Another country having an easier route than you in a previous tournament doesn't somehow mean you haven't had an easy route.
The "England have had it easy" narrative
- Thread starter Alex99
- Start date
After 1990 up until this World Cup England had won 3 knockout games in 28 years. That's including both the World Cup and the Euros.
We've won 2 in a week. It's been brilliant.
We've won 2 in a week. It's been brilliant.
You've missed my point. The bitter part isn't the not wanting us to win, the bitter part is the personal attacks on the "English cnuts singing their national anthem"
Well it is one of the worst anthems on the planet to be fair - they should raise their game. I should know, my national team has to sing it.
Wallace and Gromit theme should be the national anthem.
Pink Panther or Thunderbirds theme would be a vast improvement. The latter is the most British thing I've ever heard.
I’ll quote vin diesel here kouroux:
Whether it’s by an inch or a mile, winning is winning
Ps hope your flu has subsided well
As an England fan I don't mind people saying that we have had an easy route to the semi final as have had one of the two easier, Croatia having to beat Russia and Denmark is also pretty easy. But I feel like some people are acting like it is the first time that a team has got to the semi finals off of an easier than expected two knockout games. The Dutch at the last World Cup likely would have expected one Italy, England or Uruguay in their quarter final but instead got Costa Rica who they snuck by on penalties and they only beat Mexico thanks to a penalty that may not have been given with VAR at their tournament. If you look at their run into the semi finals I'd say it was easier than England's and that's just the last World Cup.
OP kinda screwed up by making this thread as it just legitimises the whinging as "we're only whinging because you are denying it..." etc.
Far better just to post a big picture of a cock that they can suck on.
Far better just to post a big picture of a cock that they can suck on.
helps to have it easy
Shame Wales didn’t get to Russia, I think they could have made the semis too if they had this England run.
There’s bound to be a bite but I don’t think I’m far off
There’s bound to be a bite but I don’t think I’m far off
nice rocket ship
I’ll quote vin diesel here kouroux:
Whether it’s by an inch or a mile, winning is winning
Ps hope your flu has subsided well
ThanksAlmost healed, there is a headache lingering still but I think I was just in huge deficit of vitamins/minerals which made me super vulnerable.
I don't begrudge this England side success one little bit, but to say they haven't had an easy run to the semi finals is untrue.
Luck it's part of the game. Nothing to be ashamed.
As an Arsenal fan you'd know about being shite in the knockout rounds eh?
It was but that’s been the only test really
I understand where you are coming from (and the lack of begrudging is much appreciated) but, in the context of this World Cup, I am not sure what easy means. Two traditional powers didn’t qualify (Italy and Holland), while Germany and Argentina were poor and looked there for the taking had England drawn them. Spain were also average, overloaded with possession but with no cutting edge against Russia. Were Colombia worse opponents than those teams? Aside from France and Belgium (who were in England’s group and therefore not potential opponents until the final) and, being generous, Brazil, I can’t see which great teams England have dodged.
We'd have beaten Argentina if we'd faced them, they're a mess. I'd fancy our chances against this Spain too.
Germany I dunno, as bad as they were we shrink when we go up against them. This England team is making a habit of breaking away from the past but beating Germany at the World Cup is difficult to imagine.
Germany I dunno, as bad as they were we shrink when we go up against them. This England team is making a habit of breaking away from the past but beating Germany at the World Cup is difficult to imagine.
Right, I think the best way to explain my frustrations is this:
England have beaten Colombia and Sweden so far in the knockouts, and now face Croatia in the semi-final. The line from detractors is that England could get to the final without having to beat a "top" team. I'm not sure anyone will disagree with that.
My issue is what we're defining as "top" teams. We're using "top" to mean the historically strong nations, which ignores the present strength of the other teams in the tournament. The list of teams England should apparently count themselves lucky to have avoided is consistently the same eight; Argentina, Brazil, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain.
By repeatedly mentioning these teams above the rest, it seems that the prevailing attitude is that England would have been handily dispatched by the above, but should be easily beating anyone else. The reactions to the Colombia and Sweden victories is evidence of this. The crux of the issue is that the traditional "top" teams are not always the strongest eight, and in fact, a number of them can actually be incredibly weak when compared to their reputations, and when compared to the teams who have stepped up in their place. The message from this is that England couldn't beat these sides, which for some, in their current state, is simply wrong.
This is a rundown of the "top" teams that England should be counting themselves lucky to have avoided:
Argentina only qualified for this World Cup in the final round of fixtures. They were very close to not even being in Russia at all. In qualifying, they lost to Ecuador, Paraguay, and Bolivia, and drew with Paraguay, Venezuela twice, and Peru twice, as well as being beaten 3-0 by Brazil. At the tournament, they drew with Iceland, and were beaten 3-0 by the same Croatia side England now have to face in their semi-final. They ultimately finished second in their group, behind group winners Croatia, and were then eliminated by France, one of the remaining semi-finalists.
Brazil qualified very comfortably, with the only real blemishes being a loss to Chile, and draws with Bolivia and Paraguay. They were also reasonably comfortable in the group stage with perhaps something of a stuttering start after drawing with Switzerland and requiring stoppage time goals to beat Costa Rica, but ultimately topped the group. A fairly comfortable first knockout tie against Mexico was followed by elimination at the hands of Belgium, another of the remaining semi-finalists.
France also qualified comfortably, the only notes being draws with Luxembourg and Belarus, and most notably, losing to Sweden. France also had something of an unconvincing start in the group stage, but ultimately beat Australia and Peru to top their group. They beat Argentina in the first knockout round, and Uruguay in the quarter-final, and are now perhaps the favourites to win the tournament.
Germany qualified with a 100% record, but have had a torrid tournament. They lost to both Mexico and South Korea, and their group was topped by Sweden, with Germany finishing bottom.
Italy failed to qualify. They finished second in a group topped by Spain, with no real blemishes other than a draw with Macedonia, but were then eliminated in the play-off by Sweden, not managing a single goal over the two legs.
Netherlands also failed to qualify (after finishing fourth in their Euro 2016 qualifying group and failing to qualify for that too). They finished third in their group, behind Sweden in second.
Portugal qualified comfortably, but were then very unconvincing in the group stage of the tournament, drawing with Iran and beating Morocco by just a single goal, finishing second in their group, before being eliminated by Uruguay in the first knockout round.
Spain also qualified comfortably, but were also unconvincing in the group stage, drawing with Morocco and only beating Iran by a single goal. They topped the group, but were eliminated by Russia in the first knockout round after being taken to penalties.
The idea that England's potential route to the final would somehow have been more difficult had they faced Netherlands, Italy or Germany in the quarter-final, to face Argentina or Spain in the semi-final is just bizarre, because the team England faced in the quarter-final was directly involved in Netherlands, Italy and Germany not being there, and the team they're facing in the semi-final beat Argentina 3-0 in the group stage, and just eliminated the team that knocked Spain out in the quarter-final. It's not just an insult to England, it's an insult to the other teams that have proven themselves better than the likes of Spain, Portugal, Italy, Netherlands and Argentina to be writing them off as "easy passage."
England have beaten Colombia and Sweden so far in the knockouts, and now face Croatia in the semi-final. The line from detractors is that England could get to the final without having to beat a "top" team. I'm not sure anyone will disagree with that.
My issue is what we're defining as "top" teams. We're using "top" to mean the historically strong nations, which ignores the present strength of the other teams in the tournament. The list of teams England should apparently count themselves lucky to have avoided is consistently the same eight; Argentina, Brazil, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain.
By repeatedly mentioning these teams above the rest, it seems that the prevailing attitude is that England would have been handily dispatched by the above, but should be easily beating anyone else. The reactions to the Colombia and Sweden victories is evidence of this. The crux of the issue is that the traditional "top" teams are not always the strongest eight, and in fact, a number of them can actually be incredibly weak when compared to their reputations, and when compared to the teams who have stepped up in their place. The message from this is that England couldn't beat these sides, which for some, in their current state, is simply wrong.
This is a rundown of the "top" teams that England should be counting themselves lucky to have avoided:
Argentina only qualified for this World Cup in the final round of fixtures. They were very close to not even being in Russia at all. In qualifying, they lost to Ecuador, Paraguay, and Bolivia, and drew with Paraguay, Venezuela twice, and Peru twice, as well as being beaten 3-0 by Brazil. At the tournament, they drew with Iceland, and were beaten 3-0 by the same Croatia side England now have to face in their semi-final. They ultimately finished second in their group, behind group winners Croatia, and were then eliminated by France, one of the remaining semi-finalists.
Brazil qualified very comfortably, with the only real blemishes being a loss to Chile, and draws with Bolivia and Paraguay. They were also reasonably comfortable in the group stage with perhaps something of a stuttering start after drawing with Switzerland and requiring stoppage time goals to beat Costa Rica, but ultimately topped the group. A fairly comfortable first knockout tie against Mexico was followed by elimination at the hands of Belgium, another of the remaining semi-finalists.
France also qualified comfortably, the only notes being draws with Luxembourg and Belarus, and most notably, losing to Sweden. France also had something of an unconvincing start in the group stage, but ultimately beat Australia and Peru to top their group. They beat Argentina in the first knockout round, and Uruguay in the quarter-final, and are now perhaps the favourites to win the tournament.
Germany qualified with a 100% record, but have had a torrid tournament. They lost to both Mexico and South Korea, and their group was topped by Sweden, with Germany finishing bottom.
Italy failed to qualify. They finished second in a group topped by Spain, with no real blemishes other than a draw with Macedonia, but were then eliminated in the play-off by Sweden, not managing a single goal over the two legs.
Netherlands also failed to qualify (after finishing fourth in their Euro 2016 qualifying group and failing to qualify for that too). They finished third in their group, behind Sweden in second.
Portugal qualified comfortably, but were then very unconvincing in the group stage of the tournament, drawing with Iran and beating Morocco by just a single goal, finishing second in their group, before being eliminated by Uruguay in the first knockout round.
Spain also qualified comfortably, but were also unconvincing in the group stage, drawing with Morocco and only beating Iran by a single goal. They topped the group, but were eliminated by Russia in the first knockout round after being taken to penalties.
The idea that England's potential route to the final would somehow have been more difficult had they faced Netherlands, Italy or Germany in the quarter-final, to face Argentina or Spain in the semi-final is just bizarre, because the team England faced in the quarter-final was directly involved in Netherlands, Italy and Germany not being there, and the team they're facing in the semi-final beat Argentina 3-0 in the group stage, and just eliminated the team that knocked Spain out in the quarter-final. It's not just an insult to England, it's an insult to the other teams that have proven themselves better than the likes of Spain, Portugal, Italy, Netherlands and Argentina to be writing them off as "easy passage."
Agreed, it's been very easy route. Panama and Tunisia also super easy teams, was shocked to see them actually at WC at all. not sure why would anyone need to deny that. Sweden the easiest quarter finalist ever for England and before Colombia hardly a top team and it was quite a struggle till the end, now Croatia who is also not the very top team. On the other hand the so called top teams were eliminated this year being shite so if England wins something it will hardly be undeserved. But certainly a big chance... Reminds me a bit United in Europa league two years ago...
The point I was trying to make is that had normal service presumed, Argentina, Germany and Spain would have all remained in the same half as England.
They didn't and a handful are trying to moot England's current position.
Yes on paper the teams left on the side of England are "easier" but you can only beat what is in front of you.
I don't accept the notion that we are a shit team therefore we will not get far but the minute we beat teams who topped their group it's automatically viewed as "but they're shit".
I would say that England have had an easier path to the semis than the French or the Belgians. But that takes nothing from the fact that this is a much improved England team than what we're used to seeing. Collectively, I don't think the English players have often been as good in the past as they have been this year. I think they are more focused, and play to their strengths, but are also less afraid to take risks and get outside of their comfort zone. And what's more they seem to adapt to the situation as much as they do to the opposition. If things go to the crapper during their next game, I can actually see this lot being more adept at getting back in the game and turning it around instead of imploding or disappearing completely (though I have to admit that this is mostly wishful thinking; I am pertinently aware that the first team is yet to be tested in that situation). Their mental strength too has massively improved as evidenced by the penalty shootout win.
There is a general feeling of optimism for the future of this team too. Let's not forget that this is not a team of experienced professionals, or players that have been playing together for a long time. This is their first World Cup under this system, and it has been the perfect springboard for future success for them. They will hopefully get even better with time, with also the prospect of promising talents such as Rashford, Lookman and Cook to look forward to. Watching England play is no longer an exercise in self-flagellation. In abstraction from everything unsavoury around this team, this is a pretty interesting bunch, with all the big talk and ego trips happening only in trivial contexts. On the pitch, their effort is earnest and (mostly) honest. There won't be any schadenfreude from me if they fail. For me there are enough reasons to appreciate the performance of this team in this competition, even if their opponents have been less than stellar. Because we know all too well how this usually ends.
There is a general feeling of optimism for the future of this team too. Let's not forget that this is not a team of experienced professionals, or players that have been playing together for a long time. This is their first World Cup under this system, and it has been the perfect springboard for future success for them. They will hopefully get even better with time, with also the prospect of promising talents such as Rashford, Lookman and Cook to look forward to. Watching England play is no longer an exercise in self-flagellation. In abstraction from everything unsavoury around this team, this is a pretty interesting bunch, with all the big talk and ego trips happening only in trivial contexts. On the pitch, their effort is earnest and (mostly) honest. There won't be any schadenfreude from me if they fail. For me there are enough reasons to appreciate the performance of this team in this competition, even if their opponents have been less than stellar. Because we know all too well how this usually ends.
Last edited:
Does is matter!? Of course it has been risiculously easy, «all» of the best teams have vanished before it all started. But again, who cares, it counts just as much. England’s route has been like playing Yeovil, Blackburn, Middlesbrough and West Ham in the FA Cup, now it’s quite tricky before meeting a better team in the eventual final. Belgium - France should be the real final as it stands, but that’s sadly not happening for the neutral fan - England will be a very good replacement. Now let’s just hope Croatia don’t go and beat you, would be boring to see them in a final.
i know about drawing hard teams in the knockouts and let me tell you that englands path has been not hard. id even go as far as to say it has been easy
Not sure why you want England or Brazil to lose but given I can emphasise with wanting Liverpool to lose the CL final, I freely admit that is driven by bitterness. Part of being a football fan involves bit of bitterness and wanting your rival clubs to lose/underperform.
I hated seeing Liverpool in the CL final to the point where I refused to watch it. Ignored my phone and then when I found out what happened enjoyed the schadenfreude over Karius.
Colombia was the toughest match England could have gotten in the round of 16.
The way Germany played this tournament, I would have fancied England anyway. There's a reason they finished bottom of their group.
The way Germany played this tournament, I would have fancied England anyway. There's a reason they finished bottom of their group.
What's your point here? A number of people have explicitly and repeatedly referred to both Italy and Netherlands as tougher opponents to face in the knockouts than the teams England have faced, despite one of them being directly responsible for both not qualifying.
England have undeniably had an easy road to the semi-final, now it's not their fault or their choice. Would they have done as well had they been on the other side of the bracket? So far, they haven't shown anything suggesting they haven't been good enough to get through that side as well. I'm not sure I can see them winning it all, but I can see them getting to the world cup final which would be a big accomplishment already and a hell of an improvement.
youre writing hundreds of words to dispell the england had it easy narrative when they played sweden and colombia without james. there are two certainties in life. one is that england had an easy route and the other is that muse is a shit one trick band
What a start.
Croatia are a better team than anyone that England has faced so far besides Belgium but at this stage they've gone through two 120 minute games and have some injuries.
I'd like to hear of an easier route. Before this tournament started, an absolute dream for Iceland would be to qualify from group. Looking at England's path and I'd have fancied Iceland to reach the finals and we're not nearly as good as England on paper.
Croatia are a better team than anyone that England has faced so far besides Belgium but at this stage they've gone through two 120 minute games and have some injuries.
Excellent post, and that summarizes my thoughts as well.
Whoever reach the final between Croatia and England with all the opponents they had in this WC it's like Arsenal playing one final game to win PL and most difficult opponent they had all season is Everton or Leicester. FIFA have to change something.
England were 2nd seed and the 11th highest club on the ranking in the competition and haven't faced any club higher than them in the 1st round or the quarter or semis so given that, yea the draw has been very kind to them. Group was also the easiest to qualify from in the competition. It's a bit like Liverpool in the CL the way things have been laid out for them.
Last edited:
Truthfully the dumbest post I've read on here in all the England threads.
Hats off chap. That's quite a feat.
Exactly. If it wasn't an easy route no one would have to post a 4,000 word essay explaining why it's not
It's been one of the easiest routes to a world semi final in the competition history. Just be grateful that you've made it this far(In fairness most England fans are).
I can't wait until they get knocked out. What a pathetic and drab team.
Nearly as pathetic as your bitter, anti-England posts. I'll take being drab and a world cup semi final, thank you.Exactly. If it wasn't an easy route no one would have to post a 4,000 word essay explaining why it's not
I can't wait until they get knocked out. What a pathetic and drab team.
This is if you play Wolfsburg, Panatinaikos and Sevilla to reach CL finals.
Of course England can only play what is in front of them, so who cares.
Of course England can only play what is in front of them, so who cares.
We already have seeded teams in the group stage. It's not England or Croatia's fault the 'strong' teams didn't make it through to their side of the draw.