The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
...who's more interested in the game between the Celebs and the Legends on Sky One's 'The Match' than any of the upcoming England internationals?
Page:
German
No foreign manager has ever won a trophy while managing a national team.
Well, they hadn't before euro 2004, because i can't remember what nationality the Greek manager was...
Well, they hadn't before euro 2004, because i can't remember what nationality the Greek manager was...
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> If you can honestly draw anything truly positive from
> England's last 3 or 4 games, I'll eat my hat.
Alright then, I'll give you a positive. From those games we've got 6 points which have practically guaranteed World Cup qualification.
Oh, and Holland are winning 2-0 with 20 minutes to go, so bar some sort of miracle we have qualified.
> If you can honestly draw anything truly positive from
> England's last 3 or 4 games, I'll eat my hat.
Alright then, I'll give you a positive. From those games we've got 6 points which have practically guaranteed World Cup qualification.
Oh, and Holland are winning 2-0 with 20 minutes to go, so bar some sort of miracle we have qualified.
Stryke wrote:
> You've watched, what, half of an edition of Match of the Day this
> season? By mistake?
No, I've just watched enough of England's football team to have given up hope.
If you can honestly draw anything truly positive from England's last 3 or 4 games, I'll eat my hat. Or at least I would if I wore one.
After today's abysmal showing, I stand by my original thoughts - that tomorrow's Celebs v Legends game will be far more entertaining.
> You've watched, what, half of an edition of Match of the Day this
> season? By mistake?
No, I've just watched enough of England's football team to have given up hope.
If you can honestly draw anything truly positive from England's last 3 or 4 games, I'll eat my hat. Or at least I would if I wore one.
After today's abysmal showing, I stand by my original thoughts - that tomorrow's Celebs v Legends game will be far more entertaining.
Stryke wrote:
> What point was that? That it was the players and not Eriksson's
> fault? So the players decided to curb a naturally attacking midfield
> and sit behind the ball?
It wouldn't have mattered if we played attacking football. To be honest, I don't think it would have mattered if we'd fielded the entire 18-man squad! We couldn't even get the bloody ball off them half the time. Defending too deep, not pressing the opposition.
These are professional players, and should be able to play to whatever tactics the manager decides upon. Whatever formation or tactics you're asked to play, it all begins with winning and keeping the ball. From there you should be able to have at least some success. We just can't do it.
With all due respect to the teams of Wales, Northern Ireland and Austria, these are teams which - if we're half as good as some people think - we should be rolling over. And that's regardless of what formation we use, which tactics we use, or who's in charge.
If you want to put the blame squarely on the manager's shoulders, fine. But I somehow doubt that Sven's words as they left the dressing room were, "Remember lads, don't pressure them or risk doing anything that might win us the ball." Whatever he said, that's certainly how the players seemed to interpret it.
> you've come on here and said you prefer watching fake Big Brother
> football and then proceed to attack the England players despite
> the fact most of them are on raging form for their clubs.
That surely only bolsters my argument? As Graham Le Saux (I think it was) said tonight - these players are "on fire" for their clubs. But that's irrelevant when they rarely perform to the same level in an England shirt. For that reason alone, they deserve to get some stick, and we should all be questioning their right to wear the shirt.
Those who regularly fail to perform should not be picked. "Ah, but selection is down to the manager," you say. Well, it should be, but it's not, is it? If Sven (or anyone else) doesn't pick Owen/Gerrard/Lampard/Ferdinand/Terry/Beckham/whoever (delete as appropriate), he still gets jumped on by the press and fans, saying he's got it wrong. The manager is never right, whoever he is.
"Yeah, cool, Taylor's England manager! Success here we come!" Later... "Flippin' turnip! Get rid of him!"
"Yeah, cool, Venables is England coach! Success here we come!" Later... "Venables is s#?t, get rid of him."
"Yeah, cool, Keegan's the man! Attacking football! Success here we come!" Later... "No furkin defence, he's rubbish, get rid of him!"
"Yeah, cool, Sven's the new top man! Some continental flair! Success here we come!" Later... "He's got it all wrong... bloody foreigner... get rid of him!"
With the mix of players and managers we've had, and the variety of tactics, formations and styles those have brought about, we should have at least reached a final or two. But 1966 aside, we've only twice (I think) gone further than a quarter final. So either English players aren't as good as we'd like to think, or the others are significantly better.
Tonight we were, once again, crap. I know it, you know it, the crowd knew it after 10 minutes, and so did the entire BBC commentary team, current and former players included.
So you tell me: what is it about pulling on an England shirt that has so regularly managed to turn our best players into a bunch of inept misfits?
> What point was that? That it was the players and not Eriksson's
> fault? So the players decided to curb a naturally attacking midfield
> and sit behind the ball?
It wouldn't have mattered if we played attacking football. To be honest, I don't think it would have mattered if we'd fielded the entire 18-man squad! We couldn't even get the bloody ball off them half the time. Defending too deep, not pressing the opposition.
These are professional players, and should be able to play to whatever tactics the manager decides upon. Whatever formation or tactics you're asked to play, it all begins with winning and keeping the ball. From there you should be able to have at least some success. We just can't do it.
With all due respect to the teams of Wales, Northern Ireland and Austria, these are teams which - if we're half as good as some people think - we should be rolling over. And that's regardless of what formation we use, which tactics we use, or who's in charge.
If you want to put the blame squarely on the manager's shoulders, fine. But I somehow doubt that Sven's words as they left the dressing room were, "Remember lads, don't pressure them or risk doing anything that might win us the ball." Whatever he said, that's certainly how the players seemed to interpret it.
> you've come on here and said you prefer watching fake Big Brother
> football and then proceed to attack the England players despite
> the fact most of them are on raging form for their clubs.
That surely only bolsters my argument? As Graham Le Saux (I think it was) said tonight - these players are "on fire" for their clubs. But that's irrelevant when they rarely perform to the same level in an England shirt. For that reason alone, they deserve to get some stick, and we should all be questioning their right to wear the shirt.
Those who regularly fail to perform should not be picked. "Ah, but selection is down to the manager," you say. Well, it should be, but it's not, is it? If Sven (or anyone else) doesn't pick Owen/Gerrard/Lampard/Ferdinand/Terry/Beckham/whoever (delete as appropriate), he still gets jumped on by the press and fans, saying he's got it wrong. The manager is never right, whoever he is.
"Yeah, cool, Taylor's England manager! Success here we come!" Later... "Flippin' turnip! Get rid of him!"
"Yeah, cool, Venables is England coach! Success here we come!" Later... "Venables is s#?t, get rid of him."
"Yeah, cool, Keegan's the man! Attacking football! Success here we come!" Later... "No furkin defence, he's rubbish, get rid of him!"
"Yeah, cool, Sven's the new top man! Some continental flair! Success here we come!" Later... "He's got it all wrong... bloody foreigner... get rid of him!"
With the mix of players and managers we've had, and the variety of tactics, formations and styles those have brought about, we should have at least reached a final or two. But 1966 aside, we've only twice (I think) gone further than a quarter final. So either English players aren't as good as we'd like to think, or the others are significantly better.
Tonight we were, once again, crap. I know it, you know it, the crowd knew it after 10 minutes, and so did the entire BBC commentary team, current and former players included.
So you tell me: what is it about pulling on an England shirt that has so regularly managed to turn our best players into a bunch of inept misfits?
I would never defend Crouch. His stunning vein of goalscoring continues.
Stryke wrote:
> most of them are on raging form for their clubs.
It should be noted that 'most' does not include Crouch. It would, however, include Bent. Crazy Sven.
> most of them are on raging form for their clubs.
It should be noted that 'most' does not include Crouch. It would, however, include Bent. Crazy Sven.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> in the world rankings!
>
> I think you're suffering the same problem as the English media, and
> that is any English player who is above average is automatically
> labelled as a hero and the saviour of English football.
--
Thank God you're here, Wookiee. You alone on this forum are unaffected by the media and can rise above us all to preach your message.
You've watched, what, half of an edition of Match of the Day this season? By mistake?
Yes, I realise it seems like I'm attacking you, but from my viewpoint you've come on here and said you prefer watching fake Big Brother football and then proceed to attack the England players despite the fact most of them are on raging form for their clubs.
> in the world rankings!
>
> I think you're suffering the same problem as the English media, and
> that is any English player who is above average is automatically
> labelled as a hero and the saviour of English football.
--
Thank God you're here, Wookiee. You alone on this forum are unaffected by the media and can rise above us all to preach your message.
You've watched, what, half of an edition of Match of the Day this season? By mistake?
Yes, I realise it seems like I'm attacking you, but from my viewpoint you've come on here and said you prefer watching fake Big Brother football and then proceed to attack the England players despite the fact most of them are on raging form for their clubs.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> It was "interesting" before that!
>
> This match is only serving to prove my point.
--
What point was that? That it was the players and not Eriksson's fault? So the players decided to curb a naturally attacking midfield and sit behind the ball? The players decided to play Crouch? The players decided to make stupid substitutions?
Hey, player power is more advanced than I thought.
> It was "interesting" before that!
>
> This match is only serving to prove my point.
--
What point was that? That it was the players and not Eriksson's fault? So the players decided to curb a naturally attacking midfield and sit behind the ball? The players decided to play Crouch? The players decided to make stupid substitutions?
Hey, player power is more advanced than I thought.
That match was awful.
Firstly, why did Crouch start? Defoe would have been my first pick but even Bent would have a more sensible choice. Crouck cocked up numerous good chances to score or at least set somebody else up.
Joe Cole played well, probably England's best player whilst he was on and if he'd had the likes of Defoe or Bent in the box then maybe his service could have been converted to a goal. Gerrard played well but was more impressive when he was forced into defending rather then for his attacking. Lampard seemed to lack a cutting edge though the penalty was well taken.
I find it hard to say too many bad things about Beckham. The free kick attempt could have been better but he had a great strike on the rebound. Maybe he didn't provide as much service as may have been expected but what he did give was good. The sending off was madness though. The first yellow seemed harsh enough but to get a red was just cruel.
Campbell getting injured is really bad news but Ferdinand did nothing wrong. Sven's other subs did confuse me though. Bringing on King for Cole didn't seem quite right, King had to come on but maybe taking off Crouch or even Lampard would have made more sense. Then there was Richardson for Owen. Why take Owen off? He was 1,000,000 times more likely to score than Crouch ever was.
At least we got 3 points and at the end of the day that's what is most important. I really hope we do get through off tonight's games though because I'm not sure how England will cope against Poland. The back four is not in good shape, we've lost Beckham, and the doesn't seem to be much of a spark among the rest of the team. As much as I hate to admit it, Rooney is desperately needed back so that's something good for Wednesday's game. I think the starting team for Poland will be the same as today other than Rooney for Crouch, Ferdinand for Campbell, and possibly Wright-Phillips for Beckham.
Firstly, why did Crouch start? Defoe would have been my first pick but even Bent would have a more sensible choice. Crouck cocked up numerous good chances to score or at least set somebody else up.
Joe Cole played well, probably England's best player whilst he was on and if he'd had the likes of Defoe or Bent in the box then maybe his service could have been converted to a goal. Gerrard played well but was more impressive when he was forced into defending rather then for his attacking. Lampard seemed to lack a cutting edge though the penalty was well taken.
I find it hard to say too many bad things about Beckham. The free kick attempt could have been better but he had a great strike on the rebound. Maybe he didn't provide as much service as may have been expected but what he did give was good. The sending off was madness though. The first yellow seemed harsh enough but to get a red was just cruel.
Campbell getting injured is really bad news but Ferdinand did nothing wrong. Sven's other subs did confuse me though. Bringing on King for Cole didn't seem quite right, King had to come on but maybe taking off Crouch or even Lampard would have made more sense. Then there was Richardson for Owen. Why take Owen off? He was 1,000,000 times more likely to score than Crouch ever was.
At least we got 3 points and at the end of the day that's what is most important. I really hope we do get through off tonight's games though because I'm not sure how England will cope against Poland. The back four is not in good shape, we've lost Beckham, and the doesn't seem to be much of a spark among the rest of the team. As much as I hate to admit it, Rooney is desperately needed back so that's something good for Wednesday's game. I think the starting team for Poland will be the same as today other than Rooney for Crouch, Ferdinand for Campbell, and possibly Wright-Phillips for Beckham.
Page: