I'm going to stick my long neck on the line - England to win Euro 2012

[sparkie]

Reckon we have a 3/4 chance of getting through the group.

Then 1/3 of beating Spain / Italy.

Then 1/3 of beating Holland / Germany.

Then 1/3 of beating Spain / Italy / Holland / Germany / France.

Makes it about 1 / 36, say 3% overall.

Was being generous to us as well.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Yep. I'm wrong.

(Well, Sim's stance on England's chances is wrong, but my understanding of what he meant by the odds, was wrong, too. Happy?)

 

[Simster]

Yep. I'm wrong.

(Well, Sim's stance on England's chances is wrong, but my understanding of what he meant by the odds, was wrong, too. Happy?)

Yes.

 

[Mellotron]

Let's agree to ALL be wrong.

 

[Simster]

Let's agree to ALL be wrong.

Well I certainly HOPE I am wrong, but like [MENTION=409]Herr Tubthumper[/MENTION], I just don't see enough talent in the side to worry the other three teams in the group, never mind the 4 or 5 favourites.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

I honestly have NO idea where people are getting the notion that we definitely wont get out our group.

If we played France in a freindly we would expect to lose. Fine.

If we played Sweden in a friendly we would expect to win. 3 points.

If we played Ukraine in a game we would expect to win. 3 points.

6 points, out of the group.

Now you get to the point where ANYONE can win a one-off game. Can we beat Spain on our day? Yep, did it a few months ago and Rooney would be back.

Then you get to the Semi's. The tension has risen dramatically. Hold your nerve, defend like Chelsea and snatch a 1-0 through an Ashley young free kick which evades everyone, creeps down the corridor of uncertanty and goes straight in.

We're in the final now. Anything can happen.

EASY

 

[Mellotron]

Well I certainly HOPE I am wrong, but like [MENTION=409]Herr Tubthumper[/MENTION], I just don't see enough talent in the side to worry the other three teams in the group, never mind the 4 or 5 favourites.

Do you not think Sweden and Ukraine are of a similar standard to Belgium and Norway respectively?

I know, I know, no teams TRY against England in friendlies, yet its impressive when France win a load of friendlies, etc.

 

[Simster]

I honestly have NO idea where people are getting the notion that we definitely wont get out our group.

If we played France in a freindly we would expect to lose. Fine.

If we played Sweden in a friendly we would expect to win. 3 points.

If we played Ukraine in a game we would expect to win. 3 points.

6 points, out of the group.

Now you get to the point where ANYONE can win a one-off game. Can we beat Spain on our day? Yep, did it a few months ago and Rooney would be back.

Then you get to the Semi's. The tension has risen dramatically. Hold your nerve, defend like Chelsea and snatch a 1-0 through an Ashley young free kick which evades everyone, creeps down the corridor of uncertanty and goes straight in.

We're in the final now. Anything can happen.

EASY

That is laughable. Firstly, we never beat Sweden. Apart from once in 50 years. In a friendly. At home. Secondly, friendlies mean bugger all in any case. Thirdly, Ukraine will be at home - you are underestimating the advantage of having the tournament in your own back YARD.

As for the one off games, of course anything can happen, but it is rare to see more than ONE lucky backs to the wall result in succession. It will be at least 2 decades before a team repeat Chelsea's recent success by playing like that in a semi and then final, and I don't recall any team winning a Euro Championship or World Cup by playing like that (although Argentina came close in 1990)

 

[Simster]

Do you not think Sweden and Ukraine are of a similar standard to Belgium and Norway respectively?

I know, I know, no teams TRY against England in friendlies, yet its impressive when France win a load of friendlies, etc.

It's nothing to do with not trying, it is down to teams experimenting with formations, player rotations, effectiveness of substutions etc. There are just too many variables that don't exist in a competitive match. And I think Norway are absolute crap these days, but Belgium are a very good side albeit missing a cutting edge.

IMO, Sweden and Belgium are on a par. Indeed, we beat them both 1-0 at Wembley in friendlies. I wouldn't fancy us to beat either of them in Stockholm/Brussels. However Norway really are pony and playing a friendly in Oslo in front of 25,000 is not the same as playing an admittedly only slightly better and aging Ukrainian side but in a major tournament and with a fervent home support of 80,000 in Kiev.

 

[Badger]

As for the one off games, of course anything can happen, but it is rare to see more than ONE lucky backs to the wall result in succession. It will be at least 2 decades before a team repeat Chelsea's recent success by playing like that in a semi and then final, and I don't recall any team winning a Euro Championship or World Cup by playing like that (although Argentina came close in 1990)

Greece 2004?

 

[Ian Bairds Fist]

NSC Gold potential.

 

[nwgull]

I'd be dissapointed if we didn't get a win and a draw from the Sweden and Ukraine games, and that's usually enough to qualify.

For what it's worth, when someone describes odds as 'better than evens', to me that means that the punter will get a better return, e.g. 2-1 is better than evens. When chances are described as 'better than evens', that means something is more likely than not to happen.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

That is laughable. Firstly, we never beat Sweden. Apart from once in 50 years. In a friendly. At home. Secondly, friendlies mean bugger all in any case. Thirdly, Ukraine will be at home - you are underestimating the advantage of having the tournament in your own back YARD.

As for the one off games, of course anything can happen, but it is rare to see more than ONE lucky backs to the wall result in succession. It will be at least 2 decades before a team repeat Chelsea's recent success by playing like that in a semi and then final, and I don't recall any team winning a Euro Championship or World Cup by playing like that (although Argentina came close in 1990)

I understand your point, but your post contains one of my most hated things in football punditry.

I don't care if we haven't beaten Sweden in the last 99 years. Its not the SAME PLAYERS. it has literally NO relevance to the players on show. If we were travelling to Sweden, for a qualifier, we would expect a win.

Yes Ukraine are at home....but they are also PONY. Honestly, Shevchenko is still their goal threat.

Austria and Switzerland both failed to get out their groups last time and they were the host nations....


Finally, you say you can't remember any team playing like Chelsea and winning a European competition.

I take you back 8 years to Portugal 2004. Greece are the EXACT example of that.

 

[Simster]

Greece 2004?

Definitely not. Greece 2004 is not an example of a team that couldn't get the ball off the opposition. What stood out with Greece is that they had no big-name players and worked hard as a team. It's not like Portugal or Holland spurned chance after chance after chance against them. They just didn't/couldn't create much against a solid and organised defensive unit who knew where the goal was themselves. Argentina in 1990 were just ridiculously lucky by comparison!

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Greece 2004?

Thankyou.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Definitely not. Greece 2004 is not an example of a team that couldn't get the ball off the opposition. What stood out with Greece is that they had no big-name players and worked hard as a team. It's not like Portugal or Holland spurned chance after chance after chance against them. They just didn't/couldn't create much against a solid and organised defensive unit who knew where the goal was themselves. Argentina in 1990 were just ridiculously lucky by comparison!

What ARE you talking about??

Greece SMASH AND GRABBED their way to the trophy!!

Final Stats- Port vs Greece
Total shots 17 4
Shots on target 5 1
Possession 60% 40%
Corners won 10 1

 

[Simster]

I understand your point, but your post contains one of my most hated things in football punditry.

I don't care if we haven't beaten Sweden in the last 99 years. Its not the SAME PLAYERS. it has literally NO relevance to the players on show. If we were travelling to Sweden, for a qualifier, we would expect a win.

Yes Ukraine are at home....but they are also PONY. Honestly, Shevchenko is still their goal threat.

Austria and Switzerland both failed to get out their groups last time and they were the host nations....


Finally, you say you can't remember any team playing like Chelsea and winning a European competition.

I take you back 8 years to Portugal 2004. Greece are the EXACT example of that.

I don't agree we would expect to win a qualifier in Sweden at all! On what basis do you make that claim if you object to me pointing out their historical dominance of the fixture? I agree with your assessment of Ukraine, but still feel you underestimate home advantage against a team as average as England. And finally, I don't recall Greece being unable to hold the ball in 2004, which is precisely where our problem lies. We simply don't retain possession.

 

[Simster]

What ARE you talking about??

Greece SMASH AND GRABBED their way to the trophy!!

Final Stats- Port vs Greece
Total shots 17 4
Shots on target 5 1
Possession 60% 40%
Corners won 10 1

So that's ONE game (the final). What about the other FIVE? And that's if you want to believe the stats. We know how little they show when it comes to football.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Greece's first game against Portugal

Total shots 19 8
Possession 63% 37%
Corners won 10 3

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Greece also had less possession and shots in their 1-0 against france in which they scored....from a corner.