Seagull58
In the Algarve
Kane taking all the set pieces is sheer stupidity. Hodgson needs to tell him to get in the box and stop believing he's ever going to score with a free kick.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Have we got an unofficial official England v Russia thread?
- Thread starter Sussex Nomad
- Start date
Kane taking all the set pieces is sheer stupidity. Hodgson needs to tell him to get in the box and stop believing he's ever going to score with a free kick.
Are they?
I would say they are at least as good as the other two if not better?
Most that team plays in the CL yearly - whilst it is not everything they are used to big matches
SK1NT
Well-known member
This teams qualities are attacking not defending... Cannot defend a 1-0 lead have attack.
Roy's subs were negative
His team selection was negative ... Get sterling the **** out of there...
Against a team like Russia I'd have played Kane and vardy... If you can't be positive who the **** can u be positive against
They played ok but fundamentally drawing with a weak time and showing the same old typical England weaknesses...
Roy's subs were negative
His team selection was negative ... Get sterling the **** out of there...
Against a team like Russia I'd have played Kane and vardy... If you can't be positive who the **** can u be positive against
They played ok but fundamentally drawing with a weak time and showing the same old typical England weaknesses...
Why did we deserve to win? Over the course of 90mins against a very poor side we only managed to score one goal and failed to keep a clean sheet. How does that merit a win?
Bwian
Kiss my (_!_)
- Jul 14, 2003
- 15,898
Watching the desire of every Welsh player to win tells me that England will struggle against them. Bale chased every ball in and around the box-our lot couldn't be bothered to get back onside.
If we can only score 1 against the so called worse team in the group then we will struggle against a highly motivated Welsh side desperate to beat England. Typical England in a major tournament - we might sneak into the next stage but we will get mullered by the likes of Germany, Italy, Spain and France.
I'd love us to do well but if we crash out I will be nowhere near as disappointed as I was when the Albion's season ended the way it did.
Garry Nelson's Left Foot
Well-known member
Give over Acker. Is your brain really that binary?
Tom Bombadil
Well-known member
In what way was it negative? To me it looked a positive attacking lineup.
So, you can't explain why we deserved to win?
Garry Nelson's Left Foot
Well-known member
No, I can't be bothered. You're an intelligent man. I'm pretty sure you are aware of the arguments I will give and I'm pretty sure of what you will say. There seems little point as your view and mine won't change.
Icy Gull
Back on the rollercoaster
- Jul 5, 2003
- 72,015
I thought I had watched a pretty good England performance marred by some bad defending in injury time but overall an enjoyable and decent game. Having read the NSC opinions I now realise that I know **** all. Poor negative selection by Hodgson, lacklustre performance by most of the team against a piss poor team who will roll over for all the others in our group.. Thanks for putting me straight.
Ok, so why bother to respond in the first place? Just take a cheap knock at me for not agreeing with you then walk away when challenged to back it up?
Garry Nelson's Left Foot
Well-known member
Apologies for any offense caused. None was intended.
warmleyseagull
Well-known member
Well, try 15 shots to 6, 5 on target to 2, England hit woodwork twice from same chance.
Fair play to Russia, they kept going and sometimes that's what happens, but England did enough to win surely.
This Croatia game is identical to ours.
Only one team in it to last 3 minutes, only difference is turkey missed the chance.
Only one team in it to last 3 minutes, only difference is turkey missed the chance.
Why does a team that took 15 shots and only managed to convert one deserve to win the game more than a team that managed to score one from only 6 shots?
Why does a team that faced 5 shots on goal and kept 4 of them out, deserve to lose, when their opponents couldn't keep out 2 shots on target?
How can a team that failed with 14 attempts at one end, and couldn't hold out against 6 attempts be deemed to have 'done enough to win'?
Raleigh Chopper
New member
I have been saying this for a number of years now.
Every weekend you get a team that lets say draw 0-0 and they say that one of them deserved to win, no they ******** did not, it's about scoring goals, if you create 100 chances but fail to score then you deserve what you got, 1 point.
( I am also naffed off with the latest infatuation with ' the number 10' but that's a different story)
Every weekend you get a team that lets say draw 0-0 and they say that one of them deserved to win, no they ******** did not, it's about scoring goals, if you create 100 chances but fail to score then you deserve what you got, 1 point.
( I am also naffed off with the latest infatuation with ' the number 10' but that's a different story)
BensGrandad
New member
i think the view that we should have won is based on the fact that we completely outplayed Russia for 90 of the 93 mins. They had a reasonable spell after halftime but offered no threat and had it not been for Milner falling over and losing the ball we would have won the game. Nobody nor any manager can legislate for individual mistakes like that.
But we didn't completely outplay them where it actually counts. From 15 shots we walked away with one goal. Russia needed a third of the chance we did to get the same goal total. Their defence faced three times as many attacks as ours, and we still conceded as many as them.
BensGrandad
New member
This was down to luck both good for them and bad for us plus their keeper did what he is paid to do and had an inspired game keeping them in it. Conversely, using your analogy, you could say Hart had next to nothing to do and their keeper was kept very busy so which team had most of the play?
"The harder I work, the luckier I get" - Various
“Shallow men believe in luck or in circumstance. Strong men believe in cause and effect.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson
“Luck?" Drizzt replied. "Perhaps. But more often, I dare to say, luck is simply the advantage a true warrior gains in excuting the correct course of action.” - R.A. Salvatore, The Halfling's Gem
Luck is an excuse people use when they don't want to criticise people who, while they worked hard, weren't quite as successful as they should have been.
I'm also struggling why a keeper who "had an inspired game" was part of a team that was "completely outplayed". Especially when paired with what I questioned...
I'm not questioning who had most of the play, I'm questioning why a team that had little to do defensive and failed to it adequately deserves to win over a team that had a lot to do defensively and they mostly did it. I'm questioning why a team that had so much of the play did nothing more with it than their opponents who had so little. I'm questioning why, when you were so ineffective, you deserve the win more than an opposition who did just as much as you, but managed to do it with so little of the play.
ps Sidenote: I find your attempt to both big up the goalkeeper's performance and downplay it at the same time quite amusing "doing the job he was paid to" while having an "inspired game".