Mark Stapleton Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 (edited) It's the 78 minute mark, 0-0, and Frank Lampard must be setting a record for most unsuccessful clean shots at a goal. Hold on!.....no, it's OK--Lampard's just missed again. p.s. been impressed by young replacement Lennon. p.p.s. Crouch scores! Edited June 15, 2006 by Mark Stapleton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Stapleton Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 The commentators here in Australia (Ned Zelic and former coach Rale Rasic) are claiming Beckham has lost his touch. I disagree. I thought he played OK--he put in at least half a dozen promising crosses and his set piece kicks were always dangerous. Therry and Cole were best, IMO. Lennon is very dangerous and Rooney only had limited opportunities. Hey Andy, I thought you said Rooney wouldn't play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 England's saviour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Tribe Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Since, as a poor teacher, I can't afford satellite TV, I was unable to watch the England game -- Spanish TV is only broadcasting the Spain games on "free-to-air" -- but from the brief replays they've shown, I've decided to insist to my students that I'm totally Spanish and that my British passport has well and truly expired. Two very tired performances from an over-hyped team... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Since, as a poor teacher, I can't afford satellite TV, I was unable to watch the England game -- Spanish TV is only broadcasting the Spain games on "free-to-air" -- but from the brief replays they've shown, I've decided to insist to my students that I'm totally Spanish and that my British passport has well and truly expired. Two very tired performances from an over-hyped team... It is a good job you are in Spain Mike. If those views were expressed here you would quickly find yourself in the Tower of London given the current atmosphere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Tribe Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Certainly wouldn't pass the Tebbitt test! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 What is clear from England's performances so far is that without the Liverpool contigent's contribututions they would be on the way home. It would appear that I am not alone in this view http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/drilldown/N...060618-1013.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Simkin Posted June 18, 2006 Author Share Posted June 18, 2006 The England is not at its best. I used to train greyhounds and it was very important not to bring them to their peak too soon. Maybe Eriksson shares the same philosophy. The real problem concerns his striking options. Everybody pointed out his squad was short of strikers. Especially when you consider that Rooney and Owen were clearly not match-fit. Eriksson also made a strange decision of taking Walcott instead of more experienced strikers such as Bent, Defoe or Ashton. When asked why Walcott has not been brought on as a substitute, Eriksson says that he is not ready to play at this level yet. Why then did he take him? Owen has not been right for two years. Eriksson has failed to see this and has not planned accordingly. Crouch should only be used as a late substitute. When he plays from the beginning the rest of the team rely too much on the long high ball. Good teams have no difficulty dealing with this tactic. Especially when Crouch is not that good in the air. The right-back position is also a problem. Jamie Carragher is a good defender but is hopeless going forward. I would consider playing Michael Carrick in that position. His long passes are nearly as good as those of David Beckham. However, I fear Owen Hargreaves will get the job until Neville recovers from injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Simkin Posted June 20, 2006 Author Share Posted June 20, 2006 Fifa have warned England that they could get into serious trouble if they take it easy on Sweden tonight. One of the reasons for this warning has disappeared as Germany beat Ecuador this afternoon. The other reason is that Eriksson might be tempted to help Sweden qualify for the next round. The first signs of this possibility is his hints that Owen Hargreaves will play tonight. However, even with Hargreaves I expect England to win 3-0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Raymond Carroll Posted June 20, 2006 Share Posted June 20, 2006 Eriksson might be tempted to help Sweden qualify for the next round. ... However, even with Hargreaves I expect England to win 3-0. Eriksson seems to to have achieved all his aims tonight, Sweden qualifies and England tops the group. What more could the man ask for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 20, 2006 Share Posted June 20, 2006 Eriksson seems to to have achieved all his aims tonight, Sweden qualifies and England tops the group.What more could the man ask for? John Simkin's head on a spike?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anders MacGregor-Thunell Posted June 20, 2006 Share Posted June 20, 2006 1968 - do I need to say moore? Seriously - Both these teams; Sweden and England will have a hard time in their further advances. At the same time I think this will fit both teams.... If England has a bad record against Sweden we have a worse one against Germany. The latest time we won against Germany in a competition was 1958 (in Gothenburg!). It would be good to change that statistic... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 20, 2006 Share Posted June 20, 2006 1968 - do I need to say moore? Seriously - Both these teams; Sweden and England will have a hard time in their further advances. At the same time I think this will fit both teams.... If England has a bad record against Sweden we have a worse one against Germany. The latest time we won against Germany in a competition was 1958 (in Gothenburg!). It would be good to change that statistic... Anything can happen in the KO phase of the tournament - win 4 consecutive matches and you are world champions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Simkin Posted June 21, 2006 Author Share Posted June 21, 2006 1968 - do I need to say moore? Seriously - Both these teams; Sweden and England will have a hard time in their further advances. At the same time I think this will fit both teams.... If England has a bad record against Sweden we have a worse one against Germany. The latest time we won against Germany in a competition was 1958 (in Gothenburg!). It would be good to change that statistic... Sweden was the better team and deserved to win. They would have done but for two acts of individual brilliance by Joe Cole. True England has more world class players than Sweden, but in terms of managers, they are not in the same league. Lars Lagerback is quoted as saying that Eriksson wages are “obscene” (apparently Eriksson earns in a day what Largerback earns in a year). Lagerback got his tactics right. He identified that Beckham was the wrong man to mark the near post at corners. It led to one goal and two near misses (both times the ball hit the crossbar). What sort of coach puts Beckham in that position? When did Beckham ever win a heading contest? Each time he was square on and was unable to stop the man running in front of him. It is a disgrace that Beckham still does not know how to defend corners but it is mystifying that Eriksson selects someone like him to carry out the task. After the game Eriksson said that we will have to work on this on training. I would have thought you would have sorted this problem out before the World Cup started? All those people who have criticized Eriksson over the last two years have been proven right. His obsession with playing Beckham and Owen when well past their best has now come back to haunt him. He will never drop Beckham but Owen’s injury has solved the other problem. The problem is that Eriksson never picked a replacement for Owen, instead he preferred to take an extra defender and a boy who has never played a premiership match. He made the problem worse by taking Rooney, who when fit is world class, but in his current state, is only a moderate player. Nor will he get anywhere near full fitness during the current tournament. This is not to say England will not win the world cup. Any thing is possible at this stage of the competition. However, if we do, it will be in spite of, rather than because of Eriksson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 1968 - do I need to say moore? Seriously - Both these teams; Sweden and England will have a hard time in their further advances. At the same time I think this will fit both teams.... If England has a bad record against Sweden we have a worse one against Germany. The latest time we won against Germany in a competition was 1958 (in Gothenburg!). It would be good to change that statistic... Sweden was the better team and deserved to win. They would have done but for two acts of individual brilliance by Joe Cole. True England has more world class players than Sweden, but in terms of managers, they are not in the same league. Lars Lagerback is quoted as saying that Eriksson wages are “obscene” (apparently Eriksson earns in a day what Largerback earns in a year). One of the problems with characters who follow unsuccessful football clubs for most of the year is that they have no idea of how to win, do not recognise success when it comes and also often seem to want to wallow in perceived failure. England have topped their group and now have an excellent chance to proceed to the quarter finals where hopefully again they will do enough to advance further. This for England is good! The attacks on the manager are not measured, consistent or justified. Eriksson's strategy has been to build a team around several key players - seems a fairly sensible idea in a team game at a level where matches are few and far between. It really is quite intolerable to suggest that if England fails it is because of the manager and if England succeeds it is despite of the manager. We can only speculate as to what really prompts this attitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now