Jump to content

Why England will win Euro 2008 - BBC 2003


jamiefitz

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 254
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Qualifying is a success. Getting through the group last summer was a success. Getting to the quarter finals of a major tournament is a success, unless of course you think England should be doing better. I fail to see what there is to seethe about.

On the other hand, I can see why 15 years of failure like Scotland have had would upset their fans. Some may be even seething, concentrating on their bigger more successful 'rivals' so they don't have to think about their own nations failings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qualifying is a success. Getting through the group last summer was a success. Getting to the quarter finals of a major tournament is a success, unless of course you think England should be doing better. I fail to see what there is to seethe about.

On the other hand, I can see why 15 years of failure like Scotland have had would upset their fans. Some may be even seething, concentrating on their bigger more successful 'rivals' so they don't have to think about their own nations failings.

So you think England have done well for a Western European nation of their population over the past few decades? Be specific.

Of course, Scotland have had successful campaigns where they haven't qualified, it's absolutely ludicrous to judge us by the same standards as a nation more than ten times our size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qualifying is a success. Getting through the group last summer was a success. Getting to the quarter finals of a major tournament is a success, unless of course you think England should be doing better. I fail to see what there is to seethe about.

On the other hand, I can see why 15 years of failure like Scotland have had would upset their fans. Some may be even seething, concentrating on their bigger more successful 'rivals' so they don't have to think about their own nations failings.

We won the Kirin Cup in 2006 so get it up ye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think England have done well for a Western European nation of their population over the past few decades? Be specific.

Of course, Scotland have had successful campaigns where they haven't qualified, it's absolutely ludicrous to judge us by the same standards as a nation more than ten times our size.

I think England have done ok relatively speaking to the other European footballing powers. We haven't progressed as far as them in some tournaments, but neither have we completely bombed at any competitions like France, Netherlands or Italy have. Because our media have been so ridiculously jingoistic and over-optmistic in the past, there's a tendency now (Football Weekly are particularly bad for this) to make out that England are completely rubbish, so they don't get lumped in with the idiot flag-waving types. There's never any real balance (I accept that balance isn't what you're looking for on a Scottish football forum :P ) to analysis.

The truth is that England are actually decent enough. We're nothing special, and don't have the flair to get past the very best sides, but not many teams would really want to face us. Since the beginning of 2010, England have played 44 matches and lost 4 of them. I think by anyone's standard that's a good record. The Dutch lost every game at the last Euros, France have managed 1 win in their last 3 tournaments combined, and at the last World Cup Italy finished bottom of a group that included Paraguay, Slovakia and New Zealand, yet we're always told how wonderful these teams are compared to us. I don't expect England to pull up any trees at the World Cup, but I don't think we'll disgrace ourselves either.

And plenty of small European countries have managed to qualify since Scotland last did. You have had one or two hideous groups in that time, but most of the time your failure has been down to managerial incompetence, rather than just being too small to compete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think England have done ok relatively speaking to the other European footballing powers. We haven't progressed as far as them in some tournaments, but neither have we completely bombed at any competitions like France, Netherlands or Italy have. Because our media have been so ridiculously jingoistic and over-optmistic in the past, there's a tendency now (Football Weekly are particularly bad for this) to make out that England are completely rubbish, so they don't get lumped in with the idiot flag-waving types. There's never any real balance (I accept that balance isn't what you're looking for on a Scottish football forum :P ) to analysis.

Ok? Compared to whom, specifically, and over what time period? You mention Italy but they won the World Cup in 2006, reached the final of Euro 2012 and have qualified for every major tournament since...I don't even know when. By any standards they have a significantly better record than England - and have had since the 30s.

Similarly, France have two major international wins in the last 15 years, in addition to another World Cup final.

England is more than three times the size of the Netherlands, and yet even they have a superior recent record qualifying for Euro 2008, reaching the world cup final in 2010 and the only tournament England have done better than them in is one stage further in Euro 2012.

All of the three nations you've mentioned have a better recent record than England. So, is there any Western European nation of similar populace who has done worse than England? Or are you bottom of the pile, footballs greatest ever underachievers? There is no bias here, just cold hard facts

The truth is that England are actually decent enough. We're nothing special, and don't have the flair to get past the very best sides, but not many teams would really want to face us. Since the beginning of 2010, England have played 44 matches and lost 4 of them. I think by anyone's standard that's a good record. The Dutch lost every game at the last Euros, France have managed 1 win in their last 3 tournaments combined, and at the last World Cup Italy finished bottom of a group that included Paraguay, Slovakia and New Zealand, yet we're always told how wonderful these teams are compared to us. I don't expect England to pull up any trees at the World Cup, but I don't think we'll disgrace ourselves either.
Decent enough, but with a significantly worse record than the two other nations you mention? I don't know why any nation would fear facing England, their record in International tournament is absolutely dreadful for a nation of their size. If you could choose any Western European nation of over 50 million people - you'd take England in a heart beat.
Italy are a much better team than England, they are wonderful compared to you. The Dutch not so much any more, but England is three times the size of the Netherlands and their recent record is still superior.
And plenty of small European countries have managed to qualify since Scotland last did. You have had one or two hideous groups in that time, but most of the time your failure has been down to managerial incompetence, rather than just being too small to compete.
Yeah, they have. Scotland have had a few successful campaigns, and a few poor ones, since we last qualified in 1998. We have, easily, have a great campaign and not qualify.
We are too small to expect to qualify for the World Cup from the European qualifying section, no European nation of 5 million people can consistently do it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

England should be doing so much better with the money in the English game and the facilities a their disposal.

Just too busy crying about some throw away joke involving a monkey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok? Compared to whom, specifically, and over what time period? You mention Italy but they won the World Cup in 2006, reached the final of Euro 2012 and have qualified for every major tournament since...I don't even know when. By any standards they have a significantly better record than England - and have had since the 30s.

Similarly, France have two major international wins in the last 15 years, in addition to another World Cup final.

England is more than three times the size of the Netherlands, and yet even they have a superior recent record qualifying for Euro 2008, reaching the world cup final in 2010 and the only tournament England have done better than them in is one stage further in Euro 2012.

All of the three nations you've mentioned have a better recent record than England. So, is there any Western European nation of similar populace who has done worse than England? Or are you bottom of the pile, footballs greatest ever underachievers? There is no bias here, just cold hard facts

Decent enough, but with a significantly worse record than the two other nations you mention? I don't know why any nation would fear facing England, their record in International tournament is absolutely dreadful for a nation of their size. If you could choose any Western European nation of over 50 million people - you'd take England in a heart beat.
Italy are a much better team than England, they are wonderful compared to you. The Dutch not so much any more, but England is three times the size of the Netherlands and their recent record is still superior.
Yeah, they have. Scotland have had a few successful campaigns, and a few poor ones, since we last qualified in 1998. We have, easily, have a great campaign and not qualify.
We are too small to expect to qualify for the World Cup from the European qualifying section, no European nation of 5 million people can consistently do it.

Italy I accept have a much better recent record than us.

On Netherlands, you're wrong, we outperformed them in 2006 as well as last year, and while we didn't qualify in 2008, they didn't qualify for the 2002 World Cup

By any measure you want to use, England in recent years have been better than France, I don't see how that's arguable. Like I said, 1 win in their last 3 tournaments put together.

Fine, if we're only counting Western European (conviniently excluding Russia) countries with 50 million + populations, I'd want to avoid Italy and Germany, but I'd rather play France than England.

And if 5 million is too small to qualify with any regularity, how do Croatia and Denmark manage it (and Sebia, if you want to include slightly bigger countries)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Croatia have missed one tournament since 2000 and there are less than 4m of them. I'd say that pretty consistent for a young Eastern European country with a league lacking the' European success' of the spl as well.

Pretty selective about holland there too failed to qualify in 02, out performed in 06 were not mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Englad never seem to have any major issues qualifying. It's as soon as they have qualified that their media will go all out to ruin their chances. I've never understood this. What a bunch of c***s (the English media who try to sabotage England in major tournaments).

Also just because Scotland are shite, we're not allowed to mock our rivals? f**k off. That's 'old firm' type thinking. And before some England fan claims that they don't care about us, that we aren't real rivals, who really cares? England are our biggest rivals even if they don't want to reciprocate the rivalry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qualifying is a success. Getting through the group last summer was a success. Getting to the quarter finals of a major tournament is a success, unless of course you think England should be doing better. I fail to see what there is to seethe about.

On the other hand, I can see why 15 years of failure like Scotland have had would upset their fans. Some may be even seething, concentrating on their bigger more successful 'rivals' so they don't have to think about their own nations failings.

Was struggling to beat a team who has had 15 years of failure a success?

Interesting to see you highlight rivals when england consider germany rivals when they dont really care about the english.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With Ukraine as England's toughest opponents en route, it's hardly ideal preparation. Could only matter up a couple of draws as well. They always stroll through qualifying against dross and get shafted by the first half decent side at the finals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think England have done well for a Western European nation of their population over the past few decades? Be specific.

Of course, Scotland have had successful campaigns where they haven't qualified, it's absolutely ludicrous to judge us by the same standards as a nation more than ten times our size.

Yes. In my lifetime England have made 2 semi-finals, 5 quarter finals and progressed beyond the groups on another occasion.

I'm not really a fan of your stupid population argument as its only a small factor. But lets consider, only 44 million of the 53 million population in England were actually born here (nearly a million of those are Scottish for example).

Whereas England haven't been able to take the 'next step' into finals, they have been competing against bigger nations in Europe like Germany (30+ million more people), France (10-15 million more people) and Italy (5-10 million more people). Not to mention Russia and other nations with large populations like Spain, Ukraine and Poland. We have to remember some of the bigger American nations like Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and the USA too for World Cups. Compared to these nations, reaching the last 8 of tournaments 7 times in the past 30 years is pretty successful, even if England haven't made the next step. Losing on penalties in many of these tournaments, matching the opposition in many of these games is also far from a disgrace.

I think England's record compares pretty favorably and we have been relatively successful, even if it doesn't match up to the hype of the English media or you and your fellow Scots expectations for the England national team.

Hope that is specific enough for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was struggling to beat a team who has had 15 years of failure a success?

Interesting to see you highlight rivals when england consider germany rivals when they dont really care about the english.

In a friendly.

I don't consider Germany as rivals. They are a much bigger nation. It's nice to beat them though as they are one of Europe's most successful nations and have 30 million more people living there. Any time England beat Germany they will have done very well to do so considering the size of the two nations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With Ukraine as England's toughest opponents en route, it's hardly ideal preparation. Could only matter up a couple of draws as well. They always stroll through qualifying against dross and get shafted by the first half decent side at the finals.

England have been shafted once in the finals in the last decade, as opposed to always being shafted when they get there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Italy I accept have a much better recent record than us.

On Netherlands, you're wrong, we outperformed them in 2006 as well as last year, and while we didn't qualify in 2008, they didn't qualify for the 2002 World Cup

By any measure you want to use, England in recent years have been better than France, I don't see how that's arguable. Like I said, 1 win in their last 3 tournaments put together.

Fine, if we're only counting Western European (conviniently excluding Russia) countries with 50 million + populations, I'd want to avoid Italy and Germany, but I'd rather play France than England.

So, the Netherlands reach the final of the 2010 World Cup - something England haven't managed in 47 years, and yet you think England are better than them because they qualified for more tournaments? In the last three years, are you seriously suggesting England have a better record? You mention Croatia, England is more than three times the size of the Netherlands, why are you worse than them?

And France has two major international tournament wins in the last 15 years compared to 0 tournament, 0 tournament semi finals for England. Their records are poles apart, France are much better international side. They have even qualified for more tournaments recently than England.

FYI Western Europe has never included Russia. The facts are black and white, who has had a better record in the last 15 years, England or France?

And if 5 million is too small to qualify with any regularity, how do Croatia and Denmark manage it (and Sebia, if you want to include slightly bigger countries)?

They don't? Scotland have qualified for more world cups than both of those sides. And Serbia is around 50% bigger than Scotland, there is nothing slight about that enormous advantage.

Croatia have missed one tournament since 2000 and there are less than 4m of them. I'd say that pretty consistent for a young Eastern European country with a league lacking the' European success' of the spl as well.

Pretty selective about holland there too failed to qualify in 02, out performed in 06 were not mentioned.

Croatia has more than 4 million people. Please do not make factual errors in your post.

I don't even think the Netherlands is a great example for England, heaven knows why you'd brag about being better than a nation you are three times bigger than, but their performance in the last 5 years is, yes, much much better than Englands.

Yes. In my lifetime England have made 2 semi-finals, 5 quarter finals and progressed beyond the groups on another occasion.

Hope that is specific enough for you.

Wow, you have ludicrously low expectations for such an enormous nation. I suppose Newcastle fans are used to heroic underachievement. Fair play to you, can't be easy supporting two bona fide losers of world football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not really a fan of your stupid population argument as its only a small factor. But lets consider, only 44 million of the 53 million population in England were actually born here (nearly a million of those are Scottish for example).

Where on earth did you get this from, and why haven't you applied it to every other nation in your comparison?

Whereas England haven't been able to take the 'next step' into finals, they have been competing against bigger nations in Europe like Germany (30+ million more people), France (10-15 million more people) and Italy (5-10 million more people). Not to mention Russia and other nations with large populations like Spain, Ukraine and Poland. We have to remember some of the bigger American nations like Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and the USA too for World Cups. Compared to these nations, reaching the last 8 of tournaments 7 times in the past 30 years is pretty successful, even if England haven't made the next step. Losing on penalties in many of these tournaments, matching the opposition in many of these games is also far from a disgrace.

I think England's record compares pretty favorably and we have been relatively successful, even if it doesn't match up to the hype of the English media or you and your fellow Scots expectations for the England national team.

England are bigger than Argentina even by your made up figures!

And the USA should not be considered in any comparison given football is not the first spot there, or even the second.

To the contrary really, I fully expect England to be footballs greatest underachievers now. So do you, it seems. There are so many teams who have gotten further than you in international tournaments in the last 40 years - it must be deeply embarrassing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol: Typical Supras, change the rules back and forward to suit your argument.

I got my England population figures from Wikipedia. And I did factor the same in other nations which is why for example I say, Italy (5-10 million more people) as opposed to an exact figure. Rough guess, but doubt I would be far out if I actually checked.

You can't have it two ways. Moan about England expecting too much on one hand, then moaning when an England fan considers last 8 as a success. I consider your expectations for the English national team unrealistic.

And as for heroic underachievement, or 'glorious failure', it's what Scotland are best at. They're known for it. :lol:

Very embarrassing for you here as usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...