PDA

View Full Version : England's chances in the World Cup ..



sasguru
20th June 2005, 10:21
I haven't seen an England team with quite so many talented players for quite some time. But can they do it, this time?

DodgyAgent
20th June 2005, 10:27
Witrh Michael Vaughan leading the team, and Steve Harmison, Fredie Flintoff and Pietersen in full flow I think they will do it :)

sasguru
20th June 2005, 10:29
smartarse, I meant football:D

amcdonald
20th June 2005, 10:37
I think France will abandon the CAP before England get within a whisker of winning the world cup.

sasguru
20th June 2005, 10:44
I predict a Germany- England final:D

SupremeSpod
20th June 2005, 10:53
I predict a Germany- England final

With the Yanks joining in at half time...:rollin

wendigo100
20th June 2005, 10:58
England have the best bunch of players since 1966.

This is probably down to the diversity of coaching and the competition from good foreign players over the past ten years or so.

However, translating this into a world cup win is down to other factors as well.

Board Game Geek
20th June 2005, 11:00
I predict...

Iran
---------------------- = FINAL
(USA + UK)

WageSlave1
20th June 2005, 11:24
I agree that the current England team has a lot of very talented players (excluding Beckham, as he is virtually invisible for England these days). Unfortunately I can’t see them wining the WC. The problem is the manager; his overly cautious tactics aren’t the recipe for ultimate success. I applauded the FA for appointing Ericsson, but I think his usefulness has passed. He took England to a higher level of tactical sophistication, but we need to consider moving on.

There are quite a lot of teams capable of wining the WC, so it really depends on the odd bit of luck. Holland and Spain always have an embarrassment of talent, although never fulfil their potential. The Czechs, on their day, can rival anyone. Germany, although not the best, are improving, will have home advantage and lady luck is always on their side. France are strong but spent. I’ve been predicting an Italian triumph for years; they’ve got the talent but their mentally will always let them down. Then, of course, there is always Brazil and Argentina; good enough to field about six national teams each!

Board Game Geek
20th June 2005, 11:28
What about Rochdale FC ?

With the RSD providing a smokescreen across the pitch, her little chav tykes can gain ball advantage, whilst her husband Lurgh can languish in a 3-piece sofa in goal, watching Oprah and drinking Special Brew.

sasguru
20th June 2005, 11:30
It seems from the stats that South American teams don't do well in Europe. Based on that and the fact that England have an excellent (attacking?) line-up and (for the first time?) a month's break before the competition, so they will be rested instead of knackered - I don't think there is any team in Europe we can't beat, with a bit of luck.
For those reasons I think the odds for England are on the side of the punter.

WageSlave1
20th June 2005, 11:40
It seems from the stats that South American teams don't do well in Europe.

But is that still true? These days the overwhelming majority of the Brazil and Argentina squad ply their trade in Europe.
Last night I watched the Brazil vs. Mexico game… Brazil certainly aren’t invincible, and the boy wonder Robinho was non existent. Given a bit of luck, England can win the world cup…we just need to practice those penalties!

FrancoLondinium
20th June 2005, 11:51
Has anyone watched the womens' football?

The finnish team looked quite hot. The germans not really much. Since the coach is a male I wonder if he is allowed to go to the changing room after the game, as every coach should do. :smokin

WageSlave1
20th June 2005, 11:53
Since the coach is a male I wonder if he is allowed to go to the changing room after the game, as every coach should do.

He could give a pep talk whilst the players are showering.

Wage in "now planning a career change" mode.

sasguru
20th June 2005, 11:54
Well the women's game could be "improved" with bare midriffs and skin tight tiny liitle shorts (thongs mandatory) :b .... excuse me I'm off to touch meself ....

Board Game Geek
20th June 2005, 11:57
we just need to practice those penalties

You know, that's a really good point !

Why have all the hassle and fuss and the 90 mins messing around, when the two teams can just turn up for a penalty shoot out ?

I argue that that would be more exciting than watching the match beforehand.

Both teams start with 0 points.

Each goal is a point.

First to 3 points, wins.

snaw
20th June 2005, 12:49
In true neutral scottish fashion (And I am actually neutral vis a vis England) I have to say it's the best english squad since the early nineties.

But I think strength in depth let's you down outside of the back four. Got some great central midfielders but no real width to the team and no world class striker's once you get past Owen and Rooney makes England predictable and vulnerable to injuries/suspensions.

But with a bit of luck they can still do it, but they're not favourites by any stretch. Though I'm guessing in the build up the English press will have them as odds on certanties, as per usual. And when they do get beat, they'll have been robbed once again ...

WageSlave1
20th June 2005, 12:52
I have to say it's the best english squad since the early nineties.

Carlton Palmer, Geoff Thomas, Andy Sinton...are you sure!?

snaw
20th June 2005, 13:01
I was thinking Adams, Pearce, Gazza, Shearer, Lineker, Sheringham, Barnes etc - all those guys. World cup 94, Euro 96 (Mid ninties then, not early).

sasguru
20th June 2005, 13:12
Surely the 1990 team has the best claim to be the best England team since 1966?

wendigo100
20th June 2005, 13:18
Don't be deflected snaw, you actually meant 1990. That's when Shilton, Butcher, Pearce, Gascoigne, Robson, Platt, Lineker played together and got to the world cup semi-final.

England were poor after that. They went out at the group stages in the Europeans in 1992 (when Lineker retired in a huff), and they didn't even qualify for the world cup in 1994.

The team has improved steadily from 1996, with the exception of the blip when Keegan was in charge.

shaunbhoy
20th June 2005, 13:19
Surely the 1990 team has the best claim to be the best England team since 1966?

Why do they have that claim then? The 1986 team (admittedly many players overlapped both) might have won had they not been beaten by Diego (doffs cap!) Maradona, and the Euro 96 lot were not too bad really either. I would not have said the 1990 team were any better than either of them. To get back to the original point, the current England team do have a reasonable chance. However, so do about half a dozen others at least. It might well come down to the team that gets the largest slice of good fortune, and that is traditionally where England come unstuck. They are by tradition victims of bad luck, other than when the draw for who they would get as neighbours was being held obviously.
;)

HankWangford
20th June 2005, 13:21
The 1996 team was the best in my opinion. The balance of the midfield with Anderton and Mcmanaman wide, ince holding and gazza providing the craft for shearer.
Great team, maybe not packed full of the best quality individuals but a good international team never is.

sasguru
20th June 2005, 13:25
SB

I only say that because the semi-final with Germany is imprinted on my brain. England played brilliantly against an excellent German team and were unlucky to lose. I believe that was the only time we were genuine World Cup contenders.

WageSlave1
20th June 2005, 13:29
The 1996 team was the best in my opinion. The balance of the midfield with Anderton and Mcmanaman wide, ince holding and gazza providing the craft for shearer.

I think the 1990 side had the edge. Do you remember when Des Walker was actually good!? Waddle and Barnes gave the side flair on the flanks, with (an as yet unspoilt) Gazza providing creativity in the centre. Shilton was probably the best goalie we've ever had. Up front, Lineker the poacher partnered by the more thoughtful Beardsley.

Mordac
20th June 2005, 13:36
Do you remember when Des Walker was actually good!?

No, but I have seen some Movietone footage...:lol

wendigo100
20th June 2005, 14:44
1996 contained England's best match in a final tournament that I remember, against Holland, but I don't think the team were as good as 1990.

In 1990 they might have won it if their captain and best player had not got injured in the group stages. Germany were no better than England in that semi-final, and Robson might have made the difference.

He also got injured in 1986, but Maradona was brilliant that year and England would probably still have lost to that lot.

WageSlave1
20th June 2005, 14:49
1996 contained England's best match in a final tournament that I remember, against Holland,

From what I remember, that result had more to do with Holland imploding than England being brilliant.


Maradona was brilliant that year and England would probably still have lost to that lot.

Quite. Maradona deserved to win the WC on his own. I know he cheated, but the other goal he scored against England was pure genius. I obviously wanted England to win that game, but when you witness something like that....

shaunbhoy
20th June 2005, 14:53
I obviously wanted England to win that game, but when you witness something like that....

Quite possibly the best goal ever scored IMHO.

sasguru
20th June 2005, 14:55
I think Beardsley was seriously underrated. He basically performed the role Becks is supposed to perform now - what I call the vision thing, only much better. I still remember some of his inch-perfect long distance passes.

shaunbhoy
20th June 2005, 14:58
He basically performed the role Becks is supposed to perform now

Well not quite, I don't recall Gillette clamouring for PB to model their new razors although I believe he did get a few bob modelling for the front covers of "Goosebumps"!
:eek

trajectory
20th June 2005, 15:00
I think Beardsley was seriously underrated.

Yes, but he was f ucking ugly though, you have to admit.

I reckon we've got a great chance in next WC if Sven takes a few more chances. We should have beaten Brazil in the last WC if Sven had told them to go for it 2nd half.

Watched Mexico beat Brazil last night - Brazil were very ordinary, and how anybody like Roque Junior can get 30 odd caps for Brazil is beyond me!

sasguru
20th June 2005, 15:01
>> I don't recall Gillette clamouring for PB to model their new razors

Exactly what's wrong with Becks - one of the weak links in the present team IMO.

sasguru
20th June 2005, 15:03
>> Yes, but he was f ucking ugly though, you have to admit.

What's that got to do with the price of fish? Are you gay?
I don't care if every player in the English team looks like Quasimodo if they can play.

WageSlave1
20th June 2005, 16:10
Yes, but he was f ucking ugly though, you have to admit.

Maybe, but he was a class player. Lineker grabbed the glory as the scorer, but a lot of his goals were thanks to the skill and vision of Beardsley.

snaw
20th June 2005, 16:21
Quite possibly the best goal ever scored IMHO.

What, even better than Archie Gemmel 1978, vs Holland?

Controversial.

Van Basteen 1998 European Championship final, vs Russia ...