Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I saw it.


Italy and France are continuing the form that saw they only just scrape out of Scotland's group.


Thought Italy were a trifle unfortunate - going a goal behind to a dodgy goal and then getting knifed twice on the break - but once ahead Holland gave an object lesson. Big Luca didn't really bring his shooting boots either, did he?

It was a cracker of a game - the Dutch seemed to keep putting on substitutes, each one more dazzling than the previous guy. Italy are notorious for "cold-starting" tournaments, but they now have an uphill task to get beyond the group stage. France v Italy looks like it might now be quite..er.. tense!


Currently feeling quite smug though as I backed the Dutch before the start to win the thing >:D<....early days I know! It could turn out to be like the '74 World Cup where the Dutch played all the dazzling and amazing football only to lose out in the final to (West) German efficiency..

Not be an annoying pedant but this thing about Italy "cold starting" was put to bed by the ITV commentators last night.


I would have thought this was fairly accurate but apparently in their last 15 opening matches of a big tournament (up until last night) they had won 10, drawn 4 and lost just one (to Ireland in USA '94). So really, they do quite well.


The French looked equally dreadful against the negative Romanians.

>>Not be an annoying pedant but this thing about Italy "cold starting" was put to bed by the ITV commentators last night.


I would have thought this was fairly accurate but apparently in their last 15 opening matches of a big tournament (up until last night) they had won 10, drawn 4 and lost just one (to Ireland in USA '94). So really, they do quite well. >>


I don't think the "cold starting" theory is any less valid despite the bare statistics. The thing is Italy tend to play better as tournaments progress - so they might have indeed won many first games but rather less convincingly then they win finals and semi finals. Against a team of real quality like the present Dutch outfit they lost - although admittedly without playing especially badly...


Anyway some of us remember North Korea v Italy in 1966! >:D<

*drapes St George flag around shoulders and adopts best Alf Garnett voice*


It's not that we (that's me and you know, all the other English) hate the Spanish on their own. We hate everyone equally. Frogs, Krauts, Eye-tais (sp?), Turks, all of 'em.


But since we ain't got no one to support - we'll pick one country at random to give our best wishes to. And since Spain are as good at penalties as we are...this year it's you. You should feel privileged guv'nor.

I mean in a football sense. I'm not convinced the English have much against the Spanish in a wider sense.


It is ironic for an English/liverpool fan to pick another chronically underperforming team. I mean you could actually stand a chance of supporting a winner if you go for Germany or Italy. (but not France, not this time)


As wholly impressive as Holland were last night, they'll still screw it all up.

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

    • Depends on what the Barista says doesnt it? There was no physical confrontation with the driver, OP thinks she is being targetted when she isnt. These guys work min wage under strict schedules so give them a break unless they damage your stuff
    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
    • I do hope NOT, wouldn't trust Farage as far as I could throw him, Starmer & co.  He's backed by GB News which focus's predominantly on immigration while the BBC focus predominantly on the Israel - Gazza conflict.   
    • Everyone gets the point that Corbynites try to make with the "total number of votes cast" statistic, it's just a specious one.  In 2017, Corbyn's Labour got fewer votes than May's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes). In 2019, Corbyn's Labour fewer votes than Johnson's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes); and he managed to drop 2.7 million votes or 6.9% of vote share between the two elections. I repeat, he got trounced by Boris F***ing Johnson and the Tories after the Brexit omnishambles. It is not true that a "fairer" electoral system would have seen Labour beat the Tories: Labour simply got fewer votes than the Tories. Corbyn lost twice. There is no metric by which he won the general election. His failure to win was a disaster for the UK, and let Johnson and Truss and Sunak into office. Corbynites have to let go of this delusion that Corbyn but really won somehow if you squint in a certain way. It is completely irrelevant that Labour under Corbyn got more votes than Labour under Starmer. It is like saying Hull City was more successful in its 2014 FA Cup Final than Chelsea was in its 2018 FA Cup Final, because Hull scored 2 goals when Chelsea only scored 1. But guess what - Chelsea won its game and Hull City lost. Corbyn's fans turned out to vote for him - but an even larger group of people who found him repellant were motivated enough to show up and vote Tory.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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