England - Lee Carsley Takes The Reins

[M_B]

22 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

What are you talking about? France didn't proceed as expected, so we didn't have to play them. As we weren't in control of that beyond winning our mediocre group, how is that not lucky?

I'm not the one getting things confused here. Reality matters, not potential permutations that didn't happen, of which there are a great many. Feels like you're just stubbornly sticking to what you've said rather than accept what is really very basic and obvious logic.

It isn't logical at all, being drawn out of a bag every round comes down to luck. 

England's route is down to results, every team had the chance to progress.

Spain look the best team in the competition, are we "unlucky" to be playing them in the final? 

 

 

[rigger]

I can't see anything wrong with being lucky.

[Hasta]

I know I’m late to this penalty debate , but if the defender is going into Kane after the ball has gone it’s a foul. But he isn’t. He’s static and Kane follows through and kicks him.
 

Kane comes off worse because he kicks his studs but it should be irrelevant what part of the guys body Kane kicks. If the guy had tried to block the shot with his head, and Kane had kicked his head, would people think that was a penalty?
 

It’s not a foul, or if anything it is a foul on the defender.

Edited July 11 by Hasta

[RevidgeBlue]

20 hours ago, M_B said:

Good luck to the next bloke, it's akin to following Alex Ferguson. 

My word.

Prize for most ridiculous post ever made on this forum goes to............

Gave me a good laugh anyway. A glittering career in comedy awaits you. 

 

[RevidgeBlue]

19 minutes ago, Hasta said:

I know I’m late to this penalty debate , but if the defender is going into Kane after the ball has gone it’s a foul. But he isn’t. He’s static and Kane follows through and kicks him.
 

Kane comes off worse because he kicks his studs but it should be irrelevant what part of the guys body Kane kicks. If the guy had tried to block the shiot with his head, and Kane had kicked his head, would people think that was a penalty?
 

It’s not a foul, or if anything it is a foul on the defender.

Absolutely. No way that was a penalty in a million years. Southgate must have a lucky horseshoe wedged a mile up his backside after Bellingham's worldie with 80 seconds to go against Slovakia  and that penalty decision last night. Better to be a lucky manager than a good one?

Let's hope our insanely good luck lasts for one more game.  Imo we could do with changing Kane and Rice who I thought were both very disappointing last night but he probably won't change anything so we'll just have to hope for the best and that the players pull us out of the mire with a couple of individual moments like they've been doing all tournament.

[M_B]

9 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

My word.

Prize for most ridiculous post ever made on this forum goes to............

Gave me a good laugh anyway. A glittering career in comedy awaits you. 

 

World Cup quarter final

World Cup semi final

Two Euro finals, one to be decided 

First final on foreign soil 

As an England International manager, his record is unprecedented compared to what he followed over the last 50 odd years. Let's see if the next 5 combined get anywhere near, then we'll assess your reply. 

 

[Gav]

58 minutes ago, Hasta said:

It’s not a foul, or if anything it is a foul on the defender.

He challenged for the ball, knee high, with studs showing. 

Penalty all day long, but it took me a while to convince myself Hasta 🤣

[Hasta]

5 minutes ago, Gav said:

He challenged for the ball, knee high, with studs showing. 

Penalty all day long, but it took me a while to convince myself Hasta 🤣

He tries to block the ball and wouldn’t have made any contact with Kane.

Come on, It made Speedie’s penalty in 1992 look like GBH, but I’ll take it. 😂

Edited July 11 by Hasta

[oneandycrawford]

1 hour ago, rigger said:

I can't see anything wrong with being lucky.

Agree totally. I guess that back in 1966 people said Sir Alf was 'lucky' to get a dubious goal in the final, courtesy of a Russian linesman old enough to remember what the Germans had done to his country! Luck is part of the game - not something to use as a deciding factor on who is, or isn't, a good manager. 

I disagree with some of Southgate's decisions and agree with others but if he wins on Sunday he deserves huge credit whatever the reasons for the win.

Interestingly the use of a substitute in WC70 was one the things Sir Alf was most criticised for!

 

 

[aletheia]

Speedie 1992

Play from 53 mins 😉

George Courtney

 

 

 

Edited July 11 by aletheia

[Dreams of 1995]

1 hour ago, Hasta said:

I know I’m late to this penalty debate , but if the defender is going into Kane after the ball has gone it’s a foul. But he isn’t. He’s static and Kane follows through and kicks him.
 

Kane comes off worse because he kicks his studs but it should be irrelevant what part of the guys body Kane kicks. If the guy had tried to block the shot with his head, and Kane had kicked his head, would people think that was a penalty?
 

It’s not a foul, or if anything it is a foul on the defender.

Are you being serious about it being a foul on the defender lol? Kane got 100% of the ball…………………………

[Hasta]

51 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

Are you being serious about it being a foul on the defender lol? Kane got 100% of the ball…………………………

 

It’s clearly not a foul either way. Kane kicks the ball and follows through and then goes into the defender.

But it’s Kane who goes into the defender and not the other way round. There more of an argument (wrongly) for a foul on the defender than on Kane.

 

 

[Dreams of 1995]

6 minutes ago, Hasta said:

It’s clearly not a foul either way. Kane kicks the ball and follows through and then goes into the defender.

But it’s Kane who goes into the defender and not the other way round. There more of an argument (wrongly) for a foul on the defender than on Kane.

 

 

I get that football is a game of opinions but this is a bad one

There is zero argument for it being a foul by Kane. He was first to the ball and got 100% of it. His studs weren’t up. He used his laces

Dumfries went studs up and was second to the ball. There’s no way what Kane did was worse or has more of an argument

We can argue to the cows come home over whether Dumfries’ late challenge should have been given as a penalty. But that’s where it should end

[oldjamfan1]

3 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

we'll just have to hope for the best and that the players pull us out of the mire.

“Pull us out of the mire”?

We are in the final of a major tournament FFS. What a strange choice of language.

[roverandout]

Insane the amount of miserable sods on here. Jim was bad enough at the last euros semi final.  We're in a second successive final and people are bitching on Southgate.  Saying it wasn't a penalty which it was. If u don't want to be happy and support England.  Jog on 

[47er]

1 hour ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

 

There is zero argument for it being a foul by Kane

Agree with that. No penalty there for me though Kane got his shot away exactly as intended, it was a good shot, dipped and was saved.

That's where it should have ended. 

The fact that there was contact after Kane got his shot away had no effect on play. 

Very harsh decision and very costly for Holland.

 

[47er]

Just now, roverandout said:

Insane the amount of miserable sods on here. Jim was bad enough at the last euros semi final.  We're in a second successive final and people are bitching on Southgate.  Saying it wasn't a penalty which it was. If u don't want to be happy and support England.  Jog on 

I'm happy, I support England, I'm not bitching about Southgate but I don't agree with the penalty decision.

[roversfan99]

5 minutes ago, roverandout said:

Insane the amount of miserable sods on here. Jim was bad enough at the last euros semi final.  We're in a second successive final and people are bitching on Southgate.  Saying it wasn't a penalty which it was. If u don't want to be happy and support England.  Jog on 

Seems a bit rich considering the amount of times youve written Southgate off, blamed him for wasting our players and suggested that he is the reason we will underachieve.

You as much as anyone understandably arent happy with Rovers but if someone was to say if you dont want to be happy and support them jog on, you would rightly tell them where to go.

[bluebruce]

6 hours ago, M_B said:

It isn't logical at all, being drawn out of a bag every round comes down to luck. 

England's route is down to results, every team had the chance to progress.

Spain look the best team in the competition, are we "unlucky" to be playing them in the final? 

 

 

No, we're lucky because we didn't have to play them, or any team stronger than the Netherlands, until the final.

You seem to be struggling with this so I'm just gonna leave you be.

[bluebruce]

1 hour ago, 47er said:

Agree with that. No penalty there for me though Kane got his shot away exactly as intended, it was a good shot, dipped and was saved.

That's where it should have ended. 

The fact that there was contact after Kane got his shot away had no effect on play. 

Very harsh decision and very costly for Holland.

 

Having an effect on play has nothing to do with the rules. If someone gets punched off the ball for instance, it's a free kick and a red. It not being part of the play has no relevance.

[Upside Down]

2 hours ago, oldjamfan1 said:

“Pull us out of the mire”?

We are in the final of a major tournament FFS. What a strange choice of language.

This entire thread has taken a wild turn away from reality.

A certain contingent that doesn't understand basic life concepts such as luck and chance. I'm hardly surprised at who is in that group TBH. Then there's people arguing about the actual records of teams. All a bit ridiculous really.

 

Back to reality, England played well yesterday and deserved the victory. The Netherlands didn't really offer anything going forward with England being very solid defensively and the winner was absolutely superb.

The final will be a good watch hopefully. Spain have looked good especially going forward but my Spanish mate, who was in a very patriotic mood yesterday, reckons they'll struggle with crosses into the box as they don't have a lot of height. Should make for an interesting game.

Edited July 12 by Upside Down

[riverholmes]

10 hours ago, speeeeeeedie said:

This post and your earlier one bring up some good points, that have been discussed earlier on. 

I don't know whether Guardiola taking over Barcelona was the catalyst or the game was moving toward it anyway but football is now somewhat homogensied. Back in the day every country had a distinct way of playing, and England's fast paced get the ball forward quickly style got found out regularly. After one failed competition (early 2000's I think) the FA did a review and came out with a summary that international football is closest to how Portugal play, so they started down that road. Shortly thereafter Southgate got the FA technical job and started implementing it. 

This also coincided with club academies treating young players as professionals rather than discount labour, and local authorities building 3G pitches giving kids more opportunities to play.

As a young kid I grew up playing on all sorts of sloped, windswept, boggy pitches. It wasn't conducive to silky football at all. 

As to Bellingham, mentality aside, one thing that makes him special is that he's 6'2" and weighs about 14 stone yet can glide past players with ease. 

Looking it up, Southgate was in the FA development role for 18 months. He had several years at U21s level, though and, I believe, had a great qualifying record, and won a Toulon tournament but crashed out of group stage in the 2015 U21 Euros Championship.

I think Southgate has made a real contribution but I really think he has been very fortunate to come in in this era when the possession skills gap between England and other top nations has been all but closed.

I reckon England fans should appreciate this high point, for a couple of tournaments, too because I think that the Premier Leagues return to hyper spending throttles England’s talent pool. I recall when Chelsea were under spending constraints, under Lampard, they were forced to play English talents and you saw, I think, Mount, James, Chalobah and others come through. 

 

 

 

[M_B]

7 hours ago, bluebruce said:

No, we're lucky because we didn't have to play them, or any team stronger than the Netherlands, until the final.

You seem to be struggling with this so I'm just gonna leave you be.

Your theory has run out of legs. 

It isn't me struggling. 

Edited July 12 by M_B

[Dreams of 1995]

8 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Seems a bit rich considering the amount of times youve written Southgate off, blamed him for wasting our players and suggested that he is the reason we will underachieve.

You as much as anyone understandably arent happy with Rovers but if someone was to say if you dont want to be happy and support them jog on, you would rightly tell them where to go.

Rovers haven’t made back to back tournament finals….

[roverandout]

9 hours ago, 47er said:

I'm happy, I support England, I'm not bitching about Southgate but I don't agree with the penalty decision.

It was debatable