|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jun 27, 2010 16:55:49 GMT
Germany were superb and thoroughly deserved their win. What most of the England team deserve for their performance is unprintable.
|
|
|
|
Post by amptique on Jun 27, 2010 19:19:41 GMT
After a brutal defeat, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Head Coach, John McVay was asked by a reporter . . . "What do you think about your team's execution?" McVay responded, "I'm in favor of it."  Bill |
|
|
|
Post by martindn on Jun 27, 2010 21:22:10 GMT
HaHa.
Yes the best team won, well done Germany. Although England didn't turn up.
Just watched Argentina v Mexico. I don't think England or Germany would stand a chance against either of those teams.
It is about time we Europeans stopped living on past glories and started to wake up to the standards of footbal that prevail elsewhere in the world.
Martin D
|
|
|
|
Post by larryhauck on Jun 27, 2010 23:54:22 GMT
:)Shame on you Brits for bad-mouthing your football team. They need your support in bad times as well as good times. The Chicago Cubs have not won a Worlld Series since 1946 and their fans still support them like they they had just won the all Universe Series. Any team can have a bad series so you should stick with them. Larry  |
|
|
|
Post by I-H-F on Jun 28, 2010 0:08:20 GMT
It is about time we Europeans stopped living on past glories and started to wake up to the standards of footbal that prevail elsewhere in the world. South American teams are performing better than other continents in this World Cup. Having said that, the four semi-finalists at the 2006 World Cup were all European. I do prefer to watch the flair players from teams such as Brazil or Argentina. Speaking of Argentina, I doubt we'll see a better goal at this World Cup than Carlos Tevez's second against Mexico. What a strike! I just seen highlights of the England v Germany match. Germany looked very impressive. They will be hard to beat. However, I think it will be a Brazil v Argentina final. |
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jun 28, 2010 0:37:22 GMT
Larry, In the World Cup (Which is, let us not forget, the single most important sporting event in the world), the teams carry the pride and the hopes of their nations with them. To fight and lose is disheartening, but there's no dishonour or disgrace in losing to a great team like Germany. But to be so bad they might as well not turn up - THAT is dishonour and disgrace indeed! I don't know if you watched the US team, but they played with real passion and pride and, though defeated, can return home with their heads held high. The England team showed neither, so are deserving only of our scorn. They let the whole nation down by playing as they did. To borrow the famous quote (And to include a moment of lightness after all the seriousness!  ) "Football is not a matter of life and death. It's more important than that!" |
|
|
|
Post by dazza on Jun 28, 2010 5:08:35 GMT
Larry,
The England team deserves everything they get. Our players are some of the highest paid in the world, some of them picking up over £100,000 a week. A stark contrast to the fans who have been saving their hard earned money for years just to see them in South Africa.
We know our players can perform much better - we see them do it week in week out for Man Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea. It's baffling why they rarely seem to be able to do it for England. Some of the defending was school boy stuff and that is being harsh on school boys.
I would have accepted it had we lost and gone down fighting right to the last minute, playing with pride and passion like the US and New Zealand teams, but half of our team didn't even look bothered as though they didn't want to be there and that is what is most dissapointing.
I have never felt so let down by football as I do right now, we expect better.
Dazza
|
|
Dave
Administrator
HWI Admin
Posts: 7,700
|
Post by Dave on Jun 28, 2010 8:55:16 GMT
:)Shame on you Brits for bad-mouthing your football team. They need your support in bad times as well as good times. Not all of us, not all. If expectations aren't too high in the beginning, there is less for them to have to live up to. The writing was on the wall after the first match, compared to the Germans' first match. We had lost Ferdinand by then, someone who would have injected solidity, pace and authority into the defence. England was always at risk of qualifying second after that match - which meant they would have to meet Germany and Argentina early on, both of whom seem to be better than England at the moment. Many seem to blame the players but the manager and the "regime" are equally responsible. Why play goalkeeper Green in the first match, it was always going to be risky; players were tired after a long season with no Winter break and too many games (unlike Germany); FIFA officials disallowed a legitimate goal that would have made it 2-2 (such things can be game-changing moments). The UK press are the worst culprits for whipping up hysteria by the way, they love to build 'em up so they can knock 'em down and some readers seem to buy it, every time. It's not as simple as just blaming "highly paid players", it is far more complex. And the truth is that we should just accept that there are several better teams out there at the moment, this was known after the first match, and the expectations for yesterday were too high. Just changing the players and changing the manager isn't going to be enough: there are other more fundamental problems to be sorted out too, like forcing the Premier League money men to give the National team priority in the 6 months leading up to a major championship. That means fewer club games and a suitable Winter break; and if it isn't done, things are unlikely ever to get much better. The players are only one part of a much bigger problem. Dave |
|
|
|
Post by jimg on Jun 28, 2010 11:46:23 GMT
:)Shame on you Brits for bad-mouthing your football team. They need your support in bad times as well as good times. Not all of us, not all. If expectations aren't too high in the beginning, there is less for them to have to live up to. The writing was on the wall after the first match, compared to the Germans' first match. We had lost Ferdinand by then, someone who would have injected solidity, pace and authority into the defence. England was always at risk of qualifying second after that match - which meant they would have to meet Germany and Argentina early on, both of whom seem to be better than England at the moment. Many seem to blame the players but the manager and the "regime" are equally responsible. Why play goalkeeper Green in the first match, it was always going to be risky; players were tired after a long season with no Winter break and too many games (unlike Germany); FIFA officials disallowed a legitimate goal that would have made it 2-2 (such things can be game-changing moments). The UK press are the worst culprits for whipping up hysteria by the way, they love to build 'em up so they can knock 'em down and some readers seem to buy it, every time. It's not as simple as just blaming "highly paid players", it is far more complex. And the truth is that we should just accept that there are several better teams out there at the moment, this was known after the first match, and the expectations for yesterday were too high. Just changing the players and changing the manager isn't going to be enough: there are other more fundamental problems to be sorted out too, like forcing the Premier League money men to give the National team priority in the 6 months leading up to a major championship. That means fewer club games and a suitable Winter break; and if it isn't done, things are unlikely ever to get much better. The players are only one part of a much bigger problem. Dave I'm with you all the way there Dave, Germany's 3 rd and 4 th goals, it could be argued, were a direct result of a perfectly good equalizer being disallowed. I also think if FIFA cannot move with the times and allow technology to assist the officials they should have carried forward the goal line officials they used in Europe this season. That could also have benefited Mexico who I felt were as good as if not better than Argentina until the "illegal" goal. I am not saying England deserved to win or that Mexico were the better team overall just that both deserved better than they got. Jim |
|
|
|
Post by I-H-F on Jun 28, 2010 12:15:53 GMT
Many seem to blame the players but the manager and the "regime" are equally responsible. Why play goalkeeper Green in the first match, it was always going to be risky; players were tired after a long season with no Winter break and too many games (unlike Germany); FIFA officials disallowed a legitimate goal that would have made it 2-2 (such things can be game-changing moments). Just changing the players and changing the manager isn't going to be enough: there are other more fundamental problems to be sorted out too, like forcing the Premier League money men to give the National team priority in the 6 months leading up to a major championship. That means fewer club games and a suitable Winter break; and if it isn't done, things are unlikely ever to get much better. The players are only one part of a much bigger problem. Every time I hear the "too many games" excuse I have to laugh. These are pampered players, most of them earning £100,000+ per week. They play one, maybe two games a week. They live lavish lifestyles, their every need catered for with their clubs. They travel in comfort, stay in top class hotels when on match duty, have the best training facilities and medical care. What about the people who work 50 or 60 hour weeks? The people who work double shifts just to pay their mortgage, feed and clothe themselves and their families, or provide for their children's education. That's not easy, especially in this current economic climate. There's no winter breaks for them, so why should mega-rich footballers need a break? Tired? They don't know the meaning of the word! Footballers are out of touch with the real world. England failed to qualifty for the USA 1994 World Cup, and they blamed that on the players having to play too many games in a season. As a result, they reduced the number of Premier League teams to reduce the number of games. Since then, they have also got rid of some replays in cup competitions. But here we are, 16 years later, and the "too many games" excuse is still battered about. As for goal-line technology, maybe it is time it was brought in. Ironically, against Germany in the World Cup final of 1966, England were awarded a goal that didn't cross the line. This time, it did cross the line and it wasn't given. Some you win, some you lose! |
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Jun 28, 2010 13:29:10 GMT
You cannot be serious!  Oh sorry, that's Wimbledon Tennis!  Richard |
|
|
|
Post by anshita on Jun 28, 2010 16:15:11 GMT
Woo, Netherlands beat Slovakia 2-1 & advanced to Quarter Finals!
Well done!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by dazza on Jun 28, 2010 16:34:47 GMT
I agree that technology needs to be brought into football, or at the very least an extra referee behind the goal, something which worked quite well in the Europa League last season. The technology is there so I can't understand why it is not used.
I don't want to blame the decision on the result, at 2-2 the game could have changed, but overall England were very poor and the real reason we are coming home is that we just weren't good enough against a very good German team.
I agree that the media hype things up too much going into tournaments, but I also think a lot of these expectations come from how our players perform for their clubs. Rooney is unstoppable for Man Utd, Lampard and Gerrard bang in over 20 goals from midfield every season, yet we rarely see this form replicated for England, and that is dissapointing.
Fabio Capello isn't totally blameless, some of his selections and substitutions can be questioned, but ultimately I think it is down to the players for whatever reason, just not performing to the standard we know they can. I hope Fabio stays on, I don't think changing the manager will achieve anything.
I never expected England to win this World Cup, but I also never expected us to play so poorly, it is probably the worst I have seen us perform at a major tournament, bar Euro 2000.
At least there is one good thing about England's elimination, we can now sit back and just enjoy the rest of the World Cup without any worries.
Dazza
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jun 28, 2010 16:56:17 GMT
I think the problem with English football starts with the FA. Too often those letters stand for what they know about football, instead of what they are supposed to stand for. The rot begins at the top and filters all the way down. And yes, Capello completely failed to understand the difference between club and international games, so his team selection, tactics and the bizarre substitutions (I thought he was Sven in disguise with those!) were all completely out of step with what was needed. And sometimes out of step with reality, IMO.
That said, the players must also accept their share of blame. They were absolutely rubbish, playing with no desire, no heart and no determination.
The final 4-1 scoreline actually flattered England. If not for David James (England Keeper for those who don't know), it would be vastly worse. His defenders may have let him down constantly, but he made a number of really good saves. One of the few who was fit to wear the shirt, IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by dutchjoyce on Jun 28, 2010 17:33:38 GMT
YEAH....GO HOLLAND.......GO !!!
|
|
) "Football is not a matter of life and death. It's more important than that!" 
