I too was surprised and shocked at the fitness of the Croatian team. The 2nd half and extra time they were the dominant team. Their last two games went to penalties and England should've been the fresher team and used that to their advantage. When you add the 3rd group game where England also rested the first 11...that's an extra game that Croatia have played.
The "England have had it easy" narrative
- Thread starter Alex99
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
Midfield creativity. Running off the ball. Experience.
They did good with what they had.
They did good with what they had.
Occasion kicked in. Nervous energy burned them out.
When that happens players tend to move towards each other in an effort to make sure that any passes they make are short and find white shirts.
So England got squashed into the middle and Croatia done them down the flanks.
Experience - You have to keep your shape.
Last edited:
No positives for me after last nights game and yes we had a "favourable" passage into the semis. If we'd have got ourselves into that final with France we could have been in with a shout. The opportunity was there for the taking and we bottled it. Croatia, apart from the grit throughout the team, and yes they are difficult to beat, were there for the taking last night and we didn't cash in. Sterling was giving their defenders a dogs life in the first half but was failing on the end product. When we lost possesion we were regaining it quicker than quick and were continually a threat. If we'd had a midfield functioning on all cylinders we could have sewn it up at half time. Dele Alli and our own Jesse L were a level below what is required on that kind of stage for such key positions. Especially Alli who is the most overrated player in the PL imo. Can imagine only Spurs fans like the guy as for me he's got a mean streak in him. Just an annoying player imo and has been England's, or even WC's most disappointing player.
BTW just seen England have Croatia again and also Spain for nations league so the easy narrative ends here....
Well, without James yes, but I thought that it will be close (and it was). With James, I think that Colombia would have been favorites.
They finished bottom in groups in the last world cup, and scored a goal in the final moments of the last match in 2010 to pass the group stage.
I thought both Alli and Lingard were extremely ineffective in the second half and throughout extra time - ultimately they were playing central midfield roles and both offered little in terms of possession play or midfield control.
I said it last night but I’m continually shocked how easy England are to press on the ball. I’m not sure if there’s a mental aspect as we definitely seemed worse at retaining possession once we became rattled in the second half. The likes of Modric were pushing so far up at times to squeeze our centre backs and midfield players, that just a little bit of technical nous would have enabled us to bypass the majority of their side and get at their back line.
Ultimately Henderson, Lingard and Alli were just no where near the required standard as a midfield to do that.
I said it last night but I’m continually shocked how easy England are to press on the ball. I’m not sure if there’s a mental aspect as we definitely seemed worse at retaining possession once we became rattled in the second half. The likes of Modric were pushing so far up at times to squeeze our centre backs and midfield players, that just a little bit of technical nous would have enabled us to bypass the majority of their side and get at their back line.
Ultimately Henderson, Lingard and Alli were just no where near the required standard as a midfield to do that.
Really there couldn't be an easier path to the final than the one England got this year
France would have probably beat England in the final anyway but it's a huge opportunity missed out on to at least not give yourself a chance to win the while thing in the final
France would have probably beat England in the final anyway but it's a huge opportunity missed out on to at least not give yourself a chance to win the while thing in the final
Think he might mean breeze qualifying?
Agree about Alli och Lingard. Henderson though has been decent as defensive MF.
I’m very impressed with England this WC. It’s not a golden generation, they lack heavily in experience, few special players, and yet they’ve delivered one of the best ever tournament results from an English side. QF is a normal and good result for England. SF is beyond that.
They we’re also the better playing team for large parts off the match against a well organized Croatian team with better players and more experience, which showed in the end.
Southgate has done a great job.
They we’re also the better playing team for large parts off the match against a well organized Croatian team with better players and more experience, which showed in the end.
Southgate has done a great job.
It's the right answer.
Also Southgate is trying to make Walker to play Gary Neville role in that 1998 World Cup team, but he was found wanting against good attacking players. Gazza had experience and positional sense to actually played central defence, while Walker is just quick but his positional sense is nowhere close Neville.
Pickford too but especially Maguire. Henderson got it briefly at one point.
It wasn’t their first side either.
Literally you played the weakest teams and lost to any decent team you faced. For some reason the English believed their hype. Should have waited until you lot beat at least one decent team
We shouldn't have waited for anything, we had a bloody good time getting to the semis. There's no rulebook saying you can only enjoy the WC if you beat a supposed "decent team".
I don't think many of us believe the hype. Most level-headed fans knew that Columbia would a tough game, most fans knew Sweden wouldn't be easy (we've lost and drawn against them so many times) and an awful lot of people I know didn't fancy us against Croatia due to Modric and Rakitic's quality.
I don't understand how optimism can be so easily confused for hype. An awful lot of those 'it's coming home' comments and memes had clear humour and sarcasm baked in. We were joking at our own expense while trying to be optimistic.
England are ranked 12th level with Denmark. We are not ranked in the top 5 like Germany, Brazil & Belgium so getting to the final four constitutes overachievement no matter who we played. Our opponents are ranked Columbia 16th, Sweden 20th and Croatia 24th so maybe we should be in the final but we lost to a team which has tremendous quality and experience.
We also took our youngest ever tournament squad. Only 3-4 players are likely to miss out on the next World Cup while we have multiple world champion teams in the younger age groups so this team could well develop into a real force for 2022 or 2026.
Yes. It did.
Articles upon articles in BBC sport talking about the final and the realistic chance of England winning the WC. Alan Shearer did a dedicated bit explaining why England should be arrogant this year. Some really cringey stuff.
England have a very good team, talented players, but came undone with the first decent team they met. They beat Panama, Tunisia, Colombia and Sweden...it was a very cushy run to the semis but the wankfestery from the media is borderline unbearable
This thread is an example. It’s not optimism just delusion denying English had a piss easy World Cup bracket
It's hardly our fault if the media get a bit excited though is it. After all most of the pundits are ex-England footballers. In each of England's games in the knockout stage we've been accused of arrogance due to our media and yet the quotes from the actual players and manager have shown the complete opposite. Full of humility and grace and knowing we are a good team trying our best.
Success at this tournament was set at making the quarterfinals. A realistic and honest appraisal of where we are as a team.
Any team in the semi-final of a major competition should believe they can win it, whether up against better sides or not. Plenty of those better sides went out of this World Cup to inferior sides. Also, its obvious that the BBC and other news sites will piggy back on the emotion of it all given how much people have enjoyed it.
My opinion is the suggestion that they came "undone" (as you put it) is a lazy assessment. A young, inexperienced side (by any definition) was easily the better side in the first half against a much more experienced team with a few much better individuals. England could (and perhaps should) have been two or three up at half-time. Over the 120 minutes they were beaten by the better side largely because three or four very good players in that side were superb. Modric in particular put in a match winning performance - unsurprising given the experience and quality he has. Perisic, Mandzukic and Rakitic also - all players who've got loads of experience at the top level, playing for the best teams in Europe.
England didn't disgrace themselves and had they got a late goal and gone through nobody would have been saying Croatia were robbed. That to me, isn't "coming undone" against the first decent side.
That's the thing though we get called arrogant by Modric for our media saying we should win easily and then get criticised for going out because we had a piss easy World Cup bracket. Which is it?
I get that it opened up for us but only because Germany went out in the group stage. If they'd have scraped through they looked crap. We may well have knocked them out.
Spain also looked clueless in their games while Brazil flattered to deceive the whole tournament. So why would we fear those teams over teams who played well and deserved their place in the last 16, QF.
I swear some people would fear the Dutch teamsheet or Italy team just because of their name history despite the facts that Iceland or Denmark or Sweden have outplayed those teams and qualified deservedly.
Playing devils advocate it can be both can’t it? Being arrogant can be criticised without necessarily denying there was an easy run to the semi. Anyway, I think most people saw the Croatia game as a proper challenge and modric and co were more critical of the assertion that they would be exhausted
England had a real, proper chance this time.. I think Southgate blew it a bit. Sure, he did plenty right - he got an England team playing some reasonable football with a bit of tempo and shape - but I just don't think he had the right players with him. Hindsight and all that, but was he really expecting to do anything of note with ONE midfielder playing? It led to a lack of control of games (fine when the opposition sat off and the CBs could play in midfield), and also a lack of defensive structure. I know everything has a trade off, but Alli contributed feck all in that team. Say what you want about Shelvey - looks a twat, is a twat, acts a twat, all accurate statements - he's a good footballer who's really grown this year. He looks a guy who wants responsibility, whereas the entire England team looked like children from 45 minutes on. Seemed crazy he wasn't there to me. Even Milner or someone of that age, that experience.. Presumably Southgate didn't think they'd have a shot at winning it, and so chose to bring a squad for the future...
You'll never get an easier path to a final for sure. Sure, England did better than many expected, but so what? They had to beat a country with a population less than Scotland to reach a world cup final - it's very disappointing they're out. It'll be very interesting to see what happens in two years time though.
You'll never get an easier path to a final for sure. Sure, England did better than many expected, but so what? They had to beat a country with a population less than Scotland to reach a world cup final - it's very disappointing they're out. It'll be very interesting to see what happens in two years time though.
I'm trying to empathise with Welsh, Scottish and Irish lads whose only convenient option for following England's games is via English-centric media. Mostly they all have clearly partisan pundits, which has the unfortunate habit of turning into a bit of a wankathon at times ('we, us', superlatives everywhere, incidental stuff such as Southgate seeming a half-decent bloke blown out of proportion etc.).
However rewatching the BBC Sweden post-match can you help me understand what's so bad about it? Shearer goes on about how great the performance was, Pickford's described as a hero and Southgate is apparently doing 'everything right' but the easier run to the semi is acknowledged as is the fact a semi final appearance is a pleasant surprise rather than an expectation.
From 17.50 they look ahead to the semi. Lineker and Shearer piss their pants about England being in it, Rio pulls out his lucky England top and Klinsmann looks awkward and embarrassed. Both Shearer and Lineker say 'it's coming home' in an obviously joking manner. Rio opines that Croatia would be more difficult to face than Russia, even though the latter would be huge in Moscow.
I imagine it's jading to hear the same kind of banter over and over in way that assumes you're on board with it but nauseating and almost unbearable? It seems an overreaction to me.
Milner has retired from England duty although I agree he would have been useful. As for Shelvey, I think Southgate was worried whether he might disrupt squad harmony (and he’s not that good anyway, let’s face it).
Not sure what population size has to do with it - it’s not a war, you only need to assemble 11 good players and get it right on the night. Ultimately, England weren’t quite good enough.
Give me a break. There is a difference between underestimating teams and saying you have overcome so much by beating Sweden and Tunisia. Again, this thread is a ridiculous example of how England just keeps hyping itself.
English pundits have history for this. Going all the way back to Brian Clough referring to a polish goalkeeper as ‘that clown’.
Best example is still the pre-match discussion before England vs Germany in WC2010. You would have thought England were facing a pub team the way Shearer and other went on. Half time and full time was a great dose of humble pie as you might imagine.
Oh and England’s performance against Sweden was great was it?
Twats.
Best example is still the pre-match discussion before England vs Germany in WC2010. You would have thought England were facing a pub team the way Shearer and other went on. Half time and full time was a great dose of humble pie as you might imagine.
Oh and England’s performance against Sweden was great was it?
Twats.
Rakitic is West Ham level now or are you just trolling?
I don't get this argument. It was a bit daft when it was thrown around after the Iceland game in 2016, and it's even dafter now, when Croatia, by all accounts, are considered a good footballing nation, and have been for quite some time now.
Had England played Nigeria, Japan, Mexico, Egypt or Russia, they'd have been strong favourites, despite having half the population. Should they come up against China, they'd also be strong favourites, despite having about 3% of the population.
Think you're missing the point a bit here to try and justify your dislike for England. Just say you don't like them. It's fine. You don't need to make up an excuse.
No one thinks England overcame great odds beating Tunisia and Sweden. Not even me.
This thread was about the idea that England's run was easy, and while it was more favourable than it could have been, it was no easier than a number of other draws throughout World Cup history. I'll dig the list of semi-final runs out for you if you like.
This thread also addressed how although England were still favourites, Sweden was considered a tough game for them, but they won it comfortably, how Tunisia were expected to cause problems for both England and Belgium, but both beat them, and how Colombia were considered more than a match for England, with England winning their first ever WC penalty shoot-out to progress ahead of them. It was a good run, and a run that had a number of hurdles that previous England teams would have failed to get over.
England did well to reach the semi-finals. They did come up short, I'd go as far as saying they bottled it after taking the lead, but Croatia are a good team and proved themselves better on the night. On another night England might have taken one or two of those chances and we'd be sat here discussing how they breezed their way into a WC final. It wasn't to be, and football games aren't won in 45 minutes, so the better team went through.
It's almost as if there's a consistent effort to downplay the quality of every team England face
Have you got a link to the prematch discussion before Germany in 2010 because I genuinely can't think why anyone would think that England side were anything other than massive underdogs after stumbling through the group stage, in second place, behind a mediocre USA side. That England World Cup performance was turd from start to finish, with the Lampard ghost-goal over-shadowing what was otherwise 4 spineless performances on the trot.English pundits have history for this. Going all the way back to Brian Clough referring to a polish goalkeeper as ‘that clown’.
Best example is still the pre-match discussion before England vs Germany in WC2010. You would have thought England were facing a pub team the way Shearer and other went on. Half time and full time was a great dose of humble pie as you might imagine.
Oh and England’s performance against Sweden was great was it?
Twats.
Shelvey being mentioned? He’s gash, proper mid table clogger with the occasional moment here and there.
Nothing beats the 'no Italian player would make England's first XI, not even Andrea Pirlo'. That is 2 years after Italy eliminated England from Euros, but Italy now were weak, while England was on the raise.English pundits have history for this. Going all the way back to Brian Clough referring to a polish goalkeeper as ‘that clown’.
Best example is still the pre-match discussion before England vs Germany in WC2010. You would have thought England were facing a pub team the way Shearer and other went on. Half time and full time was a great dose of humble pie as you might imagine.
Oh and England’s performance against Sweden was great was it?
Twats.
The next day, Italy won 2-1.
It want a fitness thing. Croatia can pass the ball and keep the tempo. England couldn’t. Chasing the ball and extending constantly is physical sapping but also mentally. Mental exhaustion is worse than physical
Do find this incredibly odd, especially following comments that imply Rakitic is West Ham level. What does that make Shelvey?
England were on the rise after Euro 2012? Who did we beat in a friendly to make that a thing?
In the minds of English pundits, yes.
This is the only tournament when the pundits behaved more or less like normal people, and the expectation was relatively low (although there were the moments of 'Englishness' at times).
Indeed. Your boys did well. No one expected them to reach the semis. It's something to build on.It's almost as if there's a consistent effort to downplay the quality of every team England face
It’s annoying. Rio thought we’d win 3-0! Crazy. I’d expect that sort of nonsense from Shearer, but Rio had come across far better in his punditry this WC. Easy to get carried away I suppose, but still.English pundits have history for this. Going all the way back to Brian Clough referring to a polish goalkeeper as ‘that clown’.
Best example is still the pre-match discussion before England vs Germany in WC2010. You would have thought England were facing a pub team the way Shearer and other went on. Half time and full time was a great dose of humble pie as you might imagine.
Oh and England’s performance against Sweden was great was it?
Twats.
Even as an Englishman, it comes across as arrogance. It’s easy for fans to get swept up. Basically everyone I spoke to was talking about the football, it means so much to us all and we get only one or two moments of cheer every decade. It’s a long time. People will be born and die of old age without ever seeing England win anything, and for a nation that’s so central and important to the world of football, it’s hard.
I've got to be honest I switched off a fair bit on England after they failed to qualify for Euro 2008 then stank out the 2010 WC. I had no expectations going into Euro 2012, and somehow, markedly less going into the 2014 WC, especially with the draw they were given.
Thought the potential openness of Euro 2016 with the expanded number of teams might create an opportunity for them to reach a quarter or semi, but as soon as the group stage kicked off it became apparent that it was same-old-England, and the Iceland game in the last 16 was probably about as peak-England as we were ever going to get.
This is the first tournament since 2006 I've actually enjoyed (and then I think actually going to Germany played a large part), and for the first time in a long time I'm actually looking forward to seeing England play again, rather than seeing it as pointless interruption to the club season.
I don't get this argument. It was a bit daft when it was thrown around after the Iceland game in 2016, and it's even dafter now, when Croatia, by all accounts, are considered a good footballing nation, and have been for quite some time now.
Had England played Nigeria, Japan, Mexico, Egypt or Russia, they'd have been strong favourites, despite having half the population. Should they come up against China, they'd also be strong favourites, despite having about 3% of the population.
Think you're missing the point a bit here to try and justify your dislike for England. Just say you don't like them. It's fine. You don't need to make up an excuse.
No one thinks England overcame great odds beating Tunisia and Sweden. Not even me.
This thread was about the idea that England's run was easy, and while it was more favourable than it could have been, it was no easier than a number of other draws throughout World Cup history. I'll dig the list of semi-final runs out for you if you like.
This thread also addressed how although England were still favourites, Sweden was considered a tough game for them, but they won it comfortably, how Tunisia were expected to cause problems for both England and Belgium, but both beat them, and how Colombia were considered more than a match for England, with England winning their first ever WC penalty shoot-out to progress ahead of them. It was a good run, and a run that had a number of hurdles that previous England teams would have failed to get over.
England did well to reach the semi-finals. They did come up short, I'd go as far as saying they bottled it after taking the lead, but Croatia are a good team and proved themselves better on the night. On another night England might have taken one or two of those chances and we'd be sat here discussing how they breezed their way into a WC final. It wasn't to be, and football games aren't won in 45 minutes, so the better team went through.
It's almost as if there's a consistent effort to downplay the quality of every team England face
Have you got a link to the prematch discussion before Germany in 2010 because I genuinely can't think why anyone would think that England side were anything other than massive underdogs after stumbling through the group stage, in second place, behind a mediocre USA side. That England World Cup performance was turd from start to finish, with the Lampard ghost-goal over-shadowing what was otherwise 4 spineless performances on the trot.
I’m sure you’ll tell me they said nothing wrong.