• Participation within this subforum is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

Semifinals: Croatia vs England

Who wins?

  • Total voters
    116
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Walken said:
It's not really though, it's something you chance your way through, it's not the 4 minute mile, the 3 teams England have beaten are league 2 standard at best, you all need to chill and stop smashing ambos
Click to expand...

Personally I like that people are excited. They rightly should be. There is a real chance to win the whole thing. Been a long time since people who back England have been able to say that.

I do get annoyed with the overconfidence of some when they put out blanket statements like 'we can beat any of these 3 teams'. Well of course you 'can' it's a lottery in a single elimination tournament. All three of the other teams 'can' beat England as well.
 
ilikecheese said:
Personally I like that people are excited. They rightly should be. There is a real chance to win the whole thing. Been a long time since people who back England have been able to say that.

I do get annoyed with the overconfidence of some when they put out blanket statements like 'we can beat any of these 3 teams'. Well of course you 'can' it's a lottery in a single elimination tournament. All three of the other teams 'can' beat England as well.
Click to expand...
Belgium/France crush the FLA, at this stage I'm just hoping those providing public service can stay safe
 
Walken said:
I'm not gonna read that essay Chris, I sincerely hope you enjoy the world cup as it's been thrilling, but the idea of some kind of meta tactics from Southgate is laughable, good day sir
Click to expand...

Fair enough but I find your posts re England (not this one about reading long posts) miss the point completely as well as being ridiculously perverse and extremely churlish.
 

Chris O'Connor said:
Southgate really went up in my estimation for taking what was a gamble against Belgium's second string - (which we lost to finish second in the group) even if it was very much a strategically justified one and one he really had to take imo.

Gareth gambled by resting almost his entire team against Belgium's second string, he could easily have tried to maintain 'momentum' with an easier last sixteen tie against Japan in prospect and field a stronger team (indeed many here were posting he should definitely have done just that and maintaining that any people proposing any alternative plan were just deluded) but it's paid off big time.

Lots of England managers have failed before we know that, a few have reached the quarters or better but only a very select few the semis or better, in fact only Ramsey and Robson.

Southgate despite having a young side, one which is likely to be far better in future tournaments, in two and four years time, has seized the chance to take this side beyond any realistic pre-tournament expectations. He's now achieved that and the gamble has produced the results hoped for. He gambled for a reason and it didn't involve games against Brazil or France.

The side has obvious defensive frailties and lacks an effective central playmaker normally so needed in tournament football, an English one doesn't exist atm and Gareth can't simply magic one up, he's not a club manager and he can't just buy one.

Suddenly, and perhaps quite unexpectedly, a freak of the draw offered this side, one so lacking in so many ways, a unique opportunity to reach a stage way beyond its capabilities would normally merit.

This was possibly a once in a lifetime and life changing opportunity that has put Southgate's name in the same bracket as Bobby Robson. He's now achieved this and could even go better.

He could have tried to take the nice easy safe option and aimed to put a ceiling, an upper limit on England's best possible outcome, one of beating Japan even if probably exposed by Brazil. He could have played more or less his strongest team and tried to beat a second string Belgium and gone on to maybe beat Japan, not a certainty either.

He instead thought strategically, recognised the opportunity such a massively lopsided draw had given him, it was so stark, it was absolutely unique, it had never broken this way before, it had just never ever happened before.

He was risking the gleeful 'told you so's' of all the hindsight merchants, all the press who win both ways and the usual friendly souls who always predict or wish the worst possible catastrophe on any England manager, the chippy and those Scots who support anyone England play. To be such a one isn't a good look.

He had to go for it and did

To come back now and slate him for not achieving anything as the route was easier is not just unfair, it's patently ludicrous.
Click to expand...
Southgate wanted to recall Rooney.
Rooney then proper retired.
Just sayin like.
 
In 1990 we won just one game in 90 mins against the might of Egypt in the group stage. We beat one half decent team on route to the semi final (belgium in the last 16). We had the luck of the draw that year, but out luck ran out in the semi against Germany, as we deserved to win that game. I’d say the 90 side had better players. Pearce, Gascoigne, Lineker, Beardsley were all world class players. Oh how we’d love Pearce and Gascoigne in their prime on Wednesday. However there seems a unity about this team compared to other more favoured teams during the ‘golden generation’ and there certainly isn’t any egos like there was in previous squads. 50/50 game on Wednesday, small margins decide such games.
 
Croatia is spent. Can't seem then beating England. I think it will be a bit fairly decisive win for England.

But then again, I'm near dead-last in the WC prediction thread.
 

I think Southgate's 5-3-2 is a bit of a masterstroke to be honest. It turns every game into dull as anything, slow-cooked ass, allowing England's players to use their physicality to overwhelm their opponents, either by running around a lot or at set pieces. And then when someone inevitably does a ridiculous pass or just falls over or whatever, Kyle Walker is there to sprint back and cover, because he's not trying to be a good player and attack, he's standing around on the halfway line as a centreback for exactly that purpose. It's clever. Conservative, but clever.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top