England 0 Portugal 0

[waggy]

i said we would go out in the quarters,i was right,incredible game fantastic staduim and 2 little boys having a tantrum

[ihtd]

I just got back from germany last night and it were amazing, shame about the result but the whole trip were amazing.

I signed the England bus using my log in name for here, and gave the site a big plug with a massive marker pen, just next to where Pele signed it. i've got a picture of moi signing the bus on my dads camera somewhere, i'll post it when i get the chance lads.

[FourLaneBlue]

Sir Alf Ramsey said that you play the best player that you have FOR EACH POSITION. So regardless of whether Lampard and Gerrard are "world class", they're both attacking midfielders who play in EXACTLY the same position.

True enough...and, for me, Lampard has proved he isn't in the same class as Gerrard and should therefore be dropped. Lampard has effectively played in Gerrard's position while Stevie has had to adujust his game accordingly. We shouldn't be doing that as Gerrard is the best player we have (certainly when ignoring the defending and looking at attacking and inspiring the team) yet has had to play second fiddle to a woefully out-of-form Lamps.

Glad Sven has gone as, although his reign was nowhere near as bad as suggested (comparing him unfavourably to Graham Taylor is just silly), he had run out of steam and ended up being the main problem of the side.

I don't know why people can't get it, they had a great team but didn't reach the levels expected the whole tournament.

They can get it Neekoy and many have done way before you mentioned it. Maybe it's because I'm abroad but even speaking to friends back home I have encountered less hurt at going out of a tournamant than ever before. People just didn't think we could do it with Sven or the way the team was. In the run-up to the tournament the excitement took over as it always does yet when we played we struggled so much we hoped for England to raise their game rather than expected it.

Regardless...being so close to the last four despite being crap shows that next time, despite having Stevie Mac as manager, we will all hope for a bit. Just like every other damn team in the competition, even the likes of Trinidad & Tobago, Greece or Slovenia*.

* Of course, one of those teams somehow managed to win the whole thing!

Every team in the semi's deserves to be there otherwise they wouldn't be there. I hope that Portugal or France win it.

Which means of course that if England had won the penalty shoot-out then according to you they deserved to be there.

Edited July 3, 2006 by FourLaneBlue

[Blue blood]

Gutted we went out, this was the best squad (or would have been if picked properly) for some time, and this was our best chance at success. Listening to the game (as was at a friend's wedding) I thought when down to 10 men we were excellent - giving rise to the question why don't we often play like that.

Sven got found out throughout the tournament - being proved right only in Hargreaves' ability. Lampard and Gerrard together has never really worked and with Lampard's poor form Sven had the perfect excuse to drop him but didn't. His squad selection - with Jenas and Walcott cost the team badly - neither was ever going to feature and thus we wasted 2 places. Rooney as sole striker was a daft idea too, even if he'd been 100% fit.

Gutted that it took until down to 10 men to find the real pride, passion and ability that should accompany playing for england. As for practicing penalties, if that's what we're like when we've practiced - i'm somewhat worried. Agree that it's a technical thing - if you it it firmly enough and far enough into the corner it the keeper won't get it.

As for Ronaldo - the wink says it all - absolutely disgraceful. Methinks he's trying to get a move to Madrid. The wink shows his intent and should be punished for it, not that the rest of the portugese are much better. Fifa has to act or it'll turn more people from the game.

[92er]

There is an excellent article by James Lawton in the Independent. It should be read by everybody who is an England fan, remembered by them and acted on by the appropriate people.

[SAS]

[Eddie]

I was away and have to be honest I haven't read through this yet, so apologies if it has been said, but quite down about it really. We all said better to play poorly and win then play well and lose and England proved that. I thought we were pretty excellent really, especially after Rooney went off. We looked solid while still getting forward, Lennon and Hargreaves in particular played very well. Didn't think Rooney deserved to be sent off and I thought the Lennon penalty shout was a very good one, though from where I was it was difficult to tell if the defender just got a touch of the ball. I thought we were the better side, but it is out on penalties as usual and we can all look forward to this again in four years time.

I will add that yet again the World Cup will be a huge anti-climax. I don't mind so much that England are no longer in it, but I'm really not looking forward to either of the semis or the possible final. It is nice to have teams get further than expected, but I also want to see the favourites play each other.

Edited July 3, 2006 by Eddie

[Oklahoma]

There is an excellent article by James Lawton in the Independent. It should be read by everybody who is an England fan, remembered by them and acted on by the appropriate people.

Is it this one?

James Lawton

[RoyRover]

England got as far as their football at this tournament and a favourable draw allowed them. Their overall performances meant that they simply weren't good enough, which must be disappointing for English fans when they look at some of the players they have. As Chris Waddle and Terry Butcher said on the radio and on the internet respectively after the game, even though England have wonderful talents like Gerrard, Rooney, Lampard and Terry, England have failed to consistently impress in all types of internationals, from qualification, to friendlies and in tournaments, under Sven (and even before his reign, 1 World Cup final and 2 World Cup semi-finals in their history) to have been considered genuine World Cup contenders. Very rarely under Sven have England played the type of football, that has set the likes of France, Brazil and Argentina apart from other good national teams over the past couple of years. Again, this must be a huge disappointment to English fans. The media frenzy before each tournament hypes the team up to impossible heights and you'd think that they'd learn just to keep quiet, not say daft things and see how the tournament progresses

England did well on Saturday with 10 men. Up until Rooney's justified sending off, it had been the same old England from the rest of the tournament. After this incident England played with real passion and heart, because they needed to. Portugal were totally inept in trying to break them down, but you must give credit to the back four which was immense. Again penalties seem to be the downfall of England and it's hard to understand why. When you hear Sven and Beckham talking about England deserving to be in the semi-final and the final, I'm not sure what they mean, because from their World Cup performances, this is the last place they deserve to be. There's no doubt that there are some special players in the team and they should do better, but as a team they aren't anything special.

[LeChuck]

Sir Alf Ramsey said that you play the best player that you have FOR EACH POSITION. So regardless of whether Lampard and Gerrard are "world class", they're both attacking midfielders who play in EXACTLY the same position.

Sorry, that is not right.

José Mourinho (whom many would consider the best manager around at the moment) did his utmost to sign Gerrard with the intention of playing him in a midfield quintet which would include Frank Lampard. It was not a question if chosing one or the other in a 4-5-1, the problem was that Sven only decided on this tactic during the World Cup and niether had time to work together in these roles...had they been given time to do so, I'm positive they would have been successful. As does Mourinho, obviously.

3) I would have brought on Walcott at teh start of the 2nd half of injury time for Lampard - Why? Lennon and Hargreave showed that a bit of pace at teh Portuguese is likely to have got us a goal - nad I think he would have scored/set up a goal. But bringing him on was the mother of all gambles - I think with 11 men on the pitch he would have done - with 10...... Im glad I wasnt the manager.

That is fair enough.

I'd still argue, however, that the managers of the teams still left in the tournament would have stuck with a 4-4-1 formation right to the end of extra time...given that most of them play with one up top even with eleven men.

The decision to take Jenas and not another striker was wrong, I'm not contesting that. The only thing I'm trying to point out to people is that this decision in no way affected us going out of the World Cup. In fact...and I really hope a few people reply to this bit...when Portugal were a man down against the Dutch, Scolari took the only striker Portugal had off the pitch (Pauleta) and played with not one natural forward...and this man is considered by a lot of people on here to be the best replacement for Sven. I'm not criticising Scolari's tactics here (how could I?), I'm simply trying to get the point across that the notion that a different manager would have gone for two forwards (implying that Sven is 'spineless' or something along those lines) whilst being a man down is nonsense...they wouldn't have.

Edited July 3, 2006 by LeChuck

[Oklahoma]

Scolari made a similar substitution in both cases (taking the striker off, putting a midfielder) but I guess he was only right in the first one.

In the game against Holland, Portugal was winning and the lack of striker made Portugal play in a 4-5-0. However, when attacking, Portugal could create danger as they have some fast players and Holland defenders missed a opposition reference to follow. While defending, everyone got behind the ball. That is understandable, as Portugal was winning.

Against England, I guess Scolari decided too soon. England were down to 10 men but he should have waited a little longer to make the substitution. If he was to make it then, he should have put another striker (I prefer Nuno Gomes) as Pauleta was playing really bad. So, for a while, Portugal had no reference in the front.

Sven opted, well I think, to put in a striker to make two defenders stay there. I wouldn't take off Joe Cole in that ocasion, I would probably take off Lampard or Gerrard.

No manager would put two strikers while down to 10 men, unless they are losing. English players were great after Rooney was sent off but they were playing a close game while trying to counterattack and a free kick or corner to Crouch to score/play with his team mates. With 2 strikers, it would have to be a more open game where the missing man might make a diference.

[Eddie]

I think Sven got everything right after the sending off, not his fault the players don't have what it takes to take a penalty.

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

Well what a wretched tournament for England this was...

After all the hype beforehand that this was the best English team for 35 years, this current so-called "golden generation" has failed to deliver - with several of our players simply not doing themselves justice in the tournament. The blame for our woeful World Cup performance I feel is two-fold - with both the players and the manager.

With doubts going into the tournament surrounding the fitness of Rooney and Owen, Eriksson's decision to take Theo Walcott as one of only four strikers was a major blunder. It wouldn't have been quite so bad to take Walcott as one of five strikers if Defoe or Bent were also included - but a blind man on a galloping horse could see that taking the inexperienced Walcott as one of only four strikers was clear folly. Why take Jermaine Jenas as one of nine midfielders?

Arsene Wenger said that Walcott was good enough. In that case, why didn't Wenger give Walcott a single minute in the Premiership last season? Wenger was happy for Walcott to miss the Champions League final altogether and not to have him on the bench for that night in Paris.

Five further points:

1) Apart from Beckham's free-kicks against Ecuador and Paraguay, he simply didn't do enough on the pitch, particularly in open play where he provided hardly any quality crosses from wide positions to cause damage to the opposition. When Aaron Lennon came on in the second half he looked lively, beating players and using his pace. Lennon should be the future for England on the right-wing.

2) Whether he was playing in a 4-4-2 or a 4-5-1 system, Frank Lampard had a particularly poor tournament. About 25 shots on goal, but not a single one troubling the opposition keepers.

3) It is patently clear that Peter Crouch is not a world-class striker. He neither has the pace, the mobility or the overall quality to be world-class. And the temptation for the other players is to hit the long-ball to him, which is a failed antiquated tactic at international level. Would Crouch get into the Barcelona team or the AC Milan team? Not a chance. He only scored against Trinidad and Tobago by pulling at one of the darkies dreadlocks.

4) Wayne Rooney was left too isolated on the pitch at times with not enough support from midfield. We saw signs of Rooney's abrasive Scouse temperament in the match against Sweden when after being substituted he kicked at a water bottle and threw his boots off.

Rooney previously disgraced himself in two earlier England games. Against Spain in a friendly he was highly fortunate not to be sent off, pushing the Spanish keeper over the stands and then throwing a hissy fit by ripping off his black armband. (Refusing to apologise afterwards.)

Against Northern Ireland, in one of our most humiliating performances in recent decades, Rooney also could have been sent off that night in Windsor Park, using his elbows and then throwing a hissy fit. The young Croxteth chav is a powder keg waiting to explode.

My own personal view (although it's difficult to prove) is that his foot into the groin of Carvalho was deliberate. Rooney's eyes were looking downwards when he put his foot backwards into Carvalho's groin. I don't believe that it was an accident and I feel his sending off was justified. Rooney is a highly talented player, but he needs to use his brain more often and calm down.

we don't seem to be as fit as other teams.

5) That was a point which Seb Coe (or Lord Coe as he's now known) made on a TV programme I watched on Sunday. Coe said that in his opinion the England squad didn't have the necessary speed, stamina and fitness levels required for the tournament. Coe, probably the finest middle distance runner Britain has produced, said that even allowing for the heat in some of the games, the England squad were not fit enough.

And yet we were told by Eriksson that cutting short the Premiership season a week early and having an extra week of preparation for the England squad would make all the difference. This wasn't the case.

We can look forward to four more years of Mr McClaren's training routines....

Alan Hansen: "Eriksson is to blame."

Don Howe: "Lampard, Gerrard and Beckham are to blame."

Edited July 4, 2006 by Anti Euro Smiths Fan

[LeChuck]

With doubts going into the tournament surrounding the fitness of Rooney and Owen, Eriksson's decision to take Theo Walcott as one of only four strikers was clearly a major blunder.

This is getting incredibly tiresome now.

Please explain how this decision affected us going out of the World Cup. The only way it possibly could have is if you consider Defoe/Bent a better player than Crouch, otherwise it had no bearing on the Portugal game whatsoever.

[RevidgeBlue]

Sven has definitely had the "best" (if that's what you can call it) out of the so called "golden generation."

Robinson 26

Neville 31

A Cole 25

Terry 25

Ferdinand 27

Lampard 28

Gerrard 26

J Cole 24

Beckham 31

Owen 26

Rooney 20

How many of that lot will be better players (or even as good) in 4 years time?

Rooney certainly. Hopefully Robinson, A Cole, Terry, and J Cole.

Even Gerrard may be on the decline by then.

Cheers Sven.

Memo to McClaren (and future England managers)

I'm 42 now and reckon I have another definite seven world Cups as a fan. So blooming well shape yourselves!

[American]

This is getting incredibly tiresome now.

Please explain how this decision affected us going out of the World Cup. The only way it possibly could have is if you consider Defoe/Bent a better player than Crouch, otherwise it had no bearing on the Portugal game whatsoever.

Because the decision gave him no choice but to play 4-5-1, leading to a toothless attack up until the sending off. Arguably it had every bearing on the Portugal game.

[Eddie]

It's amazing how when England lose it hurts so much more than when Rovers lose or having a ###### season.

I actually thought quite the opposite. The only reason why I really care all that much is because I have to wait four more years until we do it all again.

England are consistently poor in World Cup finals. Poor teams do not win World Cups. From that point of view, it was never going to happen.

We can argue til the cows come home how good the team looks on paper (pretty damn good, for the record), but when it comes to the crunch, you have to perform. England rarely do. When was the last time England beat a genuine contender for a major trophy in a knockout game?

France and certainly Portugal haven an equally poor history.

I don't know why people can't get it, they had a great team but didn't reach the levels expected the whole tournament.

I thought reaching the quarterfinals they way they were playing was a great result.

Every team in the semi's deserves to be there otherwise they wouldn't be there. I hope that Portugal or France win it.

Short memories for those who say England doesn't dive or cheat, have a quick flash back to Gerrard in the last friendly game before the tournament.

It wasn't poor refereeing, it wasn't johnny foreigner diving, it wasn't lady luck.

England were not good enough. (Neither was Australia before I get slighted because of my spectacles again)

You can argue until you are blue in the face but you'll never convince me that either France or Portugal have played well in these finals. They are both decent sides (and I stress decent), but neither have shown anything any better than what England produced. As for England diving, of course we do, EVERYONE does, the point is that we don't do it as often. From time to time you will see an England player dive (the only exception to this being Joe Cole who depending on how well he is playing will sometimes do it often if he isn't having a good day), but it isn't something the team does as a strategy. The likes of Portugal and Italy have it very much as part of their game, they all do it, all of the time, every game. There is no way that you can compare the two.

Now read the thread, why has no one mentioned the Lennon penalty appeal? Did the player get a touch on the ball? He seemed to go through Lennon first even if he did.

Sven has definitely had the "best" (if that's what you can call it) out of the so called "golden generation."

Robinson 26

Neville 31

A Cole 25

Terry 25

Ferdinand 27

Lampard 28

Gerrard 26

J Cole 24

Beckham 31

Owen 26

Rooney 20

How many of that lot will be better players (or even as good) in 4 years time?

Rooney certainly. Hopefully Robinson, A Cole, Terry, and J Cole.

Even Gerrard may be on the decline by then.

Cheers Sven.

Memo to McClaren (and future England managers)

I'm 42 now and reckon I have another definite seven world Cups as a fan. So blooming well shape yourselves!

Don't Sweat Rev, all of those players with the exception of Beckham and Neville will be there (though they are big gaps to fill), and they will all be better players. Also if you look at the likes of Lennon and Walcott coming through there is obvious talent. Four years ago there were few signs of Rooney, Cole being the player he is today, Terry being as good. It is a long time and there will be new players. Don't forget Hargreaves, only 24.

[LeChuck]

Sven has definitely had the "best" (if that's what you can call it) out of the so called "golden generation."

It's not as bad as it seems Rev...I think Hargreaves and Lennon will be better players come the next tournament, I can't see Ferdinand being any less of a pleyer at 31 either.

Obviously there will be players that come through in the next four years and claim places in the team...but we could conceivably go into the next tournament with the team lining up like...

Robinson

? Ferdinand Terry A. Cole

Lennon Hargreaves Gerrard J. Cole

Rooney Owen

...and, with the exception of Owen, none of them should be worse players than they are now, certainly not because of age anyway. Hopefully a world class right-back and another world class forward in a Shearer-esque mould (Ashon perhaps?) can come through before that tournament. Players like Carrick (possibly with four years as a ManUre player under his belt), King, Downing and Walcott should also have improved in that period.

I'd also wager a substantial amount on McClaren not being in charge for the next tournament either...at which point hopefully one of Pearce/Allardyce/Jewell/Pardew will have gone on to the next level at club management and be ready to step into the hotseat. Or maybe an aforementioned ex-Rover...

Because the decision gave him no choice but to play 4-5-1, leading to a toothless attack up until the sending off. Arguably it had every bearing on the Portugal game.

No decision? He could have easily played Crouch and Rooney from the start if wanted to play two up front.

Again...your theory only holds up if you consider Bent or Defoe to be ahead of Crouch in the pecking order. Given your scenario of England playing 4-4-2, choosing from a squad that contained another striker instead of Jenas...we'd have started with two up top, reverted to one when Rooney had gone, then stuck with one until penalties.

Crouch had a good game living off scraps and holding the ball up. You can easily blame Sven's tactics for not getting support to him quicker from midfield, but another striker in the squad wouldn't have made any difference.

Edited July 4, 2006 by LeChuck

[American]

If he starts with Rooney/Crouch, he has no viable options on the bench for a change of pace towards the end of the match. In a knockout match, you need at least one striker option on the bench in case anything happens. In this case, Crouch became the option on the bench, instead of the starter.

[LeChuck]

I can see where you are coming from (although I am sceptical of the idea that a coach will change the whole shape of the team to keep someone on the bench)...but given the lack of quality English strikers (hence why Walcott was included in the first place), I'm positive Sven would have gone with 4-5-1 anyway in the hope that an unrestricted combination of Lampard and Gerrard would be more threatening than a second mediocre striker.

In hindsight it is easy to criticise him for that decision, but many on here suggested the same...even Terry Venables suggested this formation before the Paraguay game in his newspaper column. I seem to recall Mourinho criticising Eriksson for not using a 4-5-1 sooner as well, although he did point out that Beckham and Gerrard should have switched roles.

Just to clarify, I do not agree with Sven not taking a fifth striker, I'm just trying to explain how it had no bearing on our exit.

Edited July 4, 2006 by LeChuck

[USABlue]

Still too depressed, Brazil losing made it worse cos I would have fancied us against the frogs. Bloody football it really is a love hate thing.

[Rovermatt]

You can argue until you are blue in the face but you'll never convince me that either France or Portugal have played well in these finals.

France were sh*t in their opening two games, you're right. However, you must have missed France toying with tournament favourites Brazil then. Nor did you see their battling display against a talented Spain side. England never came close to producing anything like that kind of football-that's sort of what all the fuss is about...

You're right about Portugal though. I hope they go out tomorrow. They've produced some pretty dull stuff (save for the impressive win over Mexico). A player of Figo's ability deserves international success, but overall their lack of cutting edge is wearing extremely thin. Allez les bleus.

Edited July 4, 2006 by Rovermatt

[RoyRover]

he should have put another striker (I prefer Nuno Gomes) as Pauleta was playing really bad.

What's Scolari's obsession with Pauleta? He plays well for PSG and scores a bundle of goals. Statistically he is good for Portugal, but at the last two tournaments, he has been woeful. with Portugal only playing one man up front, with two wingers, you'd think a player like Nuno Gomes would be more suited to the lone striker role because of his size. However, it seems that Postiga is even ahead of Nuno Gomes in the pecking order.

It is nice to have teams get further than expected, but I also want to see the favourites play each other.

I know what you mean, but Brazil were well beaten by France and Argentina were unlucky to lose to Germany.

[Oklahoma]

What's Scolari's obsession with Pauleta? He plays well for PSG and scores a bundle of goals. Statistically he is good for Portugal, but at the last two tournaments, he has been woeful. with Portugal only playing one man up front, with two wingers, you'd think a player like Nuno Gomes would be more suited to the lone striker role because of his size. However, it seems that Postiga is even ahead of Nuno Gomes in the pecking order.

Have no idea why he prefers Pauleta. But even before him it was like that. We were lucky that in 2000 Pauleta got injured before the beginning of the WC otherwise we wouldn't have made such a great run.

Pauleta is good against really small teams, that's how he beat Eusebio's record.

Postiga is another one. Don't like him. Don't understand what he sees in him.

As for Nuno Gomes being 3rd option, maybe it's because he was injured before the WC and might not be at 100%.

Fortunatelly, Pauleta will probably retire after this WC. Btw, there's an article in a portuguese newspaper asking "Pauleta, can we count on you?"

Just a final thought... Portugal doesn't have many strikers and the ones we have are not that good. My hope is that Bolton's player, Vaz Tê, might be a solution to our problems.

Edited July 4, 2006 by Oklahoma

[Eddie]

France were sh*t in their opening two games, you're right. However, you must have missed France toying with tournament favourites Brazil then. Nor did you see their battling display against a talented Spain side. England never came close to producing anything like that kind of football-that's sort of what all the fuss is about...

You're right about Portugal though. I hope they go out tomorrow. They've produced some pretty dull stuff (save for the impressive win over Mexico). A player of Figo's ability deserves international success, but overall their lack of cutting edge is wearing extremely thin. Allez les bleus.

Toying with Brazil? More like Brazil didn't turn up. They played well against Spain and Brazil, but no better than England did against Portugal, it is just that the opposition they played failed to perform in the way that they can. I'd love to see France play some wonderful stuff, but as of yet they simply haven't.