Jump to content

Recommended Posts

MrBen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> England tonight - a reminder that Scotland beat

> France twice (home and away) in the Euro 2008

> qualifiers. If we can do it against the odds

> you'll find it a walk over right?


That's the sprit MrBen, England will have no problem replicating Scotland's performances...cue 80F heat and running around aimlessly with very red faces

France showed more promise, but wre slighly off form I think.

Lucky for INGERLAND to draw them early on


I think Ukraine vs INGERLAND will be a stonker


Sweden will draw with INGERLAND btw


Scotland beat the France twice, but I had to admit that the Scots were on the defence for most of the game

I can't believe an England tournament game has garnered such little response, and even that from a foreigner ;)


England were better than I expected them to be. No standouts but a good team performance, though clearly we were set up to stymie the French we created chances and had some incisive breaks.


It's hard to tell with the French, they seemed a little disorganised, but whether they will improve or implode is anyone's guess.

Undisputedtruth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The Irish were pretty poor and I can't see them

> progressing. I suspect Italy and Spain will aim to

> improve their goal difference when playing against

> them though.


Ireland Spain is a disaster waiting to happen. Early goal from Spain and they might as well go home. I'm sure Ireland would love to hold out for a Nil Nil. If they lose to Spain, then I do feel for the fans who spent money to go for such a disappointing display. But it was a tough draw from the start and its always a tough tournament to get out of the group, as England know themselves.

The most important thing is not to lose the first game and England didn't. Basically, we parked the bus and hoped to get them on the break. On paper that was our toughest game in the group but I also think we'll draw against the Swedes and playing the Ukraine on their home turf after such a good win last night won't be easy.

Keep seeing comments along the lines of "why are they happy with a draw"? To be fair to England, France only managed a draw with them, Spain and Italy drew. Holland lost!!! One win and two draws would probably see them through, so not sure what the problem is.


I think they did quite well, especially given that France are unbeaten in 21 or something like that. Had Milner scored that early chance, it could have been a win... Or they could have gotten over confident and lost it.

England were as expected, dull and unadventurous, but played the way they had to. If they had opened up - like they did against Germany - they would have got beaten. I am hoping to see slow improvement each game and at least Roy has got us organised. How many times have you watched England before and not really known what the team and the players were trying to do? The hope is Rooney adds the strardust and links well with Young and Welbeck.

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Its occured to me that he might not just walk back

> into the 1st 11 teamsheet if the others do the

> business.


It has also occurred to me that I may have spotted another Alan Medic spelling error.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Motty reckons Young will move to the left and

> Rooney will play behind Welbeck...


Makes sense. Young will give England more width. I'd like to see Andy Carroll replace Welbeck due to the number of headed goals in the tournament.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> England band stopped from playing.

>

> Thank God for that! If I was sat near them trying

> to watch the match, I'd want to kill myself!


Abso-bleedin-lutely. Let's hope others follow suit and ban the annoying little sods totally.


On the match I thought the Ox did well and showed he didn't mind fluffing it a little, wasn't scared to take a chance - hope this rubs off on neurotics like Gerrard et al and we see a less fearful England in future. He and Young have to stay in the team or they will probably revert to the long ball.

I thought the Ox played well considering his lack of England experience and first major tournament game. He showed glimpses of brilliance at times.


My main criticism of England is that they didn't stretch the French defence enough to allow the likes of Ox to go through with consummate ease.


Lots of positives. The French restricted to shooting from outside the box. England had enough clear cut chances to win the game. Milner should have put his chance away. Four points should be enough to go through to the knock out stages and it's likely England will beat Ukraine and Sweden.


To see the best of the Ox then I'd like to see Walcott play as well. The injection of pace will put fear to the opposition.

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's hard to tell with the French, they seemed a

> little disorganised, but whether they will improve

> or implode is anyone's guess.


France had the greater possession so I'm not quite sure why you thought they were a little disorganised. Perhaps you're confusing disorganisation with their lack of ideas in the final third. Defensively, France looked weak but I thought they looked organised overall.

Maybe I'm confusing organisation with liquidity.


** or less flippantly


I think you're confusing possession for organisation.

Ceding possession and hitting them on the break in expectation of facing a more clinical side was clearly part of the gameplan.

France's lack of ideas in the final third isn't to be confused with a lack of oraganisation, it's utterly symptomatic of it.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, AFAICS, the "civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300" were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...