2018 FIFA World Cup XXI

Page 10 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re:

Flamin said:
Any sign yet of the leaky French defence? :razz: on a more serious note, I do enjoy those tactical chess games when there's so much quality on the pitch. France played like a machine. It's quite amazing to give away so little against this Belgian team.
Yeah, I was really impressed with umtiti (sort of expected it from varane). Maybe France's defence is only leaky in an open game, not when they play like that - something which I did find entertaining and very good. If England get to the final and adopt the same tactics as the Belgians i.e. play into france's strengths, their incredible counters, they'll lose 4-0. It will be: Alli loses the ball to Kante, Kante runs towards Henderson, passes the ball to pogba who run a bit more at stones before realising mbappe on a one on one on loop
 
Aug 2, 2012
4,219
0
0
we're half way there.......................

..................living on a prayer....................

Mark L

ooops! 1 -1 ..................what an idiot I am tempting fate with above

yikes! england being played off the park...................
 
Re: Re:

Brullnux said:
Flamin said:
Any sign yet of the leaky French defence? :razz: on a more serious note, I do enjoy those tactical chess games when there's so much quality on the pitch. France played like a machine. It's quite amazing to give away so little against this Belgian team.
Yeah, I was really impressed with umtiti (sort of expected it from varane). Maybe France's defence is only leaky in an open game, not when they play like that - something which I did find entertaining and very good. If England get to the final and adopt the same tactics as the Belgians i.e. play into france's strengths, their incredible counters, they'll lose 4-0. It will be: Alli loses the ball to Kante, Kante runs towards Henderson, passes the ball to pogba who run a bit more at stones before realising mbappe on a one on one on loop
In an open game, top quality attackers are always better than defenders hence every defence will appear leaky though. I mean, nobody can stop players like Hazard running towards goal 1v1.

Croatia-England is pretty entertaining but the difference quality-wise with France-Belgium is day and night. Whoever goes through will simply be humiliated by the French.
 
Sep 25, 2009
6,983
0
0
i dont share the simplistic sentiment 'the french will humiliate...'

i did watch their entire game with the belgians and will agree they looked very good, solid and felt like they could add if required....

re. the current game, unfortunately i missed both goals though i did see perhaps 70% of the main time. based on what i saw in the 1st half i though the english played better and ( i hate the word 'deserved') logically should have had the lead. when i saw 1:1 in the 2nd half the feeling did not change much. then, i should be frank , the Croatians clearly outplayed the english in the last 20 min of the main time. in every respect with the british defenders blundering several times as if they were tired...

now is the 2nd half of the additional time and and the croatians look fresher and faster, despite being older and, if am not mistaken, not having made any field changes yet.

great game, imo...
 
Re: Re:

Flamin said:
Croatia-England is pretty entertaining but the difference quality-wise with France-Belgium is day and night. Whoever goes through will simply be humiliated by the French.
But football is a game where logic doesn't always apply...
England are forgetting to play football after the first half. The Croats deserve to go through by now (first half was England).
 
Aug 2, 2012
4,219
0
0
we're going home.................we're going home

england football teams going home

..............3 lions on my shirt

Mark L
 
Sep 25, 2009
6,983
0
0
Re:

python said:
if theresa may does NOT care to travel to her footballers, perhaps they should travel to theresa ;)
it was irony/joke, BUT turns out macron was either less busy or is less attached to the 'boycott Russia' nonsense.

and he can claim what i just speculated on his part.
 
Re: Re:

Jagartrott said:
Flamin said:
Croatia-England is pretty entertaining but the difference quality-wise with France-Belgium is day and night. Whoever goes through will simply be humiliated by the French.
But football is a game where logic doesn't always apply...
England are forgetting to play football after the first half. The Croats deserve to go through by now (first half was England).
I know, but the difference in quality is really big imo. That and France should be a lot fresher as well.
 
Yeah, should be a walk in the park for France, but they thought much the same two years ago. If France don't score early, they'll get more and more nervous. Still, they hold all the cards of course. No injuries, no extra time played, physically a very strong team, smart coach, and the best defense in this tournament.
 
Nov 5, 2013
1,952
0
0
Re:

Jagartrott said:
Yeah, should be a walk in the park for France, but they thought much the same two years ago. If France don't score early, they'll get more and more nervous. Still, they hold all the cards of course. No injuries, no extra time played, physically a very strong team, smart coach, and the best defense in this tournament.
Which is why Croatia will win.
 
Re:

Jagartrott said:
Yeah, should be a walk in the park for France, but they thought much the same two years ago. If France don't score early, they'll get more and more nervous. Still, they hold all the cards of course. No injuries, no extra time played, physically a very strong team, smart coach, and the best defense in this tournament.
True, though France is better than 2 years ago.

Anyway, I have to admit Croatia's mental toughness and physical strength despite having played 2 120' games, surprised me yesterday. Nevertheless, it would be absolutely incredible if they pull this off.
 
So England played 5 matches, all against teams ranked lower than them, and a "B team friendly" against Belgium. Of those 5 matches, they won 3, drew one (against a team missing its talisman) and lost one.

So essentially their world ranking of 12th is about right, possibly generous.

But they rode their luck and gave supporters a bit of fun which, essentially, is the only thing professional sport is about.
 
A frustrating night as an England fan but no complaints, From the second half onwards Croatia were the better team. We gave up the initiative after an excellent first half performance where we could and should have scored a second goal.

Still a lot of positives for this young side who have performed well, with all the rubbish going on politically and with Brexit they’ve brought a nation back together, especially after the embarrassments of 2014 and 2016.

Pickford, Maguire, Trippier and Stones the standouts, After a lot of success with the junior teams last summer, winning the U17 and U20 world cups, I hope this is the start of something good.
 
Re:

Armchair cyclist said:
So England played 5 matches, all against teams ranked lower than them, and a "B team friendly" against Belgium. Of those 5 matches, they won 3, drew one (against a team missing its talisman) and lost one.

So essentially their world ranking of 12th is about right, possibly generous.

But they rode their luck and gave supporters a bit of fun which, essentially, is the only thing professional sport is about.
I pay very little attention to the World rankings, they can easily be manipulated. For example Poland didn’t play a single friendly from the last Euros until after the World Cup draw so they didn’t lose any ranking points and gained a top seeded spot. We all know how good they really are.

It also shows Switzerland in sixth and both Peru and Denmark above England, which isn’t correct from what we’ve seen on the pitch.

FWIW id probably put England just inside the top 10. On current form France, Belgium and Brazil are the top 3. After those a number of teams with little between them, some on the way up, some on the way down: Croatia, Germany, Uruguay, Argentina, Spain, Portugal, England
 
Jun 22, 2010
3,343
0
0
Re: Re:

Pricey_sky said:
Armchair cyclist said:
So England played 5 matches, all against teams ranked lower than them, and a "B team friendly" against Belgium. Of those 5 matches, they won 3, drew one (against a team missing its talisman) and lost one.

So essentially their world ranking of 12th is about right, possibly generous.

But they rode their luck and gave supporters a bit of fun which, essentially, is the only thing professional sport is about.
I pay very little attention to the World rankings, they can easily be manipulated. For example Poland didn’t play a single friendly from the last Euros until after the World Cup draw so they didn’t lose any ranking points and gained a top seeded spot. We all know how good they really are.

It also shows Switzerland in sixth and both Peru and Denmark above England, which isn’t correct from what we’ve seen on the pitch.

FWIW id probably put England just inside the top 10. On current form France, Belgium and Brazil are the top 3. After those a number of teams with little between them, some on the way up, some on the way down: Croatia, Germany, Uruguay, Argentina, Spain, Portugal, England

England is a bit overrated, if we are to be completely honest. They played well against Panama and Tunisia, but...it was against Panama and Tunisia...They then went up against the Belgium subs and lost. Ok, so Southgate and co were always gonna be ok with the second place finish in the group, given the opening of that side of the draw, avoiding top teams early, but they barely held on against Colombia that was without James, was average against average Sweden and lost to Croatia. Croatia are absolutely capable of better football than they actually showed last night. Pundits like Shearer and Wright are absolutely correct in saying that this particular England side should be very happy to have made to the Semis. Under normal circumstances and a more balanced draw, England would find it difficult to move past the round of 16. Croatia are a much better side on paper and the've showed more in this tournament than England. They had to go through two brutal matches, against Denmark and Russia and they still ran England rugged for much of the second half and extra time. The better team won last night. Kane had a nice opportunity as did Maguire but you can't win matches with so few shots on goal. Once Perisic equalised, you sensed that England were gonna be on the back foot.
 
Jun 22, 2010
3,343
0
0
Re:

Susan Westemeyer said:
You rate Germany much too highly.

Germany's problem was that they were over-confident, almost cocky, which is very unlike Germany. Even after struggling in the past 18 months to play good football on a consistent basis, they were confident that things would turn around with the snap of the fingers during the WC. It doesn't work like that. Neuer was out for 9 months, got back on the team literally during the WC, as Löw preferred him over Ter Stegen. No Leroy Sane on the squad, that was a big surprise for most people. The Ozil and Gundogan photos with Erdogan were a distraction and the lethargic play was the nail in the coffin. Even without distractions, the injuries and the right mindset, this particular German squad would have found it difficult to repeat. Were they capable of it? Sure, but a lot happens in four years and in this German's squad's case, a lot happened in less than year.

I find this WC much more satisfying because the big teams struggled and all but France lost earlier than expected. Even France struggled and while they had spurts that showed how talented they are, they still looked very dodgy in some of their games. Croatia has been steady, not too high but definitely not a game where they were really poor. They earned their place in the final. On paper, the French had tougher opponents during the knockout rounds, playing Argentina, Uruguay, and Belgium to get to the Final, whereas Croatia had Denmark, Russia, and England.

Hope Croatia wins this. It would be HUGE for the country and I believe for the world of football.
 
Re: Re:

BullsFan22 said:
England is a bit overrated, if we are to be completely honest. They played well against Panama and Tunisia, but...it was against Panama and Tunisia...They then went up against the Belgium subs and lost. Ok, so Southgate and co were always gonna be ok with the second place finish in the group, given the opening of that side of the draw, avoiding top teams early, but they barely held on against Colombia that was without James, was average against average Sweden and lost to Croatia. Croatia are absolutely capable of better football than they actually showed last night. Pundits like Shearer and Wright are absolutely correct in saying that this particular England side should be very happy to have made to the Semis. Under normal circumstances and a more balanced draw, England would find it difficult to move past the round of 16. Croatia are a much better side on paper and the've showed more in this tournament than England. They had to go through two brutal matches, against Denmark and Russia and they still ran England rugged for much of the second half and extra time. The better team won last night. Kane had a nice opportunity as did Maguire but you can't win matches with so few shots on goal. Once Perisic equalised, you sensed that England were gonna be on the back foot.
Some very good points, and I agree with you that Croatia deserved to go through, even though they weren't at their best.

The frustrating thing for England is that they played well in the first half and were the better team. It was probably inexperience that found them out in the end. They are a relatively young group and just weren't street-wise enough in the second half to see it out. Obviously you have to give credit to Croatia for getting past two very close games to reach the semi-finals, but the same credit must also be given to England. To actually win a penalty shoot-out after so many heartbreaks was a superb achievement, plus they were comfortable against Sweden considering it was a world cup QF.
 
Jun 22, 2010
3,343
0
0
Re: Re:

Pricey_sky said:
BullsFan22 said:
England is a bit overrated, if we are to be completely honest. They played well against Panama and Tunisia, but...it was against Panama and Tunisia...They then went up against the Belgium subs and lost. Ok, so Southgate and co were always gonna be ok with the second place finish in the group, given the opening of that side of the draw, avoiding top teams early, but they barely held on against Colombia that was without James, was average against average Sweden and lost to Croatia. Croatia are absolutely capable of better football than they actually showed last night. Pundits like Shearer and Wright are absolutely correct in saying that this particular England side should be very happy to have made to the Semis. Under normal circumstances and a more balanced draw, England would find it difficult to move past the round of 16. Croatia are a much better side on paper and the've showed more in this tournament than England. They had to go through two brutal matches, against Denmark and Russia and they still ran England rugged for much of the second half and extra time. The better team won last night. Kane had a nice opportunity as did Maguire but you can't win matches with so few shots on goal. Once Perisic equalised, you sensed that England were gonna be on the back foot.
Some very good points, and I agree with you that Croatia deserved to go through, even though they weren't at their best.

The frustrating thing for England is that they played well in the first half and were the better team. It was probably inexperience that found them out in the end. They are a relatively young group and just weren't street-wise enough in the second half to see it out. Obviously you have to give credit to Croatia for getting past two very close games to reach the semi-finals, but the same credit must also be given to England. To actually win a penalty shoot-out after so many heartbreaks was a superb achievement, plus they were comfortable against Sweden considering it was a world cup QF.

I think this English squad, given a couple years to gel and for Southgate to learn more about his players and other options that weren't there during this WC, can be a danger for the next Euro, WC and Euro 2024. I know that's looking years ahead, but with more match experience they could, actually, win a trophy. I just think that they were fortunate enough to get to the SF this time around.

And the penalty shootout was a nice hurdle for England to overcome, nobody can deny that. Had they lost that it would have been terrible, not just because they've had a miserable time with the shootout for the last 28 years, but because they got the easier route they were hoping for, and to lose at the first knockout stage would have given the critics (and the English themselves) plenty to laugh about.

This team is young and relatively inexperienced, but it would have been something had they somehow won the WC. The past teams with the likes of Gerrard, Beckham, Rooney, Lampard, Shearer, Sheringham, Scholes, Terry, Owen, Lineker, etc couldn't do it, the so-called 'golden generation,' then it would have almost been unfair for this lot to manage it.
 
The most promising thing about England’s performances was that there was no reliance on a single player. In the past it’s all been about getting the ball to Rooney or Beckham or will Gerrard perform. Trippier, Macguire, Lingaard, Kane, Stones and Dier were all great, Young and Henderson were both valuable players with experience, Pickford was emmense in goal and personally I though Alli and Stirling both played really well at times. Stirling just couldn’t finish it off but he looked dangerous every time he got the ball and added some much needed speed to the attack. Pretty much the whole squad performed as a squad. Yes, there were a few lapses that they need to work on and it broke down at times, but they showed a great base that they can work on.
 
Dier was great? He only really played against Belgium, badly, against Colombia a sub, where he missed about half of his longer passes (ok he scored the penalty) and against Croatia also as a sub, where he was basically anonymous. Others you mentioned, sure, but I don't see what Dier has done to deserve that.
 
Dier offered a change of pace and England held their shape much better when he was on the field. His distribution might not have been great but he was a very good option for when a solid mid-field was needed. Basically I think England finally got the squad right, rather than trying to shoe-horn players into a team out of position just because they couldn’t be left out. That’s probably more a result of the current crop of players but it works and hopefully Southgate will recognise this and persist.
 
Sep 25, 2009
6,983
0
0
still 3 min to play....belgium imo played smarter. incredibly sharp, gorgeous counterattacks and viscous defense which clearly was well instructed on the english tricks.

the brits imo played well. just could not get the belgium tactics and at times too linear.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY