World Cup Qatar

[EtoileSportiveDeDerby]

1 hour ago, Bris Vegas said:

Both of their goals came out of nowhere. It wasn’t sustained pressure of anything. And that first goal was one of those where he could try that again another 50 times and he wouldn’t score.

Giroud had a decent chance before he scored admittedly. But generally, that second half was as dominant as I’ve ever seen England against a top team. 

Some people hate stats. But we had 58% possession, double the shots on goal and double the corners.

That wasn’t a usual England performance. Go back over the years against the likes of Brazil, Portugal, Germany (2010) and Italy and we were on the ropes most of the game. Not this time.

Good thing is players like Bellingham, Rice, Saka and Foden will only get better. I think only Henderson and Walker are the two who will be playing their last World Cup. The rest will still be top players in 2026.

 

 

Football my friend, I' ll be the 1st to admit we (France) did not deserve it. England at the very least deserve to go to extra time and  i was dreading this as our bench was nowhere near as good as yours. Our play off final vs QPR, the WC final lost  vs Italy I could go on with the games I can look back on  and think we did not deserve this, but the bottom line line is at the top level you got to take the very few chances you get. Especially a pen in the last minutes of a game. I agree with you with  the players coming through England will be rightly considered contenders for future tournaments as opposed to a nation that matters but isn't expected to be in contention for titles.

Onto the semis France A vs France B, what could possibly go wrong?

[Bris Vegas]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

Because the contact is not with Kane's feet , it's with his upper leg, he is leaning forward. And the contact continues further inside the box. 

That the contact continues into the box is irrelevant per the laws of the game.

The initial contact (foul) is all that counts and it happened outside the box.

Either way, it made little difference. We were losing 1-0 at the time and we still equalised.

It would be different if this occurred 0-0 or 1-1.

But we were seeking an equaliser at the time. And we got it anyway.

I guess the only thing you could say is IF we were awarded a penalty then and IF Kane had scored, we would have been in exactly the sane position as we were early in the second half but with an extra 20 minutes of play.

But going back to the original point. It was outside the box. VAR didn’t get involved because it was outside the box.

The commentators even mentioned this. VAR deemed it outside the box.

[Carl Sagan]

4 hours ago, Bris Vegas said:

Yeah, I’m not disagreeing. Saka and Kane were both clearly fouled and the officials waved it off.

The France goal I don’t see much of a foul on Saka. But other occasions definitely.

But it wasn’t a penalty. VAR couldn’t do anything in this case because it was outside the box.

The ref is letting a lot go. Assuming he stays consistent, we need to get more physical with them.

On a side note. Walker on the ball has been good. Shaw has been rubbish.

 

4 hours ago, Bris Vegas said:

The foul on Kane, which was a foul, happened outside the box. 

I normally like your analysis but here you're like one of those commentators who calls it wrong and then, even when shown the replay, keeps digging. The foul started outside of the box but clearly continued inside, not even just on the line. It was one of many appalling decisions by the referee, but also a quite shocking piece of VAR analysis. Here's a freeze frame with Kane being fouled well inside the penalty area.

 

 

Edited December 11, 2022 by Carl Sagan

[Alph]

2 hours ago, ariotofmyown said:

"Hi guys, I was quite good at free kicks in an England team full of inflated egos. That is why we were always so poor in tournaments. But our friends in the media have successfully spun a narrative that people like me, JT, Lamps and Stevie G were great players. The only really good player from that copper generation was Ashley Cole, but he is black so the tabloids had to have a go at him. Rooney was great too, but just working class scum. Anyway, I want to see more ego, less squad harmony, more slavery to the filthy lucre. Only then might you get a 150 million gig to promote Qatar, even though you used to advocate for gay rights."

Mic drop.

[Ambitious]

It was a game if played 100 times would probably finish with 40 wins for France, 40 wins for England and 20 draws. Difficult to take, but a lot of heart in the performance. It's football. 

[kevinhectoring]

1 hour ago, Bris Vegas said:

The commentators even mentioned this. VAR deemed it outside the box.

I guess they decided it wasn’t clearly and obviously in the box   Fair enough, but the ref had to give something 

[Bris Vegas]

1 hour ago, Carl Sagan said:

 

I normally like your analysis but here you're like one of those commentators who calls it wrong and then, even when shown the replay, keeps digging. The foul started outside of the box but clearly continued inside, not even just on the line. It was one of many appalling decisions by the referee, but also a quite shocking piece of VAR analysis. Here's a freeze frame with Kane being fouled well inside the penalty area.

 

 

But the initial contact was outside the box. The initial foul was outside.

By letter of the law, it’s irrelevant that it continued inside the box.

It’s like with shirt grabbing. They always pull it back to where the foul started, not where the player later fell to the floor.

VAR and neutral commentators explained it was outside the box.

We can agree on one thing though. It was 100% a foul. Ridiculous it wasn’t given alongside another foul on Saka which was waved off.

[PistoldPete]

1 hour ago, Bris Vegas said:

But the initial contact was outside the box. The initial foul was outside.

By letter of the law, it’s irrelevant that it continued inside the box.

It’s like with shirt grabbing. They always pull it back to where the foul started, not where the player later fell to the floor.

VAR and neutral commentators explained it was outside the box.

We can agree on one thing though. It was 100% a foul. Ridiculous it wasn’t given alongside another foul on Saka which was waved off.

Here is the letter of the FA  law 12.3 on Advantage:

"If a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area and continues holding inside the penalty area, the referee must award a penalty kick".

So you are wrong, I'm afraid. 
 

 

[Gritstone Ram]

I am starting to like the ethos Southgate has installed with England. There is no cynical fouling or trying to cheat or bad discipline. I think he should stay for the next World Cup.

[Bob The Badger]

2 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

Here is the letter of the FA  law 12.3 on Advantage:

"If a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area and continues holding inside the penalty area, the referee must award a penalty kick".

So you are wrong, I'm afraid. 
 

 

Yeah, Phillip Walton explained that on TV.   Said the way the ref played it that it was definitely a penalty.

Sorry @Bris Vegas but your letter of the law isn't the letter of the law. 

[TimRam]

Thought we were better team after their goal. Ref was rubbish. France dirty. Did not think Saka should have come off. kane possibly lost balance for that second penalty? Well done England we more than matched the holders.

[Mucker1884]

I can confirm that in a tiny remote corner of rural SW France, one Englishman was so enraged last night, he threw his baguette at the telly, and our (French) soon-to-be-daughter-in-law is refusing to wipe the mayonnaise of the screen, so he'll have to do it himself!  She's a hard one, that girl!  ??

[BramcoteRam84]

While I’m gutted I feel really positive about the future for England. The potential of this team is frightening. We got to a Semi in 2018 when we weren’t good enough, the draw helped us but amazing turnaround from 2016. Big squad turnover for Euros, lost on penalties in the final, I don’t think we were ready to win, we froze when we needed to be assertive (manager included).  Last night against a good team, we did most things right but didn’t have the luck which you also need. In losing that game it proved to me what I knew that we’re ready to win a major tournament.
 

Before we’d get to a semi then wouldn’t even get to the QF for another 10-12 years. We will be in the running in Euro 24, in US, Canada, Mex in 2026, and also a decent chance in Euro 28 and WC 2030. Id back us to win at least one of those tournaments. 

[Anag Ram]

I know it’s heresy but are there not occasions on which it might be an idea to substitute Harry Kane?

He is undoubtedly our best striker but every now and then it would be nice to see the pace and direct style of Rashford and Wilson together.

Also thought it was tailor-made for Maddison last night. Henderson put a shift in but was sucking air from the hour mark.

Shoulda, woulda, coulda. We lost.

[Skin em Ted]

Can’t believe how mardy I still get over these England defeats, it’s like it triggers those childhood traumas… for me going back to 1990, others have been suffering this since 1970. We all know how it ends, and try to use that experience to not get so invested… but the hope sucks you in each time.

It’s so hard to win a World Cup, and is getting tougher all the time as teams from Africa, Asia and North America keep improving. No great team has a divine right to win things but I feel it’s a shame this match was only a quarter final. This team deserves to be remembered as more than quarter finalists - compared to the real chokers under Sven. This match was worthy of a final and we could’ve took some consolation in not winning as being one of the greatest teams not to win it where it further along in the comp - like Holland in the 70s or Brazil in 82. Gutted for Kane, you can see in his eyes the World Cup trophy slip away from his reach. Back to square one in four years time is brutal!

[Van der MoodHoover]

On 08/12/2022 at 13:57, Bris Vegas said:

We’re at the crunch end of the tournament now. Morocco and Croatia are underdogs, but the other six are genuine challengers.

I think the semi-finals will be Holland vs Brazil and England vs Portugal.

If England don’t win it, then I’d want Messi to. 

Anyone but Portugal.
 

0 out of 4 is woeful even for you old chap! ?

[Ram-a-lama fa fa fa]

7 hours ago, Ambitious said:

It was a game if played 100 times would probably finish with 40 wins for France, 40 wins for England and 20 draws. Difficult to take, but a lot of heart in the performance. It's football. 

i agree. even with the benefit of hindsight theres not alot people would of changed. perhaps leave saka on, perhaps put maddison on? i dont know. at the end of the its all about taking your chances. france did. we didnt im afraid

[EtoileSportiveDeDerby]

1 hour ago, Mucker1884 said:

I can confirm that in a tiny remote corner of rural SW France, one Englishman was so enraged last night, he threw his baguette at the telly, and our (French) soon-to-be-daughter-in-law is refusing to wipe the mayonnaise of the screen, so he'll have to do it himself!  She's a hard one, that girl!  ??

Good girl!! And next time, your lad can lick the Dijon mustard clean of the screen. Rule no. 1 in France, no matter how upset you are, you don't mess with baguette ? 

[BondJovi]

1 hour ago, Anag Ram said:

I know it’s heresy but are there not occasions on which it might be an idea to substitute Harry Kane?

He is undoubtedly our best striker but every now and then it would be nice to see the pace and direct style of Rashford and Wilson together.

Also thought it was tailor-made for Maddison last night. Henderson put a shift in but was sucking air from the hour mark.

Shoulda, woulda, coulda. We lost.

My only real criticism of last night were the safe subs. Don't really see what benefit there was to taking Saka off, certainly not for Sterling. 

I agree on Maddison. Football seems to have a knack of creating heroes in these moments. It seemed set up for such a time. 

[Gaspode]

4 minutes ago, BondJovi said:

My only real criticism of last night were the safe subs. Don't really see what benefit there was to taking Saka off, certainly not for Sterling. 

I agree on Maddison. Football seems to have a knack of creating heroes in these moments. It seemed set up for such a time. 

Must admit that my heart sank when I saw Sterling coming on - he's had a crap season for Chelsea, the issues at home and had only just got off the plane back to Quatar - hardly the player to choose when you need someone with a bit of magic - and when he got out on the wing with a couple of minutes to go and then turned away from goal, he just looked completely lost...It's one of the reasons people want Southgate out - he's so risk averse when the pressures on - would rather bring on a player he knows and trusts than take a risk on a maverick like Madison.

I can't criticise Southgate for the spirit he's instilled in this group of players, but they are so talented that there will always be the question of whether they could have done better with someone in charge with more nous of winning tournaments (or bigger balls). I've seen people saying how much better we are than 5 or 6 years ago - agree we are, but is that down to Southgate or is it a result of Greg Dykes' and the FA strategic plan that built St George's park, limited overseas players, and brought through the players who've already won age related competitions? I'm loath to praise the football authorities, but I do wonder if we'd have had at least as much success with a manager other than Southgate given the footballing riches he's been presented with....