England at World Cup 2014

What a load of rubbish. Yes, there is. A bit of luck can turn a terrible result in to a good one.

That will be because of tiredness or poor defending. Many would say Bayern were unlucky in 1999 final but how about Beckham's classy corners or the substitutions Fergie made in the end. There's no luck in football. When opportunity meets a well-prepared team, the losing team uses tough luck as an excuse.

We aren't a good enough team to sail through purely on skill, I agree but if you actually watched both games you can quite clearly see we were very unfortunate to lose both games, it was also the result of a lack of experience and some naive tactics, not being "Not good enough."

How were we unfortunate? Rooney missed about 3-4 clear cut chances a player of his calibre should be scoring. That's not down to luck, that's just poor performance.

No luck in football eh? Seriously, of course there is. Chelsea had heaps of it on the way to their champions league win for one.

Chelsea won that competition cos they defended ever so well & when they conceded goals, they were brave enough to go to the other end of the pitch to score.

I don't see what you're trying to get at with this. I'm not saying its only luck holding us back from winning the thing. I'm saying we were a bit unlucky in the group stages and didn't really deserve to go out on the basis of our play. Also; I'm talking purely about this tournament, not about England since 1966. We haven't been good enough to win it since then (Apart from maybe a couple of teams who were good enough) and that's not down to luck. Of course we haven't done as well as we should have, that's not my point whatsoever. I'm talking about here and now.

What do you mean by on the basis of our play? Games are determined by the number of goals you score not how pretty you play. On the basis of beauty, Arsenal & Swansea should be winning the Premier League every season. Of what essence is pretty football without scoring?

Uruguay were better overall?! Did you even watch the game? First person I've seen say this and it sounds ridiculous. We were easily the better team. They had 2 shots on target the entire match, a world-class clinical striker took their two only real chances of the game. We had all the play otherwise, they were not better overall by any means. We lacked the experience and clinical play needed to win the game, that's all. Not the "skill". Uruguay could barely pass the ball most of the time, they weren't skilful they were hard-working and hard to beat. Against Italy, it was a more even match but we took the game to a very good side which we haven't done in a tournament in a long while, had plenty of chances and tactical naivety cost us. We were certainly unlucky not to get a point.

Uruguay were better overall. They had a plan & their tactics worked a trick. They put a man-marker each on Gerrard & Rooney and England's creative hub was neutralised. It was always going to be down to fine margins - individual brilliance in front of goal. Suarez & Rooney had 4 chances each. Suarez converted 2 of them and Rooney could only score one of his chances.

2 is greater than 1, no?

The media overhyping mediocre players? I've barely seen the media hype up anyone. They've been pretty flat with this side since the World Cup if I'm honest, as has everyone else. Nobody thinks this side are world-beaters anymore. Most actually underrate the side and bash it more than necessary if anything.

Yes, they overhyped England before the tourney. A cursory glance at Guardian Sports would see various articles hyping Gerrard as the messiah that would take England to the promised land. The hype raises expectations & it puts enormous pressure on the players. The outcome is always horrible.
 
We've produced some excellent players who are far better than just "good."

Exactly, player for player we've had some excellent players. The issue is the cohesion between the team. Getting to the root of this problem as we've seen over the years isn't easy. Capello was hailed as being a world class manager, but when we got to the world cup we were terrible. We may have gone out sooner this time but I preferred this tournament under Roy than the one under Fabio.
 
Cahill & Jagielka formed a decent partnership in qualifiers and played numerous games together. Other partnerships didn't work as well, there honestly wasn't that much else to turn to.

In the qualifiers against the shittiest teams in Europe? My great grandmother would cop a world class performance against San Marino, Moldova & Montenegro and she's half-blind. Don't use those qualifying games to rate players - The opposition are mostly shit.
 
Terry should have been there with Cahill. Love him or loath him he is England's Puyol and look how shit Spain are without him. Woy doesn't inspire me with any confidence. His team under achieved and could end up 0-3.
 
Funny how before the tournament England were "pressure-free" for the first time, with no grand expectations to hold them back. Now they're being put next to Spain as the biggest disappointments of the tournament, after narrowly losing to two top sides?
 
Terry should have been there with Cahill. Love him or loath him he is England's Puyol and look how shit Spain are without him. Woy doesn't inspire me with any confidence. His team under achieved and could end up 0-3.

You raise a very good point there....

Terry should have been coaxed back into the squad. He was the best central defender last season and he actually has a chemistry with Cahill. Besides that, Terry is a natural leader. He is very vocal & he instructs his team mates where he wants them to be. Cahill is a good defender but his positioning can be wayward sometimes and Terry would have been a wonderful guide dog for Cahill.

Jaglieka/Cahill partnership was just wrong.
 
In the qualifiers against the shittiest teams in Europe? My great grandmother would cop a world class performance against San Marino, Moldova & Montenegro and she's half-blind. Don't use those qualifying games to rate players - The opposition are mostly shit.

Why do you sound angry when talking about England? Shit like this tells me you are anti-England no matter how good or poor England are. I get the same vibe from that guy from New Zealand.

I come to the conclusion people FEAR a strong England - I think the thought of the home of football and the country with arguably the best league in the world and the country who spends the most money also having the best national side in the world, people fear it and don't like it and rejoice when failure happens.
 
Why do you sound angry when talking about England? Shit like this tells me you are anti-England no matter how good or poor England are. I get the same vibe from that guy from New Zealand.

Because unlike you, I call a spade what it is. Admitting there's a problem in the structure is the first step to redemption. England are not good enough at this level - it's not about me being anti-England. I want England to do well every time. My favourite players are mostly English players.

I come to the conclusion people FEAR a strong England - I think the thought of the home of football and the country with arguably the best league in the world and the country who spends the most money also having the best national side in the world, people fear it and don't like it and rejoice when failure happens.

Stop trolling.....
 
In the qualifiers against the shittiest teams in Europe? My great grandmother would cop a world class performance against San Marino, Moldova & Montenegro and she's half-blind. Don't use those qualifying games to rate players - The opposition are mostly shit.

I'm not. All I'm saying is you said they've barely played together when they are probably our most used partnership at the back. We have very few options there to be fair to Roy, its our weakest position.
 
Why do you sound angry when talking about England? Shit like this tells me you are anti-England no matter how good or poor England are. I get the same vibe from that guy from New Zealand.

I come to the conclusion people FEAR a strong England - I think the thought of the home of football and the country with arguably the best league in the world and the country who spends the most money also having the best national side in the world, people fear it and don't like it and rejoice when failure happens.

There is certainly a lot of hatred directed towards England in general from abroad. A lot of it is to do with jealousy I believe due to our success in other areas and in football its one of the few things they can poke fun at us about.

I don't think this guy is one of those people though, he's just speaking the truth and fair play to him, I actually agree with some of what he is saying, I just don't think the situation is quite as bad as he makes out or that we're as terrible as all that.
 
England took the wrong 2 left backs for starters

How do we know if Shaw was the wrong back up to take? He hasn't had a chance yet. He'll start vs. Costa Rica and we can (sort of) judge from there.

Baines was by a distance the best English LB last year and the year before. His stats in the league are incredible for a fullback, he's a great attacking threat for Everton down that left-hand side. Unfortunately it didn't happen for him with the NT, I think it's down to his mentality and also as Hannibal said, whereas Baines has great chemistry with the players down the left for Everton and they know how to make him tick, our wingers have played very little with him and don't have the same understanding.
 
I don't think you can make that claim, until we see which team wins it. Greece won the Euro's with a clear identity and way to play and nobody could claim that side was anywhere near as talented as this England team.

You don't need to have an incredible team to win a world cup. With some luck, a decent draw, a good system that works with the players etc you can win it without world-stars. We certainly at the very least have the team to do well.

I have very much made the claim and stick by it.
 
Havent read the thread so much but heres my two pence.

The reason we were eliminated so early is for various reasons but I think for me at least there are three very clear reasons we are taking an early flight home.

1. Overwhelming support for essentially rubbish/inexperienced players.

The first game I caught on my way home from a flight and when I arrived at the place I was watching it all my friends were raving about Sterling....I was baffled, what I witnessed from him were various runs to the byline resulting in smashing a cross into someones shins. I was bemused to find out his only real effective piece of play was the pass to Rooney...I was later even more bemused when he started against Uraguay and proceeded to do absolutely nothing. Not only him but Sturridge, providing nothing in the entire two games other than one tap in and couple of hopeful shots, he simply isnt as clinical as everyone thinks, for the team he literally offers nothing, how many times are you screaming PASS at the screen. Barkley looked good for roughly 2 mins when he came on and proceeded to go completely missing, offering yet again nothing to the team.

I wont go into everyone but heres a little round up of people who shouldnt have started the uraguay game: Henderson, Gerrard, Johnson, Sterling and perhaps Jagielka.

People were ranting and raving about the way Everton and Liverpool have been playing, fantastic, yes but sorry, when was the last time those players played in a high pressure international competition like the CL or even the EL, honestly how could we expect a team full of players more used to battling against West Brom and Palace with literally no experience from playing teams such as Bayern, Barca, Real? Even the likes of Gala, Dynamo and so forth. From the moment we were arrogant enough to think these players could automatically play to that level, we might as well have booked our flights home.

2. English Press

As usual the English press chose to pick out a player and absolutely berate them for no apparent reason, embarrassing, NO OTHER country does this, yet we leak game plans, slag Rooney off for what? will it help? How embarrassing is it that our own players have to defend themselves against our own media. Not only that but the utter ridiculous and misplaced hype for substandard players was shocking.

3. England have no central creative players

Countless times in the match we would get into the right positions, start circulating posession around the edges of the box, not a single player made an intelligent run and if they did there was no one there to place the pass, we decided to go for players that can do a job rather than create anything new or unpredictable.


I wont rabbit on too long but I wasnt shocked or surprised to see us go out, it was obvious, sometimes we are in our little bubble in the prem, we dont look at the bigger picture nor understand the game on the continent, we think simply slapping the players together and hoping for the best will work. We want to drop players in favour for someone who can do step-overs. We want to play old "legends" because wed be "worse off" without them with no regard for the opposition at all, for the level of competition. For some reason unknown to me Uraguay were cast aside as an easy victory. As usual the country with the best league in the world has a bunch of clueless ride alongs in the press.

Incidentally this would have been my team based on the first game and needing a win in the second.

Forster (CL experience, less flappy than Hart)
Jones (CL- Title Winner)- Cahill (CL Winner)- Smalling (CL- Title Winner)- Baines (No other option)
Wilshire (CL)- Lampard (CL Winner)
Ox (Risked it, CL)- Rooney (CL Winner)-Lallana (No one else, very creative)
Welbeck (CL, scores in big games)

Yes the new blood should have gone, but relying on the likes of Henderson, Sterling was shocking to me. Sterling should be used like Januzaj for Belgium.

Fell free to destroy me, but it was embarrassing how we are behind such over rated players.
 
I have very much made the claim and stick by it.


Then you are also claiming that that Greece side had better players than England when they won the Euro's. Which would be ridiculous. That team was unbelievably average, but they had an excellent game plan that saw them beat superior sides.

It's not beyond the realm of possibility that this England team could win 2018. It's very unlikely but its possible, with a clear identity and some decent tactics. This is football, the best team doesn't always win the tournaments. See Liverpool 2005 and Chelsea 2012 and like I said, Greece 2004.


For example, I would only take Howard in to the England starting 11 and he's a goalkeeper (and some would still take Hart) yet as a team they have performed much better because they are motivated and well organized/drilled. You don't need a team of stars to win.
 
Havent read the thread so much but heres my two pence.

The reason we were eliminated so early is for various reasons but I think for me at least there are three very clear reasons we are taking an early flight home.

1. Overwhelming support for essentially rubbish/inexperienced players.

The first game I caught on my way home from a flight and when I arrived at the place I was watching it all my friends were raving about Sterling....I was baffled, what I witnessed from him were various runs to the byline resulting in smashing a cross into someones shins. I was bemused to find out his only real effective piece of play was the pass to Rooney...I was later even more bemused when he started against Uraguay and proceeded to do absolutely nothing. Not only him but Sturridge, providing nothing in the entire two games other than one tap in and couple of hopeful shots, he simply isnt as clinical as everyone thinks, for the team he literally offers nothing, how many times are you screaming PASS at the screen. Barkley looked good for roughly 2 mins when he came on and proceeded to go completely missing, offering yet again nothing to the team.

I wont go into everyone but heres a little round up of people who shouldnt have started the uraguay game: Henderson, Gerrard, Johnson, Sterling and perhaps Jagielka.

People were ranting and raving about the way Everton and Liverpool have been playing, fantastic, yes but sorry, when was the last time those players played in a high pressure international competition like the CL or even the EL, honestly how could we expect a team full of players more used to battling against West Brom and Palace with literally no experience from playing teams such as Bayern, Barca, Real? Even the likes of Gala, Dynamo and so forth. From the moment we were arrogant enough to think these players could automatically play to that level, we might as well have booked our flights home.

2. English Press

As usual the English press chose to pick out a player and absolutely berate them for no apparent reason, embarrassing, NO OTHER country does this, yet we leak game plans, slag Rooney off for what? will it help? How embarrassing is it that our own players have to defend themselves against our own media. Not only that but the utter ridiculous and misplaced hype for substandard players was shocking.

3. England have no central creative players

Countless times in the match we would get into the right positions, start circulating posession around the edges of the box, not a single player made an intelligent run and if they did there was no one there to place the pass, we decided to go for players that can do a job rather than create anything new or unpredictable.


I wont rabbit on too long but I wasnt shocked or surprised to see us go out, it was obvious, sometimes we are in our little bubble in the prem, we dont look at the bigger picture nor understand the game on the continent, we think simply slapping the players together and hoping for the best will work. We want to drop players in favour for someone who can do step-overs. We want to play old "legends" because wed be "worse off" without them with no regard for the opposition at all, for the level of competition. For some reason unknown to me Uraguay were cast aside as an easy victory. As usual the country with the best league in the world has a bunch of clueless ride alongs in the press.

Incidentally this would have been my team based on the first game and needing a win in the second.

Forster (CL experience, less flappy than Hart)
Jones (CL- Title Winner)- Cahill (CL Winner)- Smalling (CL- Title Winner)- Baines (No other option)
Wilshire (CL)- Lampard (CL Winner)
Ox (Risked it, CL)- Rooney (CL Winner)-Lallana (No one else, very creative)
Welbeck (CL, scores in big games)

Yes the new blood should have gone, but relying on the likes of Henderson, Sterling was shocking to me. Sterling should be used like Januzaj for Belgium.

Fell free to destroy me, but it was embarrassing how we are behind such over rated players.

Consider yourself destroyed.

It's not even necessary to go through your post and take it apart bit by bit .. and would be a total waste of time on you. Your 'team' destroys all credibility you may have elicited from a few, despite the previous 3 paragraphs of drivel. I mean seriously inserting players stating 'CL Winners' (from 6 years ago) as if it is some form of validation for inclusion and dropping players who were actually amongst the best (Sterling was our MoM against Italy and Sturridge one of the best too, but you would drop them against Uruguay based on that)!? Claiming there is no other option to Baines (when Shaw is sat on the bench), that Lampard, a 36 yr old. is a viable option to run the MF and then incredibly, including Ox-Chamb.' when he is injured FFS, saying 'Risk It' !?!?!?

And before you try to find some other excuse for that team let's remind ourselves of your words above :

Incidentally this would have been my team based on the first game and needing a win in the second.

Rarely have I seen a more ill-conceived, and biased, post of utter rubbish. You are right it really is embarrassing.
 
Last edited:
There is certainly a lot of hatred directed towards England in general from abroad. A lot of it is to do with jealousy I believe due to our success in other areas


Well that's one way of putting it, I suppose. :wenger:
 
Well that's one way of putting it, I suppose. :wenger:

You don't think any of the irrational hatred SOME foreigners direct towards England/Britain is anything to do with jealousy? It's not the sole reason but its part of it.
 
You don't think any of the irrational hatred SOME foreigners direct towards England/Britain is anything to do with jealousy?

No, I don't. But we could all do without the thread being derailed by discussions of history & politics, so I'll leave it there.
 
That will be because of tiredness or poor defending. Many would say Bayern were unlucky in 1999 final but how about Beckham's classy corners or the substitutions Fergie made in the end. There's no luck in football. When opportunity meets a well-prepared team, the losing team uses tough luck as an excuse.

Are you serious? So if a referee gives a bad decision against you then that isn't luck? England have been poor with defensive errors but in the Uruguay game, Godin should have been sent off, 10 men with your best defender off is a whole different proposition. England might still not have won but we will never know. This doesn't obviously disguise their poor performances and is no excuse but all teams who have won major tournaments, leagues, cups etc have had some form of luck be that in whatever form. Of course you don't win tournaments with luck alone but there is always luck in football and because the World Cup is only a small number of games, it can make the difference.
 
Are you serious? So if a referee gives a bad decision against you then that isn't luck? England have been poor with defensive errors but in the Uruguay game, Godin should have been sent off, 10 men with your best defender off is a whole different proposition. England might still not have won but we will never know. This doesn't obviously disguise their poor performances and is no excuse but all teams who have won major tournaments, leagues, cups etc have had some form of luck be that in whatever form. Of course you don't win tournaments with luck alone but there is always luck in football and because the World Cup is only a small number of games, it can make the difference.

It's not luck - it's just incompetence of a match official. There are 90 mins in a football game to do something about the incorrect decision of a referee.

For instance, England is playing Nigeria.......Nigeria got a goal through a dubious decision to take the lead. England cannot use that as an excuse cos they needed a goal in the first place to beat Nigeria(dubious decision or not)....At worst, the game should end in a draw not a loss.
 
Some country's just do that, poverty probably as something to do with it, poor country's like Brazil/Argentina/Portugal - All kids have is a football and they play from getting up until they go to bed, kids from western nations are spoiled and have other things in life other than a football.

Look at Uruguay - Population of just over 3 million yet won the World Cup twice and probably have the best strike force in the world right now in Suarez and Cavani.

Still to say England have never produced truly great players is unfair as we've had players who have left their mark on the game and won MOTM's on some of the biggest stages of them all (Champions League final) and usually have several players per generation highly regarded as the best (or one of) in their area of expertise.

About the South Americans true, but don't forget Germany, the Netherlands, France and Spain. With England, I'm just saying we never quite have that X factor type of player. Many of the great teams down the years have had this. Zidane and Platini for France, Cruyff and Van Basten for the Netherlands, Beckenbaur and Matthaus for Germany and recently Iniesta and Xavi for Spain.

With the exception of the odd time like Greece in Euro 2004, you need that special type of player who can get you out in the close games with the other big nations. Suarez being an example the other night. And England over the years have often been undone by a special player like Zidane in Euro 2004 scoring a freekick in the last few seconds or Ronaldinho and Rivaldo in 2002 or Maradona in 86.
 
Part of the problem is tactical, part is player selection and part player performance. To me it seems like England's managers take the players who would make up most people's top 23 list rather than the 23 player who would best fit with the philosophy of what England is try to do.

I think Garreth Barry while not a spectacular player would have added stability.

I also find it difficult to figure out England's footballing identity.
 
You don't think any of the irrational hatred SOME foreigners direct towards England/Britain is anything to do with jealousy? It's not the sole reason but its part of it.

It's to do with our media acting like fools down the years.
 
Bit too late to be fielding that highly attacking side. Woy will get massive stick fi they turn Costa Rica over.
 
I truly truly don't get the Lampard one, why does he NEED a sendoff? He's got the 100 caps, he really doesn't need it. But he'll probably score. Should of kept Sterling in there, or give Rooney his first genuine game as the captain.
 
I truly truly don't get the Lampard one, why does he NEED a sendoff? He's got the 100 caps, he really doesn't need it. But he'll probably score. Should of kept Sterling in there, or give Rooney his first genuine game as the captain.

This is symptomatic of the over sentimental approach to Hodgson's World Cup. It's about time he took the job seriously enough to forward the nation's cause. That means being more cut throat and less mollycoddling of his favoured players. I don't think he sees what he is doing. I'm sorry, but this is just unacceptable, and quite frankly, unprofessional. Given our spectacular failure, he could at least pretend he has some tactical nous and make some bloody meaningful changes.
 


Thoughts?


Our B team, but a better side than half of the country's who will qualify for the last 16 tbf.

*Waits for the anti-England response*

3231230758_Angry_Muslim2_xlarge.jpeg


:nervous: