NationStates Jolt Archive

I mean, they didn't play well, but...I can't say I expected this.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/internationals/7103110.stm
England failed to qualify for Euro 2008 after losing a sensational game against Croatia at Wembley.

Germany didn't manage more than a 0:0 against Wales and are second after the Czech Republic in their group. Which, I suppose, is only fair, because they really dropped the ball a bit in the second half of the qualifying.

So the following are through:

Austria
Croatia
Czech Republic
France
Germany
Greece
Holland
Italy
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey

The groups will be figured out on the 2nd. Still, in a completely meaningless exercise in killing time: who do you think will win the tournament?

I hate football and even I know England sucks.

Good. Scotland didn't get through, so England getting through would have just been sour news indeed.

The England team is a shambles, to be honest. A load of pampered puppies, closer to a school team than a serious, professional European team.

I hate football and even I know England sucks.
Yeah, I just didn't expect them to suck that much. I mean, their opposition was Israel and Russia...I would have thought they'd get through a group like that. But apparently I underestimated just how much they suck.

As for the poll, I'd like to think Germany can win it. They definitely can if they get their heads together and play at a level similar to what they showed in the early stages of the qualifying.

But of the other ones I think France is the best team. Italy is self-destructing, the Netherlands is a good squad but I don't think they're that good. Which really leaves only Portugal, who I always seem to underestimate.

I'll vote Germany anyways, more out of hope than anything else. The question is only whether they can get their motivation and concentration up without Klinsmann.

But of the other ones I think France is the best team. Italy is self-destructing, the Netherlands is a good squad but I don't think they're that good. Which really leaves only Portugal, who I always seem to underestimate.



Interestingly, Scotland beat France, ending up at the top of thier bracket, but lost to Italy. Take that England!

The England team is a shambles, to be honest. A load of pampered puppies, closer to a school team than a serious, professional European team.

English football has been dead for years really, as a nation we are dying for a new sport which we may actually win

England do, but shouldn't, suck.

A competant manager, unafraid of confrontation with the likes of Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney and Ashley Cole, could easily fashion the resources England undoubtedly possess into a world class international team. McClaren's successor, whoever he happens to be, will inherit a legacy that will not be quite so parlous as many imagine; failure to qualify for Euro 2008 should harden attitudes at the FA to the extent they will condone, and compel, measures of the sort McClaren ought to have taken upon succeeding Erikkson.

I must confess I quite want Portugal to win; primarily because they play football in a style that is at once enervating, thrilling, intelligent and individual. Players such as Nani, Ronaldo, Deco and Joao Moutinho are midfielders of the type England have a disturbing dearth; supremely talented, and sufficiently individualistic to attempt the unconventional, but by the same measure intelligent and aware of the necessities of the team.

Other than Portugal, I do quite like Spain, for much the same reason that the likes of Iniesta, Xavi, Guti, Villa and Torres are simply brilliant, and Holland, although this owes more to an enduring affection for Ruud.

Romania will obviously win.

English football has been dead for years really, as a nation we are dying for a new sport which we may actually win

I disagree. English football is far from dead; it might require, to continue the analogy, immediate and drastic surgery, but players such as Lennon, Walcott, Richards, Bentley, Agbonlahor, Young, Derbyshire and Foster should provide excellent replacements for Ferdinand, Lampard, Beckham and company.

Equally, I am truly excited about English cricket in the coming years. Pietersen, Bell and Cook should comprise the mainstay of a batting order that will surpass all bar perhaps Australia, whilst, in Panesar, Broad, Tremlett, Anderson, Rashid, Hildreth, Bresnan, England will be able to martial a bowling attack that should pose significant danger in all environments. Hell, we even appear to have a few decent keeper-batsmen emerging...:eek:

That match was bloody awful. Largely the manager's fault too - I mean, who puts on an untested keeper in such an important match? 3 attacking midfielders? Lampard looked fat and talentless for much of the game, Crouch pulled his usual trick of being a head on a long stick for the long-and-utterly-wasted ball for much of the game only to pull out something spectacular, Wright-Philips did nothing, the defence was shoddy at best (especially dire considering McClaren's tactics tonight - you could practically see him telling all the players to stay in their own half after the second goal) and even Gerrard, usually a spirited player, looked lacklustre. Until Beckham arrived the crosses/free kicks were horrendous and play just didn't seem to flow at all.

Our potential squad is, frankly, tremendous. We should have breezed that group.

Equally, I am truly excited about English cricket in the coming years. Pietersen, Bell and Cook should comprise the mainstay of a batting order that will surpass all bar perhaps Australia, whilst, in Panesar, Broad, Tremlett, Anderson, Rashid, Hildreth, Bresnan, England will be able to martial a bowling attack that should pose significant danger in all environments. Hell, we even appear to have a few decent keeper-batsmen emerging...:eek:
The main problem is that Pietersen is actually quite rubbish at the moment, see also Bell and Cook. But there we go.

Interestingly, Scotland beat France, ending up at the top of thier bracket, but lost to Italy. Take that England!

meh comments like that really p1ss me off (and im not really into football) ... the sad thing about it is if England hadnt of got through and Scotland had most of England would have been cheering Scotland on .... where as the Scots with there anti english government would have cheered for who ever was playing against England (or like UN Protectorates taking the pee when we didnt get through)

Im now starting to think the sooner the Scots get there independence the better ... i cant stand rasicm

The main problem is that Pietersen is actually quite rubbish at the moment, see also Bell and Cook. But there we go.

Bollocks they are. Bell was exceptional against India over the summer, especially in the ODI series, whilst KP seems to have an average over 50, generally the qualification for batting "greatness". Where Cook is concerned, he has, I believe, the finest statistics for a 22 year old in cricket, with the obligatory exception of Bradman.

Cook might not be replicating the form he showed against Pakistan last year, however, given that he is opening, and has done so against the likes of McGrath, Zaheer, Vaas, Malinga, Clark, Lee and Shoaib, and done so with an average of 44, I'd be prepared to agree with Boycs that he's set to be a genuinely "great" opener.

English football has been dead for years really, as a nation we are dying for a new sport which we may actually win

What you need is a team that turns up and doesn't just expect to win as of right.

Your overpaid prima-donna laden team of perrennial losers could do with a couple of pints of whatever your Rugby team had to drink after the South Africa game in the group of the Rugby World Cup.

(Of Course we will be on hand to ruin their day in the 2008 6Nations :D)

England do, but shouldn't, suck.

A competant manager, unafraid of confrontation with the likes of Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney and Ashley Cole, could easily fashion the resources England undoubtedly possess into a world class international team. McClaren's successor, whoever he happens to be, will inherit a legacy that will not be quite so parlous as many imagine; failure to qualify for Euro 2008 should harden attitudes at the FA to the extent they will condone, and compel, measures of the sort McClaren ought to have taken upon succeeding Erikkson.
This looks right to me. England have (and have had, for years) an embarrassment of talent at their disposal. That they seem to consistently fail to capitalise on it is a bit bewildering for an outsider looking in. Perhaps if the media refrained from the cycle of hype and vitriol that they heap upon the team and manager of the day things might improve a little. They might improve despite that, if they can actually get a run of games without significant injury problems, or if they actually pick the in form players, rather than relying on reputation.

We'll see, there's plenty of time before the World Cup qualifiers start ;)

Oh, and for the poll I went with Spain. They have some wonderful players, and they're long overdue a tournament win.

I disagree. English football is far from dead; it might require, to continue the analogy, immediate and drastic surgery, but players such as Lennon, Walcott, Richards, Bentley, Agbonlahor, Young, Derbyshire and Foster should provide excellent replacements for Ferdinand, Lampard, Beckham and company.


Um, none of the players you mentioned are good enough for a top four side so 'excellent' is more than stretching it. Maybe in a couple of years Walcott, Richards and Young might be good enough.

Im now starting to think the sooner the Scots get there independence the better ... i cant stand rasicm

Sour grapes. If you can't tell the difference between a football rivalry and racism then you need to stop following sports. I guess most England fans are racist towards Germany then? Much like how I'm racist towards people from Leith, West Londoners and North Londoners are racist towards each other, Scousers and Mancs, Geordies and Mackems... all racists.

meh comments like that really p1ss me off (and im not really into football) ... the sad thing about it is if England hadnt of got through and Scotland had most of England would have been cheering Scotland on .... where as the Scots with there anti english government would have cheered for who ever was playing against England (or like UN Protectorates taking the pee when we didnt get through)

Im now starting to think the sooner the Scots get there independence the better ... i cant stand rasicm

Pfft! Racism!? You must be kidding. This rubbish gets dredged up everytime Scotland and England national teams are competing in the same sport tournaments, particularly football.

Scottish personalities and such get asked during the upcoming week or so who'll they be supporting, and when they say they will support Scotland over England (Shock and surprise! They want to support thier national team!) it's decried by Pro-England media as racism.

The word isn't "racism". It's national rivalry.

This puts me in mind of a little joke:

An English sporting win, is a victory for England.
A Scottish sporting win, is a victory for Britain.
A Scottish sporting failure is a failure for Scotland.
And an English failure is Henman.

P.S. Scotland at large doesn't actually want independence. It depends on how you disguise the polls.

Our potential squad is, frankly, tremendous. We should have breezed that group.

It's not particularly special. A combination of playing in a 'home' league, preference for home grown lads and a massive media focus on English players has led to the players becoming massively overrated.

England don't have a goalkeeper for starters. They haven't figured out a workable midfield or a good partnership upfront.

Russia qualified ahead of England? Bloody hell. :(

Um, none of the players you mentioned are good enough for a top four side so 'excellent' is more than stretching it. Maybe in a couple of years Walcott, Richards and Young might be good enough.

Firstly, Foster and Walcott are good enough for a top four side. Foster is out with cruciate ligament damage until March; that is the only reason why van der Sar is still keeping goal at United, whilt Walcott, for an 18 year old, is as good as anybody I've seen along with Rooney, Ronaldo and Messi.

Richards is only at Man City because they refused to sell him, and I assure you the same is true for Lennon, and frankly I'd rather see the likes of Young, Agbonlahor and Bentley play in top six sides for the moment; a good few players have seen their careers hamstrung by playing at the highest level too early.

This looks right to me. England have (and have had, for years) an embarrassment of talent at their disposal. That they seem to consistently fail to capitalise on it is a bit bewildering for an outsider looking in.

In the last two world cups England reached the quater finals. Are you honestly telling me that England have a squad that is in the world's top four? When it includes the likes of Jenas and Phil Neville and Defoe and Paul Robinson and Alan Smith?

It's not particularly special. A combination of playing in a 'home' league, preference for home grown lads and a massive media focus on English players has led to the players becoming massively overrated.

England don't have a goalkeeper for starters. They haven't figured out a workable midfield or a good partnership upfront.

Wrong for the most part.

I do agree that English players should play abroad, and should so from an early age, since it would allow for technical parity with the likes of Italy, Spain and France.

However, England have stumbled upon a decent goalkeeper; he just happens to be injured. Indeed, if only someone had the balls to drop Lampard for Hargreaves, and play Rooney alongside Crouch, England would be infinitely better.

Oh, and for the poll I went with Spain. They have some wonderful players, and they're long overdue a tournament win.
They always are. :p

In the last two world cups England reached the quater finals. Are you honestly telling me that England have a squad that is in the world's top four? When it includes the likes of Jenas and Phil Neville and Defoe and Paul Robinson and Alan Smith?

Neville was good enough to play for over a decade for Man United; surely you don't believe that Ferguson lacks the ability to discern a bad player from a good one? He may not be exceptional in any one position, however, as a utility player, Phil Neville remains unrivalled.

For that matter, England's squad, when fit, is no worse than that of Italy, Spain or France. Can you name me players outside of the Spain starting XI? Actually, name the Spain starting XI if you can.

Firstly, Foster and Walcott are good enough for a top four side. Foster is out with cruciate ligament damage until March; that is the only reason why van der Sar is still keeping goal at United, whilt Walcott, for an 18 year old, is as good as anybody I've seen along with Rooney, Ronaldo and Messi.

Richards is only at Man City because they refused to sell him, and I assure you the same is true for Lennon, and frankly I'd rather see the likes of Young, Agbonlahor and Bentley play in top six sides for the moment; a good few players have seen their careers hamstrung by playing at the highest level too early.

That's simply not true. Van Der Sar is in goal because he's a massively more talented keeper. Foster is mediocre. World Class goalkeepers aren't playing at Wrexham on loan at 22.

Rooney, Ronaldo and Messi were performing on the world stage at 18. Walcott has a couple of substitutions to his name. He can't even get into the Arsenal side.

Lennon wouldn't get into any top four side. Bentley is about 40 so no idea what you mean by 'for the moment'

Lennon wouldn't get into any top four side. Bentley is about 40 so no idea what you mean by 'for the moment'

He's only 23 years old...

Neville was good enough to play for over a decade for Man United; surely you don't believe that Ferguson lacks the ability to discern a bad player from a good one? He may not be exceptional in any one position, however, as a utility player, Phil Neville remains unrivalled.

For that matter, England's squad, when fit, is no worse than that of Italy, Spain or France. Can you name me players outside of the Spain starting XI? Actually, name the Spain starting XI if you can.

This is nonsense. Even if we take Ferguson's judgement as evidence of quality the fact remains that Ferguson did get rid of him. He went to Everton, where he is outshone by the brilliant Arteta who has never got an international call up for Spain (Neville has about 60 caps)

I can name you loads of players outside of the Spain starting XI. I just named a great player who has never even got in the squad. One of the stars of Liverpools season so far, Arbeloa, has never been called up either. Staying with Liverpool we have Pepe Reina who is about a billion times better than any goalkeeper England have. He's on the bench.

That's simply not true. Van Der Sar is in goal because he's a massively more talented keeper. Foster is mediocre. World Class goalkeepers aren't playing at Wrexham on loan at 22.

Rooney, Ronaldo and Messi were performing on the world stage at 18. Walcott has a couple of substitutions to his name. He can't even get into the Arsenal side.

Lennon wouldn't get into any top four side. Bentley is about 40 so no idea what you mean by 'for the moment'

Bentley is in his early twenties, and I really do find it amusing you think you know more about United than myself. Most goalkeepers, Casillas the exception, do not fully mature until 26 or 27; Rio Ferdinand played on loan in the lower leagues at 18. So too did Scholes, Beckham and Neville. They all seem to have done rather well for themselves.

Incidentally, has it occurred to you that Walcott cannot get into the Arsenal team because they are playing unbelievably well, and are relatively free of injuries? Messi first played for Barcelona due to injuries to Giuly, Xavi and van Bommel; that he flourished is a different matter. Moreover, at 18, neither Ronaldo nor Rooney were playing particularly well "on the world stage". Ronaldo was vexingly inconsistent until last season, whilst Rooney seems only now to be fully maturing into the role conceived for him by Ferguson; I daresay Walcott could, if necessary, be similarly precocious yet inconsistent for Arsenal. That Wenger deems it worthwhile to allow him to mature outside of the first XI is a matter for his own opinion; an opinion you clearly disagree with, despite his ability to fashion truly wonderful teams from relatively little money.

He's only 23 years old...

This kid knows fuck all about football. So far he's managed to suggest that Ferguson and Wenger are inferior to him as judges of talent...

Bentley is in his early twenties, and I really do find it amusing you think you know more about United than myself. Most goalkeepers, Casillas the exception, do not fully mature until 26 or 27; Rio Ferdinand played on loan in the lower leagues at 18. So too did Scholes, Beckham and Neville. They all seem to have done rather well for themselves

Cech joined Chelsea at 22. Reina was playing for Barcelona at 19. Buffon cost £32million at 23.

He's only 23 years old...

And at 23 he's not ready to play for the big boys yet? :D

Cech joined Chelsea at 22. Reina was playing for Barcelona at 19. Buffon cost £32million at 23.

And? Ronaldinho at 18 was by no means the most celebrated 18 year old in the Brazil, let alone the world. Keane was not at his best until he was 28 or so, whilst Zidane was far from glittering at 18 either. Players mature at differing rates; this much ought to be clear.

I would be prepared to state that Foster will be an exceptional keeper for United, and England, next season. You can disagree if you choose, but frankly, I'm confident of being proved correct. I trust in the judgement of Ferguson; I daresay you don't consider Gerard Pique to be of any great potential because he has not been playing "on the world stage" since he was in nappies. I consider the opinions of Ferguson, Wenger and Henry to be of more consequence than yours; they are of the opinion that you cannot force a player to mature quicker than is correct.

And at 23 he's not ready to play for the big boys yet? :D

Given that he was sold by Wenger, somewhat oddly, and has since had to rebuild his career, he probably is ready. Once more, however, we meet a stumbling block you seem to disregard; perhaps Blackburn are refusing to sell him? What oddity that would be, a team retaining its best players, or a plyer having some loyalty!

Pretty pointless arguing with you since a) you clearly know nothing about football and b) think that "ferguson/wenger disagree so you must be wrong" is some kind of acceptable argument. So I will go to bed.

P.S Wenger and Ferguson support the keep racism out of football campaign. No real justification for mentioning that other than it's another opportunity to laugh at you for being a racist.

Given that he was sold by Wenger, somewhat oddly, and has since had to rebuild his career, he probably is ready. Once more, however, we meet a stumbling block you seem to disregard; perhaps Blackburn are refusing to sell him? What oddity that would be, a team retaining its best players, or a plyer having some loyalty!

Here is where I quote your earlier statement about trusting the managers. Glorious juxtaposition.

Although I won't actually do this because I already said I was going to bed and only stopped to laugh at you. Maybe for the next time you can work on your ability to use irony effectively? Thanks

Pretty pointless arguing with you since a) you clearly know nothing about football and b) think that "ferguson/wenger disagree so you must be wrong" is some kind of acceptable argument. So I will go to bed.

P.S Wenger and Ferguson support the keep racism out of football campaign. No real justification for mentioning that other than it's another opportunity to laugh at you for being a racist.

Really? Please tell me then, how do you actully know this? I'm genuinely interested you see. Have you heard of Anderson? Ferguson was prepared to spend some £20 million to bring him to Old Trafford, yet was reticient, until injuries compelled him otherwise, to play him in the first team. By your logic, if a player is not ready to play all comers at 18, he is doomed to mediocrity.

Gosh, it really is late though isn't it? What is it we have in the morning? Another day at a mediocre school, or in a mediocre job?

Moreover, the notion that the opinion of excellent managers carries some weight is wholly sensible. I would not accept either of their opinions wholly as axiom, however, where their appreciation of talent is concerned, I am prepared to fall back upon their reputation; they have found such players as Giggs, Henry, Beckham, Ronaldo, Fabregas, Anelka and Keane. This is significant in establishing whether their stance towards a player is correct, since a stance they take is likely to be correct.

Oh, and once more, personal slurs are unbecoming. Really, if only you had a semblance of civility or manners, or, for that matter, style, I can't help feeling you'd be infinitely more fun to post with.

Good. Go Russia, Croatia, and France.

Down with Italy.

England clearly needed Rochdale's Chris Dagnall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Dagnall)...always on target in FIFA 08...:p

Anyway, seriously- back to the OP: even if England had qualified, they'd be hard-pressed to win Euro 2008. They're kind of like Anna Kournikova- always looks good but never performs when it's needed. If you ask me, my heritage says Italy, but I have to be rational- the team's pretty old (only four of the team's 19 players called up against Scotland are under 25), they looked pretty gassed against the Scots (and only won because the referee gifted them the game- Scotland fan or not, that free kick should've gone Allan Hutton's way) and they've really just been a step behind during the whole qualification process (they only managed 2-1 and 3-1 wins against the Faeore Islands (mind you the last one was meaningless), and that 3-1 loss to France in the early stages is pretty ugly). The French have looked pretty aimless without Zinedine Zidane and Spain- just like England- do tend to look good but never seem to win, so before I pick them it'll be a case of "I'll have to see it before I believe it).

I think the Germans will win- they were the most complete team in the 2006 World Cup, and the team's pretty young (11 of 25 are under 25) so it can only get better. Portugal looks pretty good too, especially now that Cristiano Ronaldo's starting to use his teammates now. I don't know about the Dutch- I wouldn't say on paper they quite match up (at least not now), and they haven't exactly done much recently (although, to be fair, I'd stick their Round of 16 loss to the fact Marco van Basten planted Ruud van Nistelrooy on the bench). I'd still like to see the Dutch and the Portuguese placed in the same group- after the Battle of Nurnberg, I'd say any future contests between the two will be quite spirited. :D

Of course, considering the Greeks won in 2004, who knows who'll win anyway (my money on a surprise winner would be either Russia or Serbia, especially the Serbs- you think they'd let their Balkan rivals Greece have all the fun again?).

England sucks, ha ha! :p

Why did we put Mclaren in charge? I said at the time, Allardyce would have been the better choice...

Full blame on McLaren.

1. Whatever his faults, Beckham lends confidence to the team - even disregarding this, to simply state at the start of managing that he was dropping Beckham, then recalling him, displayed uncertainty on McClaren's part, a lack of confidence that showed in England's performances. This is not so much saying Beckham's any good as opposed to showing the dithering uncertainty of McClaren, hardly confidence inspiring. However, we won the 2nd half with Beckham 2-1, the first we lost 2-0. Croatia's own freaking coach stated they were most afraid of Beckham being able to deliver crosses onto Crouch's head.

2. Hargreaves? Where was he?

3. Oh yes, he was dumped in favour of a Lampard-Gerrrard combination that my blind grandmother knows does not, and has never, worked - fantastic!

4. Crucial match? Time to test a new goalkeeper then!

5. Hmm, switching from 4-5-1 to 4-4-2 has resulted in 2 goals, better go back to 4-5-1 or we're in danger of qualifying!

As to Lampard-Gerrard, we actually have the luck to play two different midfields in one match, a Lampard-Beckham midfield switching to a Gerrard-SWP midfield or vice versa but no, we go for the one combination that fails and fails again.

Ultimately, we wouldn't make these experimental 'we can try this because we expect to win' mistakes if the entire FA leadership weren't so blind to the failings of the managerial set up.

*rant...rave...rant...rave...storms off into distance...*

I wonder who will get the job now of England manager....

What's the difference between Lewis Hamilton and the England Squad?

Lewis Hamilton will still have a Mclaren.

I'm actually quite happy England didn't get in - I fear the english "fans" a lot more than the russian ones, simply because there would be more of them...

I voted for Portugal, for - sort of - "private reasons" :p

England sucks, ha ha! :pNow, I am German, and that kind of makes gloating about this my birthright, but somehow, I just feel sorry for the English.

But I do wonder what British tabloids would be looking like if Germany's and England's positions were reversed...

Now, I am German, and that kind of makes gloating about this my birthright, but somehow, I just feel sorry for the English.
Exactly my feelings. While the qualification hung in the balance, I was always up for a joke that the English wouldn't make it.

But now that it actually happened, there won't be a Germany v England match to look forward to, which is really quite sad. One of my best football-related memories was the semifinal of Euro '96.

Ohne England fahr'n wir zur EM!
Ohne England fahr'n wir zur EM!

Good job, England!

McClaren's fired, I'm glad the FA agree with my judgment.

McClaren leaves his post as statistically the worst England manager in history, having lost five of his 18 matches in charge. However the FA's chief executive, Brian Barwick, said he had "no regrets" about appointing McClaren on a four-year deal, even though it would cost the FA £2.5m to pay off his contract.

Link (http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2215145,00.html)

Full blame on McLaren.

1. Whatever his faults, Beckham lends confidence to the team - even disregarding this, to simply state at the start of managing that he was dropping Beckham, then recalling him, displayed uncertainty on McClaren's part, a lack of confidence that showed in England's performances. This is not so much saying Beckham's any good as opposed to showing the dithering uncertainty of McClaren, hardly confidence inspiring. However, we won the 2nd half with Beckham 2-1, the first we lost 2-0. Croatia's own freaking coach stated they were most afraid of Beckham being able to deliver crosses onto Crouch's head.

2. Hargreaves? Where was he?

3. Oh yes, he was dumped in favour of a Lampard-Gerrrard combination that my blind grandmother knows does not, and has never, worked - fantastic!

4. Crucial match? Time to test a new goalkeeper then!

5. Hmm, switching from 4-5-1 to 4-4-2 has resulted in 2 goals, better go back to 4-5-1 or we're in danger of qualifying!

As to Lampard-Gerrard, we actually have the luck to play two different midfields in one match, a Lampard-Beckham midfield switching to a Gerrard-SWP midfield or vice versa but no, we go for the one combination that fails and fails again.

Ultimately, we wouldn't make these experimental 'we can try this because we expect to win' mistakes if the entire FA leadership weren't so blind to the failings of the managerial set up.

*rant...rave...rant...rave...storms off into distance...*


Hargreaves wasn't fully fit, to be fair to McClaren. I still think it was criminally poor judgement to continue with Lampard and Gerrard in central midfield, given how well Barry and Gerrard played when in a 442, but then again any manager who refers to his players as "JT", "Stevie G" and "Becks" in press conferences has clearly failed to maintain the appropriate distance between himself and his players. Have you ever heard Mourinho call Lampard "Lamps"? Or Ferguson refer to "Scholesy" and "Wazza"? I think not.

Or Ferguson refer to "Scholesy" and "Wazza"? I think not.

No, but now I really, really want to!

No, but now I really, really want to!

I do think it would be even better if he called Gary Neville "schnookywookums" or "lovemonkey", but thats probably not going to happen soon...:(

Now, I am German, and that kind of makes gloating about this my birthright, but somehow, I just feel sorry for the English.


I suggest watching the English play via ITV, paying close attention to the commentary. The opposition is irrelevant. Try not to have anything in your hands after the teams come onto the pitch, and have at least 6 foot in distance between you and the TV, to give others a chance to pull you back until the red mist clears.....

England do, but shouldn't, suck.


QFT

By your logic, if a player is not ready to play all comers at 18, he is doomed to mediocrity.

Gosh, it really is late though isn't it? What is it we have in the morning? Another day at a mediocre school, or in a mediocre job?


You seem obsessed with mediocrity. Which is understandable given that you're going to have to work hard to make your way up to it.

5. Hmm, switching from 4-5-1 to 4-4-2 has resulted in 2 goals, better go back to 4-5-1 or we're in danger of qualifying!

That's in reference to the first Croatia match, right? I didn't see it, but I did read that even Slaven Billic thought McLaren was crazy- doesn't *that* say something about his effectiveness!

I do think it would be even better if he called Gary Neville "schnookywookums" or "lovemonkey", but thats probably not going to happen soon...:(

:confused:...that'd be kind of creepy, actually...

As I predicted, Steve MaClaren's tenure would be brief and painful.

I'm sorry but if Tim Crouch is your answer for striker, then you simply don't belong in international tournaments.

Yeah, not like Crouch has a brilliant international scoring record and had finished the last season as top scorer of the Champions League finalists.

As I predicted, Steve MaClaren's tenure would be brief and painful.

I'm sorry but if Tim Crouch is your answer for striker, then you simply don't belong in international tournaments.

Oh I agree entirely, what with his terrible international scoring record 14 in 24, (0.58 goals per game), which just happens to statistically exceed Geoff Hurst (0.49), Alan Shearer (0.48), Michael Owen (0.45 goals per game) and Wayne Rooney (0.35), to name just a few famous names.

On the world stage, he also outscores Ruud Van Nistelrooy (0.51), Miroslav Klose (0.50), Thierry Henry (0.45) and Robinho (0.31), all of whom I expect you would claim are 'superior' players. While I wouldn't dream of arguing that Peter Crouch is on the same level as these players in terms of skills, you can't argue that he is up there with them in terms of effectiveness.

As armchair fans wanting to see silky total-football skills, we often forget that strikers are on the pitch to score goals, and on that single all-important measurement, Peter Crouch is indeed world class - the only striker playing in tournaments of a major federation - CAF, CONMEBOL or UEFA - I can find that exceeds his ratio having played a significant amount of games is Ronaldo (62 in 97, 0.63 goals per game).

Now those stats might bore you to tears, but it's something to think about next time someone has a pop at Crouch for not exactly being the Macclesfield Messi.

Oh I agree entirely, what with his terrible international scoring record 14 in 24, (0.58 goals per game)...blah blah blah, lies, damn lies, statistics...
Go on, now tell us the teams he's scored against. Jamaica, I hear you say? Andorra? Hungary? Trinidad & Tobago (a goal that should have been disallowed - come on, he's 6'7", he doesn't need to be holding down a defender...)...Estonia...Greece...

That's 10 of his 14 goals right there. He scored 5 in the Euro 2008 qualifiers - 8 fewer than David Healy of those international colossuses (colossi?) Norn Iron. He is...let me make this perfectly clear...NOT. A. WORLD. CLASS. STRIKER.

Tell me the last decisive goal he scored at international level. One that really turned a game. That won us a competitive match. I'm sorry? You can't? Is that because he's never done that? It is? Stone the fucking crows, it is!

As for England sucking, we have done for 40 years, but for one brief 90 minutes against Holland 11 years ago. Italia 90 doesn't count - scraping through to the last 16 with a 1-0 victory over Egypt, beating Belgium 1-0 with a winner in the 119th minute, and being taken to extra time by Cameroon does not count as good performance in my eyes. I'm used to it, I don't know why everyone else isn't.

That's 10 of his 14 goals right there. He scored 5 in the Euro 2008 qualifiers - 8 fewer than David Healy of those international colossuses (colossi?) Norn Iron. He is...let me make this perfectly clear...NOT. A. WORLD. CLASS. STRIKER.

Tell me the last decisive goal he scored at international level. One that really turned a game. That won us a competitive match. I'm sorry? You can't? Is that because he's never done that? It is? Stone the fucking crows, it is!


Most players will score the vast majority of their international goals against small teams.

Naming Healy isn't a great argument as Healy has been sensational for Nothern Ireland. Everyone in Europe is trailing him. For comparison, Rooney scored a total of 0 goals in the 2006 World Cup qualifiers (and the finals too for that matter)

As for the decisive goals there is the goal against Trinidad and there is the only goal of the game in Macedonia.

As I predicted, Steve MaClaren's tenure would be brief and painful.

I'm sorry but if Tim Crouch is your answer for striker, then you simply don't belong in international tournaments.

Well sure, if former Cleveland Browns quarterback Tim Couch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Couch) (who I believe you were thinking of when you stated "Tim Crouch") was indeed Steve McLaren's first choice as striker I'd be questioning his selection there too. :p

As for Peter Crouch, I think that equalizing goal against Croatia suggests he's up to the job- perhaps, then, he's just not used right (the game wasn't on here so all I could see were the highlights). However, I still think defence and goalkeeping robbed England of the game against Croatia- as soon as that ball slid through Scott Carson's fingertips you just had to know it'd be a long night.

Go on, now tell us the teams he's scored against. Jamaica, I hear you say? Andorra? Hungary? Trinidad & Tobago (a goal that should have been disallowed - come on, he's 6'7", he doesn't need to be holding down a defender...)...Estonia...Greece...

That's 10 of his 14 goals right there. He scored 5 in the Euro 2008 qualifiers - 8 fewer than David Healy of those international colossuses (colossi?) Norn Iron. He is...let me make this perfectly clear...NOT. A. WORLD. CLASS. STRIKER.

Tell me the last decisive goal he scored at international level. One that really turned a game. That won us a competitive match. I'm sorry? You can't? Is that because he's never done that? It is? Stone the fucking crows, it is!

As for England sucking, we have done for 40 years, but for one brief 90 minutes against Holland 11 years ago. Italia 90 doesn't count - scraping through to the last 16 with a 1-0 victory over Egypt, beating Belgium 1-0 with a winner in the 119th minute, and being taken to extra time by Cameroon does not count as good performance in my eyes. I'm used to it, I don't know why everyone else isn't.

Crouch is woefully underrated by both club and country. It's snobery, he's not world class maybe, but he's hard working, reliable and effective. Definetly good enough to be playing reguarly for liverpool and england.

To say he doesnt score important goals isnt very fair. He's the 3rd choice striker, if owen and rooney are fit, they will be playing. I think Rooney and Crouch would be a more effective paring myself. Plus he scored the goal that would have got england through if they hadnt scored again, well taken goal as well.

There's an article in the Economist this week on why England suck so much (relative to the other major European teams) and the low number of domestic players in the Premiership and few Englishmen in the Champions League - apparently there were more Brazilians, French, Italians, Spanish, Argentinians, Germans, Romanians, Turks, Czechs, Serbs and Dutch in the Champions League this year than English. And all this despite the Premiership being one of the most prestigious leagues in the world.

The article blames this on the poor coaching standards for youngsters. English youngsters get half as many coaching hours as the French (and even then the best coaches are working with older players rather than kids), spend too much time playing matches at a young age rather than technical training and also lack a national academy.

It also goes on to criticise the attempts to create a quota on the number of foreign players allowed to play in England as being symptomatic of a trend in Britain to try and prevent immigrants from working here rather than improving the competitiveness of our own workforce.

I must say they seem to have hit the nail on the head here.

There's an article in the Economist this week on why England suck so much (relative to the other major European teams) and the low number of domestic players in the Premiership and few Englishmen in the Champions League - apparently there were more Brazilians, French, Italians, Spanish, Argentinians, Germans, Romanians, Turks, Czechs, Serbs and Dutch in the Champions League this year than English. And all this despite the Premiership being one of the most prestigious leagues in the world.

The article blames this on the poor coaching standards for youngsters. English youngsters get half as many coaching hours as the French (and even then the best coaches are working with older players rather than kids), spend too much time playing matches at a young age rather than technical training and also lack a national academy.

It also goes on to criticise the attempts to create a quota on the number of foreign players allowed to play in England as being symptomatic of a trend in Britain to try and prevent immigrants from working here rather than improving the competitiveness of our own workforce.

I must say they seem to have hit the nail on the head here.

That is very well said, but I must say I am shocked to learn England has no national academy- I figured "the birthplace of football" would at least have one, if not several.

That is very well said, but I must say I am shocked to learn England has no national academy- I figured "the birthplace of football" would at least have one, if not several.

The FA tried to build an academy at Burton-on-Trent but abandoned the project a few years ago - mainly because a lot of funding was being diverted to the new Wembley at the time. They didn't think it was worth the investment, but you just have to look at France's Clarefontaine Academy to see what difference it can make.

everyone talks about England and Scotland no one thinks about wee Northern Ireland and how close we came to qualifing. Everyone talks about the Hamden roar what about the Windsor Roar. We beat the Spanish the Sweds, the Danes and more in this great campaign. David Healy broke the record for the most goals scored in a Qualifing campaign which for a country like Northern Ireland in amazing.

Come on theGreen and White army

and bring back the Home Nations and lets see if anyone can get Northern Irelands Crown

everyone talks about England and Scotland no one thinks about wee Northern Ireland and how close we came to qualifing. Everyone talks about the Hamden roar what about the Windsor Roar. We beat the Spanish the Sweds, the Danes and more in this great campaign. David Healy broke the record for the most goals scored in a Qualifing campaign which for a country like Northern Ireland in amazing.

Come on theGreen and White army
That's an unfortunate part of UK media and politics, I'm afraid. Northern Ireland quite literally gets mentioned only when there are goings-on with the usual Unionist/Nationalist bickering. I've never heard spart mentioned more than as an afterthought after England has been dealt with.

Crouch is woefully underrated by both club and country. It's snobery, he's not world class maybe, but he's hard working, reliable and effective. Definetly good enough to be playing reguarly for liverpool and england.

To say he doesnt score important goals isnt very fair. He's the 3rd choice striker, if owen and rooney are fit, they will be playing. I think Rooney and Crouch would be a more effective paring myself. Plus he scored the goal that would have got england through if they hadnt scored again, well taken goal as well.

It isn't snobbery in the slightest. Tall strikers such as Zigic, Berbativ, van Nistelrooy and Toni are celebrated by those who criticise Crouch; the difference is, they can be relied upon to convert a chance, even if they recieve only one in a game. Crouch, against Macedonia at Old Trafford, had a free header in the dying minutes, and failed to even place his attempt on target.

Crouch may well be reliable, I can accept he is hard working. What this shold not disguise is his technical failings that deny him entry to the highest echelons of striking; he has precious little pace, surprisingly little strength, and is technically inferior to Owen, Rooney, Defoe and their ilk. English football still persist with the notion that enough "passion, gumption and hard work" can overcome the manifest technical and tactical failings of even the best English footballers; hence why so few English "stars" attract the attention of continental clubs, and why the likes of Croatia are able to surmount our national team.

English football requires an academy much like that Clairfontaine in France; unsurprisingly, however, the FA sacrificed the academy at Burton in favour of what now seems a hollow, delusionally mighty edifice at Wembley.

Crouch may well be reliable, I can accept he is hard working. What this shold not disguise is his technical failings that deny him entry to the highest echelons of striking; he has precious little pace, surprisingly little strength, and is technically inferior to Owen, Rooney, Defoe and their ilk. English football still persist with the notion that enough "passion, gumption and hard work" can overcome the manifest technical and tactical failings of even the best English footballers; hence why so few English "stars" attract the attention of continental clubs, and why the likes of Croatia are able to surmount our national team.


Wait a second. A moment ago you were telling us that England's squad is in the world's top four quality-wise?

Wait a second. A moment ago you were telling us that England's squad is in the world's top four quality-wise?

No. Top four premiership; I have no pretentions that England have the strength in depth of a Brazil, Italy, Argentina or Spain. We should have a first team capable of competing with any of the above, what we lack, due in no small measure to there being only 33% or so English players in the premiership, is a squad.

Yeah, not like Crouch has a brilliant international scoring record and had finished the last season as top scorer of the Champions League finalists.

A record compiled against brilliant teams?

For that matter, Crouch clearly cannot be that wonderful a player if Benitez chased Torres with such imperative. Why, given that Liverpool are prepared to sell Crouch, have no clubs of any calibre attempted to buy him, if he is of the quality you suggest?

Incidentally, I'd suggest you lay off Rooney. Firstly, he is not, nor ever will be, a striker. He is a second striker at best; he plays behind a conventional frontman, much like Sheringham, Totti and Cantona. In light of this, Rooney cannot be fairly evaluated solely in regard to quantity of goals he scores. But surely, as you were at such lengths to inform me of your superior knowledge of football, you knew this?

No. Top four premiership; I have no pretentions that England have the strength in depth of a Brazil, Italy, Argentina or Spain. We should have a first team capable of competing with any of the above, what we lack, due in no small measure to there being only 33% or so English players in the premiership, is a squad.

Simple comparison,

England's performance
Euro 88 Round One
World 90 Semi Finals
Euro 92 Round one
World 94 Failed to Qualify

World 02 Quarter Finals
Euro 04 Quarter Finals
World 06 Quarter Finals
Euro 08 Failed to Qualify

So in about 20 years (I know the prem started in 1992 but you hadn't seen the huge money and large amounts of foreign players that people moan about so much at that time) the prem has if anything improved the national team's performance.

No. Top four premiership; I have no pretentions that England have the strength in depth of a Brazil, Italy, Argentina or Spain. We should have a first team capable of competing with any of the above, what we lack, due in no small measure to there being only 33% or so English players in the premiership, is a squad.


For that matter, England's squad, when fit, is no worse than that of Italy, Spain or France.

I am actually embarassed for you.

A record compiled against brilliant teams?

For that matter, Crouch clearly cannot be that wonderful a player if Benitez chased Torres with such imperative. Why, given that Liverpool are prepared to sell Crouch, have no clubs of any calibre attempted to buy him, if he is of the quality you suggest?

Incidentally, I'd suggest you lay off Rooney. Firstly, he is not, nor ever will be, a striker. He is a second striker at best; he plays behind a conventional frontman, much like Sheringham, Totti and Cantona. In light of this, Rooney cannot be fairly evaluated solely in regard to quantity of goals he scores. But surely, as you were at such lengths to inform me of your superior knowledge of football, you knew this?

I'm not "laying into Rooney", it suits my argument - that Crouch produces for England - that I compare Crouch to a quality player.

Besides, some players produce on the international stage. Crouch has. Baros did. Lampard doesn't. Club form doesn't always matter. You're doing well as an international striker if you get 1 in 3. Crouch decimates that and, by the way, all the strikers play the poor teams.

I am actually embarassed for you.

Why?

Why?

Because the two statements directly contradict eachother.

If that was a deeper question then I guess that given this man shamelessly tried to claim that "If a black man ever becomes primeminister I'll emmigrate" wasn't a racist statement because "I plan to emmigrate anyway" then someone has to be embarassed for him because he won't be embarassed for himself.

Poor England squad and poor England manager. Completely mediocre material and people always wait for it to be the champions.

Poland will take Euro 2008 by storm. Just watch.

Simple comparison,

England's performance
Euro 88 Round One
World 90 Semi Finals
Euro 92 Round one
World 94 Failed to Qualify

World 02 Quarter Finals
Euro 04 Quarter Finals
World 06 Quarter Finals
Euro 08 Failed to Qualify
The problem is that just giving that information hides the actual performance of the team - for example, Italia 90 we played rubbish for the most part, but were still within a penalty shootout of the final. In 2006, we played rubbish but were within a penalty shootout of the semi-final. Euro 2004 we actually played quite well, and had it not been for missing a penalty and conceding two late goals against France, we would have topped our group and played Greece in the quarter-final (admittedly they did win the tournament...). However, the overall look of the thing, when compared to the World Cups in 2002 and 2006, is the same - losing in the quarter final.

You also seem to have omitted France '98 and Euro 2000. Second round and first round respectively, where we played rubbish and were found out.

The last time we beat one of the top international teams at a major international tournament was in 2002, against Argentina (with a dodgy penalty). In fact, here's a list of the top international teams we've beaten in a competitive match in...let's say the last decade: Turkey (I'm being generous here, Euro 2004 qualifying), Argentina (World Cup 2002), Germany (World Cup 2002 qualifying). That's not really a very impressive list...

I'd agree that the Premiership has improved the English national team, but only absolutely. Relative to other national teams, we've been standing still for the last 20 years, with only the occasional exceptional result (eg. Holland in Euro 1996, Germany in 2001).

As for Crouch, it's fine to say that most international strikers score most of their goals against weaker teams, but looking at the teams he's scored against (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_crouch#International_goals), it looks like he doesn't perform against the top teams.

It isn't snobbery in the slightest. Tall strikers such as Zigic, Berbativ, van Nistelrooy and Toni are celebrated by those who criticise Crouch; the difference is, they can be relied upon to convert a chance, even if they recieve only one in a game. Crouch, against Macedonia at Old Trafford, had a free header in the dying minutes, and failed to even place his attempt on target.

Crouch may well be reliable, I can accept he is hard working. What this shold not disguise is his technical failings that deny him entry to the highest echelons of striking; he has precious little pace, surprisingly little strength, and is technically inferior to Owen, Rooney, Defoe and their ilk. English football still persist with the notion that enough "passion, gumption and hard work" can overcome the manifest technical and tactical failings of even the best English footballers; hence why so few English "stars" attract the attention of continental clubs, and why the likes of Croatia are able to surmount our national team.

English football requires an academy much like that Clairfontaine in France; unsurprisingly, however, the FA sacrificed the academy at Burton in favour of what now seems a hollow, delusionally mighty edifice at Wembley.

I said that Crouch is not world-class. I doubt when anyone discusses great strikers, they will be talking about Crouch. However at the moment, he is more reliable than Owen and less injury prone as well, for Liverpool I would say the same. Other than Torres, he is still the striker most likely to score. He is also the striker who has got the least number of starts. For both England and Liverpool, it feels like he isnt picked because other strikers may have a more desirable playing style even if they arent scoring as many goals. I think that neither side has enough quality to do that.

Relative to other national teams, we've been standing still for the last 20 years, with only the occasional exceptional result (eg. Holland in Euro 2006, Germany in 2001).
Wait, does that mean we sucked in 2006 or that we were rather good?:confused:

Wait, does that mean we sucked in 2006 or that we were rather good?:confused:
Ahem. I meant 1996.

So, who's seen the draw for WC 2010 qualifying? :D

Not liking England's chances there. I can see us losing in Croatia, Ukraine and Belarus.

Ahem. I meant 1996.

So, who's seen the draw for WC 2010 qualifying? :D

Not liking England's chances there. I can see us losing in Croatia, Ukraine and Belarus.I still don't get it.:p

Woohoo, Holland vs Scotland, Norway, Macedonia and Iceland.:D

I said that Crouch is not world-class. I doubt when anyone discusses great strikers, they will be talking about Crouch. However at the moment, he is more reliable than Owen and less injury prone as well, for Liverpool I would say the same. Other than Torres, he is still the striker most likely to score. He is also the striker who has got the least number of starts. For both England and Liverpool, it feels like he isnt picked because other strikers may have a more desirable playing style even if they arent scoring as many goals. I think that neither side has enough quality to do that.

Style is everything in football. Why do you think Barcelona are hailed as European greats, whereas Chelsea, equally successful in the past few years, are loathed? Abramovich's money may well be significant, but I assure you that, if Chelsea played in a style befitting Abramovich's largesse, they would attract far less invective.

For that matter, Crouch is far less of a striker than Owen. He has a poor appreciation of the game, of space, and of where he ought to run, whilst he lacks any real touch or technique. Both Liverpool and England can, and should, do far better than Crouch. Why not try to play a formation that actually accomodates Rooney/ Gerrard, rather than shoehorning him into whatever place is left?

I still don't get it.:p

Woohoo, Holland vs Scotland, Norway, Macedonia and Iceland.:D

Essentially, IV is suggesting that we played bloody well to beat you in 1996. Which we did.

God I envy Dutch football.:(

Essentially, IV is suggesting that we played bloody well to beat you in 1996. Which we did.

God I envy Dutch football.:(
You did? Awesome.:D

I don't recall the Euro '96 anyway.:p

Ok, the draw was last night, so we've got the following groups and my own predictions:

A
1. Portugal
2. Czech Republic
3. Switzerland
4. Turkey

B
1. Germany
2. Croatia
3. Poland
4. Austria

C
1. France
2. Holland
3. Italy
4. Romania

D
1. Sweden
2. Spain
3. Russia
4. Greece

QF
Portugal vs Croatia
Germany vs Czech Republic
France vs Spain
Sweden vs Holland

SF
Portugal vs Germany
France vs Holland

Final
France vs Germany

France will never make it out of Group C. :D

But I can't say more than Muahahahaha to England not qualifying. http://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/aetsch.gif

Ok, the draw was last night, so we've got the following groups and my own predictions:

A
1. Portugal
2. Czech Republic
3. Switzerland
4. Turkey

B
1. Germany
2. Croatia
3. Poland
4. Austria

C
1. France
2. Holland
3. Italy
4. Romania

D
1. Sweden
2. Spain
3. Russia
4. Greece

QF
Portugal vs Croatia
Germany vs Czech Republic
France vs Spain
Sweden vs Holland

SF
Portugal vs Germany
France vs Holland

Final
Holland vs Germany
Changed for accuracy.:p

I'd love to see Turkey win... just for the fun of it.
I remember when they got so close to the final in 2002, seeing them celebrate in Germany just was so much fun :)

Picking a wee bit of an upset-going with Spain. I think they can beat Russia and also Greece. Sweden should be a good game. Then for their quarter final it will be a tough game against Italy/France/Holland, but if they get through that, I think they have every chance!

I'd love to see Turkey win... just for the fun of it.
I remember when they got so close to the final in 2002, seeing them celebrate in Germany just was so much fun :)

Evidence if ever it was required that the spineless and uninterested should keep far away from football.

I personally want one of Spain, Portugal and Holland to win. Hopefully Portugal, simply because they play the better football, but there is little between Spain, Holland and Portugal in this respect.

I suspect Ronaldo may define this tournament; of the three best footballers on the planet at present, he is the only one to be playing at Euroe 2008.:)

Evidence if ever it was required that the spineless and uninterested should keep far away from football.



Huh? Why would you want to ban all the fans from the games? And most of the teams, for that matter? :confused:

Huh? Why would you want to ban all the fans from the games? And most of the teams, for that matter? :confused:

...because one has a superiority complex?

That would be my guess.

English football has been dead for years really, as a nation we are dying for a new sport which we may actually win
There's always Bogsnorkelling (http://llanwrtyd-wells.powys.org.uk/bog.html) or Cheese Rolling (http://www.cheese-rolling.co.uk/the_event.htm), both worthy heirs to the title of British sports.

(whoops! just noticed: Kiwis appeared to have won most of the cheese rolling this year. So scratch that as a sport Brits can come top in. As an aside, it's nice to see that NZ can win something this year!)

Huh? Why would you want to ban all the fans from the games? And most of the teams, for that matter? :confused:

I don't. I do, admittedly, prefer watching football in Spain where the average fan might do more than shout a variety of expletives at any number of players, managers and referees, but that's immaterial.

What is more relevant is my objection to the sort of comment you make; "Oh deary me, I do hope Turkey win because its nice watching them celebrate". Opinions of that sort have no place in a discussion about football sweetie; they belong in a cheap mothers magazine or tablod opinion column.

I don't. I do, admittedly, prefer watching football in Spain where the average fan might do more than shout a variety of expletives at any number of players, managers and referees, but that's immaterial.

What is more relevant is my objection to the sort of comment you make; "Oh deary me, I do hope Turkey win because its nice watching them celebrate". Opinions of that sort have no place in a discussion about football sweetie; they belong in a cheap mothers magazine or tablod opinion column.

Hon, I'm not in the stadium playing with the team. So what interests me about football is seeing a nice, interesting game (which Turkey delivered) and having a good nice party afterwards, with no violently inclined or overly arrogant fans of the winning team around (also delivered by Turkey).
I happen to measure teams not only by their performance, but also by their fan base.

Hon, I'm not in the stadium playing with the team. So what interests me about football is seeing a nice, interesting game (which Turkey delivered) and having a good nice party afterwards, with no violently inclined or overly arrogant fans of the winning team around (also delivered by Turkey).
I happen to measure teams not only by their performance, but also by their fan base.

You want to see proper football? Why on earth aren't you supporting Spain, Holland or Portugal. No offence but Turkey aren't celebrated for their playing style, and their fans are vile. There is a reason most European fans avoid travelling to Turkey when their side plays Galatassaray or Besiktas; their fans are the worst in Europe by a mile.

However, if you do rate a team by its fan base, Italy has far better fans than Turkey.

However, if you do rate a team by its fan base, Italy has far better fans than Turkey.

And Northern Ireland won an award for their fans.....although granted that's about the only good thing the team has going for them

I personally want one of Spain, Portugal and Holland to win. Hopefully Portugal, simply because they play the better football, but there is little between Spain, Holland and Portugal in this respect.
By better football, I assume you are referring to their marvelous diving displays that took them so close in the WC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QB6Cd87s2D0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scfio8umvbs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzvx5f9FZss
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YqAThhy1Q4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzvx5f9FZss

I don't. I do, admittedly, prefer watching football in Spain where the average fan might do more than shout a variety of expletives at any number of players, managers and referees, but that's immaterial.

You mean shouting 'monkey' chants and general racism?

Indeed, racist insults at Spanish soccer games are now almost routine. A year ago, members of the same Zaragoza crowd pelted Eto'o with peanuts, and in January Zaragoza were fined after a group of supporters hurled racist taunts at Real Betis' Brazilian forward Robert. In 2004 Spanish national team coach Luis Aragonés created a stir when he allegedly made racist remarks about Thierry Henry, the black French striker who plays for London club Arsenal. Shortly after, a "friendly match" between Spain and England was marred by the all-too-familiar simian noises. Perhaps most troubling, the xenophobic chants and racist slogans are no longer confined to bands of Ultras. "What concerns me," says Javier Duran, president of the Observatory of Racism in Sport, the body created by the Spanish government to monitor xenophobic incidents, "is how generalized the phenomenon has become. At Zaragoza, it was the whole stadium chanting those ape noises, not just a handful of fans."

To be sure, racist insults can be heard in stadiums elsewhere in Europe. In Italy last year, Messina's Marc Zoro, an Ivorian, had to be restrained by teammates after he was racially abused by Lazio fans at Rome's Olympic stadium. (Zoro later suffered similar abuse at Inter Milan.) Yet Spain stands out. Duran attributes the xenophobic displays at soccer games to the country's recent influx of immigrants — a function both of Spain's recent economic success and its declining birthrate. Spain's National Institute for Statistics reported last year that the number of foreigners living in the nation is nearly four times what it was five years ago. "The widespread presence of immigrants is a new phenomenon for us, so we're just beginning to recognize the problem of racism," says Duran.

You want to see proper football? Why on earth aren't you supporting Spain, Holland or Portugal. No offence but Turkey aren't celebrated for their playing style, and their fans are vile. There is a reason most European fans avoid travelling to Turkey when their side plays Galatassaray or Besiktas; their fans are the worst in Europe by a mile.

However, if you do rate a team by its fan base, Italy has far better fans than Turkey.

I don't like the Italian style of playing. And I don't appreciate arrogance displayed by the Spanish and Portuguese most of the time.
I do like the Dutch, I also like the Swedish and German players. But I have a problem with their fans, again.
As I said, I saw Turkey play, and celebrated with them years ago, and it was the most enjoyable experience.

By better football, I assume you are referring to their marvelous diving displays that took them so close in the WC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QB6Cd87s2D0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scfio8umvbs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzvx5f9FZss
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YqAThhy1Q4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzvx5f9FZss

Or this;

Nani; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOmt10eFasM&feature=related

Ronaldo; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk_NlkFffP4&feature=related

Quite simply, diving is, wrongly, endemic in the game. If you seek to criticise Portugal for simulation, you cannot do so exclusively. They also happen to have a midfield consisiting of Deco, Ronaldo, Nani and Quaresma, and can also call upon the likes of Joao Moutinho; simply put, they play a stellar brand of football that, much like that of Argentina or Holland, is unattainable for the sort of players Turkey can call upon.

Perhaps it is footballing snobbery, but nothing bores me more than seeing a less talented, but harder working team grind out a victory against a footballing side like Barca or United through physicality and cynicism. Football should concern itself with beauty and genius, not uninspiring stakhanovite players fulfilling mechanical roles in mediocre football.

And Northern Ireland won an award for their fans.....although granted that's about the only good thing the team has going for them

Meh. David Healy's fairly good, although I doubt he'll ever get the chance to prove as much at a club greater than Fulham, and Steve Davis and Johnny Evans should have bright enough futures.

I don't like the Italian style of playing. And I don't appreciate arrogance displayed by the Spanish and Portuguese most of the time.
I do like the Dutch, I also like the Swedish and German players. But I have a problem with their fans, again.
As I said, I saw Turkey play, and celebrated with them years ago, and it was the most enjoyable experience.

Arrogance is a facet of genius. It might rile at times, but I'd sooner see an arrogance in players like Ronaldo, Torres, Kaka and Messi than the earnest application of the less talented. They cannot get me out of my seat in wonder or amazement.

Incidentally, answer the point regarding Turkish fans. They rightly have a vile reputation at club level, a fact you wilifully disregard.

You mean shouting 'monkey' chants and general racism?

Ever been to the Camp Nou? If not, do so, come back and talk to me about atmosphere and appreciation of football.

Meh. David Healy's fairly good

It would be a bit insulting to England if you said anything other than this

It would be a bit insulting to England if you said anything other than this

I like him actually. Unlike Heskey, Saha and company, he isn't just a tall, strong, fast bloke who might take a chance occassionally. He has excellent technique and sublime instincts.

Meh. David Healy's fairly good, although I doubt he'll ever get the chance to prove as much at a club greater than Fulham, and Steve Davis and Johnny Evans should have bright enough futures.

Um....Healy already played for a bigger club than Fulham...

Arrogance is a facet of genius. It might rile at times, but I'd sooner see an arrogance in players like Ronaldo, Torres, Kaka and Messi than the earnest application of the less talented. They cannot get me out of my seat in wonder or amazement.

I won't make excuses for bad behaviour based on possible talent. Or anything else, for that matter.


Incidentally, answer the point regarding Turkish fans. They rightly have a vile reputation at club level, a fact you wilifully disregard.

I disregard it because I have never before heard of it, and I personally can't say I experienced it in any way.

I won't make excuses for bad behaviour based on possible talent. Or anything else, for that matter.



I disregard it because I have never before heard of it, and I personally can't say I experienced it in any way.

Sadly true. Galatasaray a case in point. However our hooligan problems look like a cake walk when compared to South America...

Um....Healy already played for a bigger club than Fulham...

Leeds? They're not a big club! They don't even own their own stadium!

(spot the smiling United fan...:D)

I know he played for United as a youth and then moved on, but what I really meant was that even now, at the age of 28(ish, I think...), he probably won't get the transfer his record should command.

Ever been to the Camp Nou? If not, do so, come back and talk to me about atmosphere and appreciation of football.

The Boix Nois are well-known for racism, it certainly exists both in Barcelona and even more in Spain overall.

Catalan as a region is highly nationalistic in terms of Catalan and also has severe racism problems.

The point is, you're making blanket statements that don't stand up to reality.

I won't make excuses for bad behaviour based on possible talent. Or anything else, for that matter.



I disregard it because I have never before heard of it, and I personally can't say I experienced it in any way.

It isn't bad behaviour. What you label arrogance is nothing more than confidence in ability and technique; a trait not bred into English footballers enough.

For that matter how much do you know of Portugese "arrogance"? So bloody what if Ronaldo might think himself a cut above the average British professional, he is. I can forgive him any indiscretion if he continues to score last minute wonder goals and win us games. Zidane was probably, to your definition of the term, arrogant. It doesn't change the fact that he won France any number of games, and two trophies, whilst humble Peter Crouch has, and will, win bugger all.

Sadly true. Galatasaray a case in point. However our hooligan problems look like a cake walk when compared to South America...

Or South America

*shudder*

I really do fear for South American would cup, and quite why it's being held in Africa is beyond me.

Leeds? They're not a big club! They don't even own their own stadium!

(spot the smiling United fan...:D)

I know he played for United as a youth and then moved on, but what I really meant was that even now, at the age of 28(ish, I think...), he probably won't get the transfer his record should command.

Temporary hiccup.

Healy is not a major star player...he is a fine player though without a doubt...but not world class...his club form is not good enough.

Just pointing out that we are bigger than Fulham.... I am gutted that Poyet went to Spurts though. Healy had to go as did Lennon and Robinson. Our finances were a mess and still are. The FA screwed us well and proper as well. Fuck the FA and their team.

Oh yeah...fuck off dirty manc ;)

The Boix Nois are well-known for racism, it certainly exists both in Barcelona and even more in Spain overall.

Catalan as a region is highly nationalistic in terms of Catalan and also has severe racism problems.

The point is, you're making blanket statements that don't stand up to reality.

Nationalism is not a byword for "BAD! SOUND THE ALARUM BELLS!". To the likes of you, perhaps, but there's no accounting for terminal stupidity; I imagine you quite like Murali as well.

In any case, so what if the Boix Nois are racist? Most football ultras are, and this is a transnational trend. What does concern me is that a visiting fan in Barcelona is unlikely to be stabbed, attacked or killed; this is not the case in Turkey. Or South Africa for that matter. Hence why FIFA gave them a world cup...

Temporary hiccup.

Healy is not a major star player...he is a fine player though without a doubt...but not world class...his club form is not good enough.

Just pointing out that we are bigger than Fulham.... I am gutted that Poyet went to Spurts though. Healy had to go as did Lennon and Robinson. Our finances were a mess and still are. The FA screwed us well and proper as well. Fuck the FA and their team.

Oh yeah...fuck off dirty manc ;)

I agree regarding the FA. I'm quite staggered that the FA, ECB and RFU all seem to attract complete fuckwits as adminstrators...well, to an extent. But the fact stands they are appallingly incompetant and blinkered.

I have a suspicion Healy would flourish at a big club. I don't know why, it really is just an instinct, but he strikes me as being a player who plays better the greater the stage. Not that anybody will either gamble on him, or give him the time to settle into a big team, which really is a shame. he could be great.

I'm not sure about Leeds though. I have a horrible feeling you might actually recover, which wouldn't be any good at all!:p

Or South America

*shudder*

I really do fear for South American would cup, and quite why it's being held in Africa is beyond me.Maybe because S. Africa has a higher level of development than, what's that country where the Olympics are being held again..., China?

Nationalism is not a byword for "BAD! SOUND THE ALARUM BELLS!". To the likes of you, perhaps, but there's no accounting for terminal stupidity; I imagine you quite like Murali as well.


Nationalism is for people who've nothing to boast for themselves so they place their sense of self-worth in their country out of sense of misplaced superiority - one you've consistently shown throughout this thread.

I really do fear for South American would cup, and quite why it's being held in Africa is beyond me.
It must be that pesky "world" part of "World Cup" again, I suppose. You know, the part that says it's an inclusive endeavour- open to, and representative of, the whole world rather than just the little portion of it that you find palatable.

It must be that pesky "world" part of "World Cup" again, I suppose. You know, the part that says it's an inclusive endeavour- open to, and representative of, the whole world rather than just the little portion of it that you find palatable.

Not at all. I can understand holding a world cup in the Orient. Hell, even North America could be held to be sensible. What is not is holding an international event of the scale of the world cup in a country that lacks sufficient stadia to host the event, has endemic poverty, rife crime, and a football team below the level of the likes of the USA and South Korea. It simply seems nonsensical; only South America and Europe, and perhaps the USA, are actually equipped to host a world cup without creating a legacy comparable in wastefulness to an Olympic Games.

Nationalism is for people who've nothing to boast for themselves so they place their sense of self-worth in their country out of sense of misplaced superiority - one you've consistently shown throughout this thread.

Wrong. Nationalism is taking a pride in one's country at the expense of others. One can feel nationalism and self-worth simultaneously; they are not, to anybody capable of thought beyond that which is inculcated by an increasingly poor education system.

I happen to be, I'll bet, better looking than you. I'm at a decent enough university, and am on for a first and the Oxbridge Ma I actually want. I have a girl who is not only gorgeous, but also engaging, intelligent and semi-famous, a circle of friends that allow me to disregard the majority of the medicre goons in my accomodation block, and a future as bright as I seek to make it.

Sorry my dear, I might not always be particularly nice or compassionate, but my sense of superiority is not misplaced.

Sorry my dear, I might not always be particularly nice or compassionate, but my sense of superiority is not misplaced.So what's the character flaw that keeps you posting in the forum?

So what's the character flaw that keeps you posting in the forum?

Boredom? Or the fact I quite like discussing issues with people who, for the most part, are intelligent, and also come from more than one or two countries. The same reasons others do I imagine.

Boredom? Or the fact I quite like discussing issues with people who, for the most part, are intelligent, and also come from more than one or two countries. The same reasons others do I imagine.Everyone here is running away from reality or has some other disturbed reason why they're here, particularly because the anomymity we have protects us from showing off our bad sides.

Everyone here is running away from reality or has some other disturbed reason why they're here, particularly because the anomymity we have protects us from showing off our bad sides.

Indeed. Anonymity is one of NSG's great appeals. As, for that matter, is the fact that there is a greater range of views and backgrounds than the average discussion group or debating society.

Boredom? Or the fact I quite like discussing issues with people who, for the most part, are intelligent, and also come from more than one or two countries. The same reasons others do I imagine.

If your friends and girlfriend are so amazing, why are you bored?

If your friends and girlfriend are so amazing, why are you bored?

Because we don't live in each other's pockets, and, at this place called U-N-I-V-E-R-S-I-T-Y we also have academic work to do, the timing of which does not always coincide.

If your friends and girlfriend are so amazing, why are you bored?
Because going out in York isn't all that cheap and TBC is a student ;)

Because we don't live in each other's pockets, and, at this place called U-N-I-V-E-R-S-I-T-Y we also have academic work to do, the timing of which does not always coincide.

Must be a pretty small group of friends. Most people at U-N-I-V-E-R-S-I-T-Y have a large enough group to do something at any time. Are you sure you're not mixing up elitism with being a nerd?

Must be a pretty small group of friends. Most people at U-N-I-V-E-R-S-I-T-Y have a large enough group to do something at any time. Are you sure you're not mixing up elitism with being a nerd?

I've come on these forums many a time when I'm writing (or, rather, "should be writing" :p) an essay. It's a useful distraction. :D

Perhaps it is footballing snobbery, but nothing bores me more than seeing a less talented, but harder working team grind out a victory against a footballing side like Barca or United through physicality and cynicism. Football should concern itself with beauty and genius, not uninspiring stakhanovite players fulfilling mechanical roles in mediocre football.

If you ask me, I'd rather have a group of 20 or so guys short on talent but high on work ethic than 20 players who may be sublimely talented but only perform "when the spirit moves them." Talent is useless if the players do not use it.

Of course, further to the point, if the likes of Fulham, Reading, Birmingham City et all had the ability to build a team comparable to the likes of Manchester United, Chelsea and Arsenal they wouldn't have to play "negative, grind-it-out" soccer. Yeah, I'd love to see every Premiership, Serie A, La Liga, etc. team play beautifully, but when there's a clear talent gap between the top quarter of the league and the rest of the league, they've got no choice *but* to be "negative"- otherwise, they'd lose each time with a cavalcade of 3-0 and 4-0 scorelines.

I've come on these forums many a time when I'm writing (or, rather, "should be writing" :p) an essay. It's a useful distraction. :D


I'm the same, although I'm happily too old for essays. But that's not boredom, that's procrastination.

Quite simply, diving is, wrongly, endemic in the game. If you seek to criticise Portugal for simulation, you cannot do so exclusively. They also happen to have a midfield consisiting of Deco, Ronaldo, Nani and Quaresma, and can also call upon the likes of Joao Moutinho; simply put, they play a stellar brand of football that, much like that of Argentina or Holland, is unattainable for the sort of players Turkey can call upon.true. If anything I blame Portugal's coach. He took Brazil to WC victory by teaching them how to dive and brought the same coaching techniques with him to Portugal. Remember that appalling ball dribbling towards Ronaldo (iirc) only for him to collapse in screaming agony clutching his face and being awarded a penalty kick?

Perhaps it is footballing snobbery, but nothing bores me more than seeing a less talented, but harder working team grind out a victory against a footballing side like Barca or United through physicality and cynicism. Football should concern itself with beauty and genius, not uninspiring stakhanovite players fulfilling mechanical roles in mediocre football.
All sports are like that though. Take rugby for eg. Polynesian rugby is great to watch but I'd never bet against England vs an Islands team. When there's a lot at stake, boring works. take German football for example.

Nationalism is for people who've nothing to boast for themselves so they place their sense of self-worth in their country out of sense of misplaced superiority - one you've consistently shown throughout this thread.
Who is that said, "A patriot is someone who thinks their country is the best simply from having been born into it"?

Who is that said, "A patriot is someone who thinks their country is the best simply from having been born into it"?

Google refuses to tell me though it offers some nice quotes on nationalism:

“Nationalism is an infantile sickness. It is the measles of the human race.”
Albert Einstein

“Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first.”
Charles de Gaulle quotes

Ahh...Google does tell me:

Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it. ~George Bernard Shaw

As well as...

Patriotism, the virtue of the vicious. ~Oscar Wilde

Patriotism is a kind of religion; it is the egg from which wars are hatched. ~Guy de Maupassant

I see the difference much as De Gaulle does though more that a love of one's country is natural, a belief in its superiority is indicative of an immature mind.

Perhaps it is footballing snobbery, but nothing bores me more than seeing a less talented, but harder working team grind out a victory against a footballing side like Barca or United through physicality and cynicism. Football should concern itself with beauty and genius, not uninspiring stakhanovite players fulfilling mechanical roles in mediocre football.
Yeah, we were all heartbroken to see Bolton beat United as well.

Arrogance is a facet of genius. It might rile at times, but I'd sooner see an arrogance in players like Ronaldo, Torres, Kaka and Messi than the earnest application of the less talented. They cannot get me out of my seat in wonder or amazement.

Incidentally, answer the point regarding Turkish fans. They rightly have a vile reputation at club level, a fact you wilifully disregard.
Arrogance is not a facet of genius. Arrogance is a facet of selfishness. Look at Fabregas - genius, yes. Arrogant? No. Kaka's hardly arrogant either. He'd be just as happy playing futsal in the street than in a Champions League final.

Henry was arrogant. But then, he didn't make a habit of diving, and (perhaps more importantly) he didn't have a face that you want to smack.

As for Euro 2008:
Group A - Czech Rep top, Portugal second, Turkey third. Czech Rep vs Portugal is each team's second match. Portugal play Turkey in their first match, while Czech Rep have a nice warm-up against Switzerland.

Group B - Germany top, Croatia second, Poland third. By the last match, Austria will already be out, while Poland will still be able to qualify with a win. Germany should be able to take it easy against Austria and qualify top, while Croatia will have to fight against Poland. Unless they beat Germany, which I don't think will happen.

Group C - Top will be whichever one of France or Italy gets their shit together. Romania will be second. They topped their qualifying group (which had Holland in it), the only match they lost was in Bulgaria, 1-0, when they'd already qualified. Holland will probably be bottom of this group.

Group D - Top and second will be Spain and Sweden, the order depends on the result of the match between the two. In qualifying, Spain won 3-0 in Spain, Sweden 2-0 in Sweden. I think Spain. Russia third.

QF (winners first):
Czech Rep - Croatia
Germany - Portugal (possibly aet or even penalties)
France/Italy - Sweden
Spain - Romania

SF:
Czech Rep - Germany
France/Italy - Spain (aet)

Winners:
Czech Republic (you heard it here first)

Yeah, we were all heartbroken to see Bolton beat United as well.

Henry was arrogant. But then, he didn't make a habit of diving, and (perhaps more importantly) he didn't have a face that you want to smack.


Winners:
Czech Republic (you heard it here first)

No!

Yes!

Maybe!

;)

Ahh...Google does tell me:

Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it. ~George Bernard Shaw
a ha! Shaw was going to be my 3rd choice behind Twain or Wilde. I felt it was one of those three.
ThanQ.

Yeah, we were all heartbroken to see Bolton beat United as well.

Let's not forget how many times Manchester United won 1-0 themselves. Early on they didn't look so good either.

Arrogance is not a facet of genius. Arrogance is a facet of selfishness. Look at Fabregas - genius, yes. Arrogant? No. Kaka's hardly arrogant either. He'd be just as happy playing futsal in the street than in a Champions League final.

Henry was arrogant. But then, he didn't make a habit of diving, and (perhaps more importantly) he didn't have a face that you want to smack.

Arrogance doesn't bother me if the player can back it up. Guys like Thierry Henry and Cristiano Ronaldo do have an air of conceitedness to them but they do produce. Antonio Cassano, however, doesn't (wonky knees or not). Yeah, I'd rather have a humble, "team-first" kind of guy than someone who feels they come before the team, but as long as there's results there's not (much) reason for complaint.

As for Euro 2008:

Group A- Only clear result in my mind is Turkey: I don't think they've got enough to compete against Portugal and the Czech Republic. Switzerland on paper doesn't either, but they did quite famously (and hilariously) not concede at World Cup 2006, and if Alexander Frei can bag himself a few (as he's capable of), the Swiss could surprise a few people. Portugal's the best team on paper but have yet to really make a "major" impact at any major tournament (Euro 2004 seems to be a fluke) and the Czechs' meltdown at WC 2006 doesn't indicate to me that they've got that finishing touch either. Still, if I was a betting man I take Portugal by a hair, at least because of the talent.

Group B- I think it's pretty straightforward: the Germans are the best team at Euro 2008, Croatia is stronger than many give them credit for, the Poles have talent yet never show up and the Austrians are just in over their heads. Hey, at least they have a good U-20 showing to boast about.

Group C- Heard a lot about these Romanians: did pretty well in qualifying and there's some quality players on that side (Adrian Mutu, Christian Chivu), but this may be just a case of "I'll believe it when I see it". Still, the French didn't really impress me in qualifying (they really do miss Zinedine Zidane's leadership) and the Italians are old, so I don't see either getting out of the group, being taken out by the hungrier Romanians. That leaves the Dutch, who have too much talent to be denied (I just hope coaching comes through).

Group D- I like Spain to win the group, since that's what they managed to do at WC 2006 before having their usual letdown. The Swedes should finish second, because neither Russia nor Greece are comparable to them, despite being relatively plucky sides, and this stage, a lack of talent can mean everything.

Quarterfinals:

Portugal over Croatia- Ronaldo & Co. should have a field day frustrating the Croatian defence. Maybe Josip Simunic will pick up four yellow cards in this one?

Germany over Czech Republic- The Czechs could make a run but I don't think they've got enough- physically and mentally- to keep up with Germany here.

Holland over Sweden- Like the Czechs, the Swedes should give the Dutch a run for their money but the Dutch have too much firepower not to go through.

Romania over Spain- Yeah, the Tricolorii should lose, but it's Spain and the Spanish never get a knockout stage win. Could go down to the wire, however.

Semi-Finals:

Germany over Portugal- Okay, so the WC Third Place Game isn't the same thing as other knockout stage games, but Germany did win (and win handily) so that has to mean something. Portugal can keep up this time but I think it won't be enough- though only barely.

Holland over Romania- Comparisons would be made with this year's Romania team and last edition's Greek team, but I think the Dutch will be better focused this time around hoping to avoid another early exit. That, and these two teams just don't compare. All bets would be off, though, if Ruud van Nistelrooy stays rooted to the bench again.

Finals:

Germany over Holland- Well, I said it- the Germans are the best team here. They're the best all-around team and pretty young as well. The Dutch will give it a go (this is a rivalry game, after all) but the Germans won't be denied.

I most definitely hope Spain win Euro 2008.

Our record against them in qualifiers is 3-3 (over two legs, one win each), so it would be awesome for a country as small as us to have basically taken a two-leg draw over the top Eurpoean country.