that we usually get in the big games. Keep it up boys!
|
|
We need to change our playing style, tis no wonder we are not a threat like we used to be! - the other night I missed the first half of Germany v Holland, but in the second half I noticed that even when under a bit of pressure, the Germans never made a single pass-back to their Keeper, not one, zilch, nothing! Last night I watched England v Sweden (up until the first goal, when our telly decided to lose signal due to rain!) and in the first 24mins England had had 9 shots at their own goal, and only 2 at the oppositions! - Sweden had had 1 shot at both goals in comparison!
|
I thought you played football to your own strengths. England try to play like Germany, Holland or Spain and they will get mullered every time.
Fit men by no doubt but not in the same league as some of the other teams there. Milner is another Chris Waddle who looks like he's already played 90mins. walking out onto the pitch before kick-off.
|
|
FWIW BBC HD (Freeview 54) is showing England's women playing Holland in a qualifier for next year's Euros now (kick-off 5:15?).
|
>> I thought you played football to your own strengths. England try to play like Germany,
>> Holland or Spain and they will get mullered every time.
England would never be able to pass like Spain. I find them exciting to watch - they keep the pace up. I can never understand why England pass to someone already surrounded by the opposition, They are just asking to be tackled. Spain gets away with it because they are faster.
|
"England would never be able to pass like Spain"
Where has this skill gone? If you watch the old clips of England in Mexico 1970 (links above)then they (the likes of Charlton, Peters, Moore, Newton, Cooper, Lee, Hurst etc) passed the ball, kept possession and even "dribbled" (now there's a word you don't hear often now!!) and beat men. Is it because defenders are so much more skillful now? Or has the art of beating a man through deception and skill on the ball, and passing been lost?
And I've not even mentioned the opposition - the likes of Beckenbauer, Vogts, Seeler, Muller, Overath,
and then there were the Brazilians - Jairzinho, Pele, Tostao, Rivelino, Gerson, Carlos-Alberto who were brilliant, and beat Italians in a fantastic final.
Catch the games on you-tube.
Sorry to mention 1970 World Cup again in thread but as far as I'm concerned, this was the peak - sublime skills - downhill all the way from there!!!
Well done England so far though!
And the rugby yesterday was brill - bad luck Irish and Welsh, good fight back by England but we just ain't got the power to beat those Boks!
P
|
>> England would never be able to pass like Spain.
>>
England pass just as well as Spain. What they don't do anywhere near as well is run off the ball and find space, so no matter how accurate the passes are after the third one the receiver is surrounded by opposition players and in trouble. Watch their next game and you'll see what I mean.
|
>> Watch their next game and you'll see what I mean.
Will do RR.
|
>>
>> >> England would never be able to pass like Spain.
>> >>
>> England pass just as well as Spain. What they don't do anywhere near as well
>> is run off the ball and find space, so no matter how accurate the passes
>> are after the third one the receiver is surrounded by opposition players and in trouble.
>> Watch their next game and you'll see what I mean.
And the subsequent loss of possession means they have to chase the ball or back pedal. An England player runs around far more than the others, getting nowhere and getting nackered.
|
|
The England players are used to running around.That is the English game.I wish the Dutch did a bit more running around with some of the players they have.No hope me thinks.
|
>> The England players are used to running around.That is the English game.
Thats the problem, they have been running around with no break since last september.
|
|
Do they? the England team, look knackered at the end to me.
|
|
Being knackered is a good sign always a indication that the players give all.And the heat didn't help,but that counts for both teams.
|
Watching England play football is like watching someone play FIFA 2012 on a PlayStation who hasn't yet mastered the controls.
They're running everywhere except where they are meant too.
|
Rooney scored.Now England against Italy.England had a bit of luck which they deserved.
It will be a scrappy game against Italy,lots of pretend injuries by the Italians but England will win.>;)
|
Thrashed 'em! Great result :)
Pity though - I took up a Quidco offer of £20 cashback for a £10 bet with PaddyPower, and the only decent odds were on Ukraine winning. If England had lost 3-1 I'd be £340 better off!
However, part of the promotion was getting your losing stake back if Rooney scored, so I'm still £20 up, and there's also another free £20 bet (although IIRC that £20 isn't included in your winnings if you do win). I suspect the odds on England winning the next game might be a bit longer... (sorry Dutchie I'm being realistic negative again :)
Last edited by: Focus on Wed 20 Jun 12 at 14:22
|
"England had a bit of luck which they deserved."
Hmmmmm. Only saw second half but (OK call me pessimist) seemed like Ukraine had all the possession, skills and wasted chances. The better team lost??
Not sure that England "deserved the bit of luck", especially since the whole world bar 1 blind ref and 1 blind line judge (or whatever they are called) saw Ukraine score a goal. Not that it would have stopped qualification.
But, as they say, it's the result that counts. Are we as good as Italy, Spain, Germany etc? If we keep winning - yes!
|
>> Hmmmmm. Only saw second half but (OK call me pessimist) seemed like Ukraine had all
>> the possession, skills and wasted chances. The better team lost??
We played better in the second half - they were all over us in the first
|
>>
>> Not sure that England "deserved the bit of luck", especially since the whole world bar
>> 1 blind ref and 1 blind line judge (or whatever they are called) saw Ukraine
>> score a goal.
>>
The referee and his assitants had also missed the fact that one of the Ukraine players was offside, so if the goal had been awarded it would have been an injustice against England. As for possession, you get no points for that, only for sticking the ball between the posts. We did and they didn't.
|
Still not sure how anyone can get so excited about a sport where so little happens for so long. No wonder the crowd have to fill in the gaps by chanting inanely. Must be a technique for staying awake.
Even in cricket, which can also fairly swiftly remove the will to live, someone scores a point now and then.
:-)
|
Italy would have been robbed if they hadn't gone through yesterday. They were by far the superior side. England weren't even playing in the second half. England goal kick, immediate possession by Italy, run circles round England, shoot. Repeat ad nauseum.
Usual story from England - we can play as a team, we can pass the ball around, we can create chances, we can perform. But we can't do any of it for a full 90 minutes. In fact, we couldn't do it for 45 yesterday.
Italy should have had it sewn up 2-0 by the final whistle.
|
"Italy should have had it sewn up 2-0 by the final whistle. "
But they didn't. Football is as much (if not more) about defending as it is about attacking - just ask any Italian soccer coach - and England's defence was superb. Not so their attack unfortunately.
|
...and England's defence was superb. Not so their attack unfortunately...
Agreed.
England got what they deserved, a draw in play and a defeat on penalties.
|
England are in the 2nd division of International sides.
(Scotland is 3/4th division but we know that!)
English Media have been more realistic in Euros than in the SA World Cup, which is a good sign and mybe the team can be built on realism rather than the sandy foundations in the recent past.
Must go, I have my red/white tunic and chain mail head gear to return to the dress wear hire shop.
|
>> England are in the 2nd division of International sides.
>>
>> (Scotland is 3/4th division but we know that!)
It depends how big you want your divisions to be. I would guess we are equal 6th best with France.
World? Pop brazil and argentina onto the top of the rung and I guess that makes us equal 8th.
So we should make the 1/4 finals of any contest, and thats about where we always get to. Its always been that way apart from the blip of 1966 - 1970. Why the press always hypes us above that is beyond me.
|
I must have been watching a completely different game to all the "experts".
I saw an Italian that, admittedly, held onto the ball well with endless passing in the midfield, but then primarily resorted to long balls into Ballotelli or shots from well outside the box.
England looked just as likely to score as Italy for most of the match, and seemed far more able to break through the opposition's defence, rather than hoofing long balls like some Italian version of the Dog and Duck B team.
Of course, because of all the passing in midfield and the long shots, Italy look good from a statistical point of view, but you don't get extra points for passing or long shots that the keeper easily deals with.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics...
|
>> I must have been watching a completely different game to all the "experts".
Clearly.
|
>> >> I must have been watching a completely different game to all the "experts".
>>
>> Clearly.
As usual, insightful analysis from Zero.
"err...well, Alan Hansen said it, so it must be true..."
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Mon 25 Jun 12 at 12:18
|
I was merely agreeing with you, you have a problem with that?
|
>> I was merely agreeing with you, you have a problem with that?
Oh, do excuse me. I had the crazy idea that you didn't like the conclusion I came to, but were unable to actually refute any of my reasoning, and so chose a wisecrack instead in the hope downplaying my conclusion.
Whatever was I thinking?
|
>> >> I was merely agreeing with you, you have a problem with that?
>>
>> Oh, do excuse me. I had the crazy idea that you didn't like the conclusion
>> I came to, but were unable to actually refute any of my reasoning, and so
>> chose a wisecrack instead in the hope downplaying my conclusion.
>>
>> Whatever was I thinking?
No you were right. Your conclusion that you were watching a different match is entirely correct.
That must be the only logical explanation for your conclusion, therefore there is nothing to refute as the rest of the world was clearly watching a different match. In the match you watched could you tell us how many goal chances each team had?
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 25 Jun 12 at 12:53
|
>> That must be the only logical explanation for your conclusion, therefore there is nothing to
>> refute as the rest of the world was clearly watching a different match. In the
>> match you watched could you tell us how many goal chances each team had?
So, you agree that you aren't able to refute my reasoning.
Perhaps you didn't understand it. For example you raise the issue of shot on goals, well you call them goal chances, but I assume you mean shots on goal.
I explained that a very large number of those shots were long range, and easily handled by Hart.
If you'd have been playing, you could probably have easily hoofed the ball hopelessly at the goal a number of times too.
England likely made about as many real chances as Italy did.
But then they don't record "real chances" as an easily understood statistic, so I can understand your confusion.
A ball hoofed 50 yards and easily gathered by a keeper who has watched it all the way, will be counted as a shot on target, whereas a ball nicked off the end of a striker's foot after scything his way through the defence, and just before he knocks it in from 6 yards, is not counted.
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Mon 25 Jun 12 at 13:55
|
>> >> That must be the only logical explanation for your conclusion, therefore there is nothing
>> to
>> >> refute as the rest of the world was clearly watching a different match. In
>> the
>> >> match you watched could you tell us how many goal chances each team had?
>>
>> So, you agree that you aren't able to refute my reasoning.
Yes I agree i can't refuse your reasoning, because I was watching a different match from you. In fact you were the ONLY person watching that match.
Nothing more to say really.
|
>> Yes I agree i can't refuse your reasoning because I was watching a different match
>> from you. In fact you were the ONLY person watching that match.
>>
>> Nothing more to say really.
There's not an original thought floating around in that head of yours is there Zero? :)
"No, I'm not going to try to refute your observations, everybody else says that the Sun revolves around the Earth, and that's good enough for me!"
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Mon 25 Jun 12 at 17:11
|
|
Well as you are clearly on a different planet, thats a very stupid comparison isn't it.
|
>> Well as you are clearly on a different planet, thats a very stupid comparison isn't
>> it.
No. I reckon it's a pretty valid comparison given that the only insight you seem to be able to bring is "everybody knows Italy outplayed England".
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Mon 25 Jun 12 at 19:20
|
No, thats not what I said now is it. You admitted that your view of the game was so different to everyone else's, including mine, that you concluded that you must have been watching a different game. I merely agreed with you.
Now I rate your footballing knowledge about as low as the fluff and crap in the gaps of my floorboards, since reinforced as it happens, I see no point in destroying your fantasy view of the game.
Either that, or you exist in a parallel universe that sometimes interferes with and breaks into ours. Given that you think the sun revolves around the world, that possibility should not be discounted. And whose to say in your world it doesn't, and Italy were rubbish.
|
OK, you're just getting silly now Zero, and maybe a little irate.
Unless you actually have some insight other than "everybody is the whole wide world agrees with me", I suggest you give it up now.
|
No, everyone in the whole world disagrees with you.
I have nothing to give up, I have not engaged with your views.
|
>> No, everyone in the whole world disagrees with you.
Even if you someone knew what everybody in the world was thinking (which you don't), and even if they all happened to be thinking the same thing (which they aren't), that doesn't mean they are right does it?
Even if you are a minority of one...
>> I have nothing to give up, I have not engaged with your views.
Yes you do. You could have just ignored by analysis, but instead you had to jump in with your "Alan Hansen said" analysis...and came a cropper.
|
Rooney was a dead loss. Needs to pack in the fags. He looked knackered in the second half. Carroll should have been in his place from the start. The team played better in the opening two matches, why didn't this line up continue.
As for the penalties. By the end of two hours play, in the heat, they will all be tired. Then to have the pressure of taking their individual penalty must be sapping. No wonder we don't get through.
I suggest that when the quarter finals begin, the penalty shoot out takes place before the start of the match. Then both sides hopefully would provide a result in the 90 mins. All to play for.
|
>> I suggest that when the quarter finals begin, the penalty shoot out takes place before
>> the start of the match. Then both sides hopefully would provide a result in the
>> 90 mins. All to play for.
>>
I don't think that it would work like that in practice. The temptation would be overwhelming for the team that won the penalty shootout to go ultra-defensive from the outset. Only one team would actively need to win the game "normally".
|
Match Stats include
England 9 Shots 1 On Target
Italy 30 shots 8 On Target
That and Rooney not close to match fitness means that it was unlikely to be a happy outcome
|
I happened to be in a bar (abroad) last night and they turned on the last 15 minutes of the match - plus the penalty shootout. Two thoughts in so far as I care at all about football:
1. All future matches should be settled by way of penalty shootouts. No need for the peculiar faffing beforehand, and my goodness was it dull. So it could all be over in five or ten minutes.
2. Alternatively, they should just go on playing until either side scores a goal. At that point, all over. Judging by the very dead legs by the 120 minute stage, this might encourage a little activity in the earlier stages of the game.
|
|
In no way shape or form am I a soccer fan however I did watch the match to its conclusion. My thoughts - Rooney waste of space just stood there whilst the ball was being passed around him. Terry was always there either end of the pitch - a real grafter.
|
>> 2. Alternatively, they should just go on playing until either side scores a goal. At
>> that point, all over. Judging by the very dead legs by the 120 minute stage,
>> this might encourage a little activity in the earlier stages of the game.
Agreed.
|
Why do the English fans have "ENGLAND" written on their flags?
Most of them can't read, so why bother?
Name another country where its citizens have the name of the country written on the flag!
|
When all said and done, it's a fair result. England are a top 8 team in Europe. They aren't, frankly, a top 4 team, so going home after the quarters seems about right. I still think it's a shame Italy had to go through on penalties when the entire England team apart from the defenders effectively stopped playing long before the final whistle.
On that form, Germany would have handed the team its collective privates on a plate on Thursday. This was far less embarrassing.
Last edited by: DP on Mon 25 Jun 12 at 15:26
|
Didn't see the whole game, and I gather England had more of the play in the first half, but what I saw of the later stages consisted of
Scramble energetically to recover ball from Italians
Mount tentative foray into Italian half
Misplace pass, lose ball in tackle, or just hand it back to Italians
Repeat, with a little less energy each iteration.
That, for the most part, is how England teams have played in tournaments since they last had a seriously competitive team, which for me was at Euro 1996. Hard work might get you past the likes of Sweden, but against teams that can really play you do need to be able to keep the ball.
Pity, really. I quite like these couple of weeks when I can watch football as a partisan - I have no allegiance to a club, and I'm unlikely to acquire one now - and now it's over for another two years.
|
|
You seem to be as bad at ball control as England WDB - the little ones at the start of your list items have gone off the field of play! (using FF)
|
|
Ah, well, yes, the medium is the message you see, Focus old chap. I think I got my list tag wrong; perhaps a passing mod could change it to ol or ul for me.
|
|
I read about the result in this morning's on-line papers. It seems that England did not win again.
|
I watched the entire game with youngest son.
We both agreed:
1. Rooney was rubbish: He has never played well for England.
2. England could not pass to a white shirt to save themselves.
3. The Italians were rotten shots. Even 1/3rd of them on target would have meant England would have lost 2-0.
4. England were even worse shots than the Italians.
5. It was deadly boring.
6. England losing put spectators out of their misery.
Anyone who thinks ENgland stood a chance of winning either watched a different game or are on strong medication.
|
I had to laugh at Alan Hansen's comment, "Liverpool was Hodgson's first big job."
He's never heard of Internazionale then?
|
>> I had to laugh at Alan Hansen's comment, "Liverpool was Hodgson's first big job."
>>
>> He's never heard of Internazionale then?
You know scourers, the world stops and begins at Anfield.
|
Re 5
I don't think it was boring. It was an enthralling game of football.
|
Not a boring game,one sided in the second halve.Maybe if we allow less foreign players in the premier league and spend more on our youngsters we might have a better change in future.
|
>> Not a boring game,one sided in the second halve.Maybe if we allow less foreign players
>> in the premier league and spend more on our youngsters we might have a better
>> change in future.
>>
>>
>>
Pity about the inability of English managers to manage...
|
>>
>> Pity about the inability of English managers to manage...
Given the available time, and raw ingredients, I reckon Roy showed thats exactly what English managers can do. You can say what you like about England, you can't argue they were not well managed, motivated and organised this time round. And he punched a little bit of realism and humility into them, which didn't go amiss.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 25 Jun 12 at 19:31
|
Of course, in the last eleven international tournaments that England have played in, the mighty Spain, Germany, Portugal, Germany, Italy and Argentina have, on seven occasions, been unable to beat them before the penalty shootout.
If only they could get good at penalties.
But they everybody in the whole wide world know that England are rubbish, rubbish, rubbish...don't they?
|
|
I think Roy is a good manager the players like him which is a good start.This game is not just about skills.like I said before the Dutch team has the skills but not a team.Spanish are great on the ball individual talented.Germans similair to the UK but fitter and they never give up.Portugal rely on Rolando their star player.I was surprised how unfit Rooney looked he never seem to perform on a national level.Gerard top player also John Terry.Theo Walcott top notch.
|
>>Spanish are great on the ball individual talented.
And work well as a team.
>>Germans similair to the
>> UK but fitter and they never give up.
More organised, challenge far more when ball lost so get possession again. Great footwork in passing. It works like a well oiled machine.
|
>>Theo Walcott top notch.
>>
Theo Walcott is fast, but then so is Usain Bolt and I wouldn't have him in the team either.
|
Some observations from a neutral Jock's point of view :)
Italy played England off the pitch. Yes, people criticise England passing but that is as much to do with Italians fighting to get the ball back than the passing being poor.
It could be argued that as the game went on, Roy's tactics were being proved to be correct as Italy still hadn't scored despite all the possession. However what was lacking was a change of tactic whereby they had stifled the flow for the whole game, now how do they go and win it. There was no plan b.
For those who watched Chelsea beat Barcelona in Champions League final, Barca had humungous amounts of possession but they did not have a plan b. They can not change their style when that game maybe needed some long shots at goal rather than running the ball intot he net. Chelsea soaked up and then exposed the weaknesses in Barca defence with long balls and quick players. That was missing from England.
Re commentators, we had Hansen saying Roy had no big team before Liverpool (this from the man who predicted 3 teams from the same group would go through to the next section), we had Alan Shearer telling us that Ballotelli hasn't won any big medals (mmm) and then we had Lawro referring to one of the Italians as a West Ham reject, yes the same one who scored the winning penalty. BBC should be shot for their choice of pundits and what they get paid. Much preferred ITVs team (apart from Chiles).
|
|
Too many folk who say England were carp were watching Italy v England, if they`d watched England playing Italy, England weren`t that bad!! - maybe its these two matches that Z and SS were watching, yes, they were two different games!
|
>> Too many folk who say England were carp were watching Italy v England, if they`d
>> watched England playing Italy, England weren`t that bad!! -
?
I am sure that you have mis-written the above, devonite...
|
|
Another take on England being out is that team are not in line for Sport Personality of the Year. Murray will soon make the usual descent from UK hero to Scots loser and the coast's clear for Bradley Wiggins as winner of the Tour de France!!
|
|
Anybody else, apart from me, prefer to watch the Clooney film 'Up in the air'? I enjoyed it just as much the second time round.
|
>> (mmm) and then we had Lawro referring to one of the Italians as a West
>> Ham reject, yes the same one who scored the winning penalty.
To be fair, he was complete rubbish in the premier league (or should I say he was complete rubbish in the west ham team - they are not the same thing I guess) except for one game where he played an absolute blinder. He did rock all in that european cup game except score a penalty.
|
The European Cup. - Robin O'Reliant
