Doesn't look to bad at this moment in time

2-0 at half time to Italy. So Italy can score 2 in 45 minutes against the team everyone is raving about as being brilliant & how if we beat Italy, they would have slaughtered England, yet Italy couldnt score in 120 minutes against us. Perhaps our performance was better than some people have given us credit for.

Italy missed easier chances than the two goals and created more chances against us than they have tonight!

If someone fails to convert a chance from six yards is that good defending?

We rode our luck had the Italians been as clinical as they have been tonight we'd have lost 5-0.

Is OzIl marty feldmans love child

Don't see the need to keep knocking England's performance when tonight has proved just how good a team we were up against.
Germany have been ripped a new arsehole.

If you have watched a game that lasted 120 minutes in the 38 minutes from my post to yours, you either fast forwarded it so therefore havent watched it properly or are one of the people I mentioned as just always having a go at England & refusing to give us any credit for anything.

In agreement 100%

Italy were miles better than us and been even better against the Germans, this easily could be 4-0.

I don't think stating the truth is knocking England.

f the open play in tournaments,pj ..we just need to improve our penalty taking eh. ?

It's Gomez Addams.

I bet myself 500 snodgers I'd come home to find this post I'm rich!!

I hope it wasnt Euros that you bet yourself, as they will be almost worthless soon & if Germany take a huff for losing the football & refuse to prop up everyone else any longer it wont be long before you can spend those froggie francs again!!

Pools beat Stoke and Wigan the other season, making them officially better than every PL side those two beat that season and both the season before and after we beat them.

FACT!

I don't really buy into all the doom and gloom surrounding England, we've gone out unbeaten on a lottery system to a very good Italian side, after finishing top of our group. We've had a better tournament than Holland Russia and France, and the players though obviously limited have looked like a team who want to play for and with each other.

England may never win a major competition because there are several other teams who are simply better than us, so why don't people just accept this and enjoy supporting them, instead of bleating on about fooking possession and shits on target and blah blah baldrick on question time. Bye.

Because football is the number one sport in this country and we should look at getting closer to these teams in the future? Make progress?? Do better?

I don't really detect any doom and gloom this time, more of an acceptance that given our limited side we performed above expectations, that's not to say we weren't technically inferior to both France and Italy. We found a way to win the two games we were expected to and found a way not to lose the other two. Hodgson is a canny manager and the players give everything, we can't complain. Why aren't we good enough though?

My tenner each way bet on Italy ain't looking too bad now either!!!

14-1!

Forza!!!

It's the number one sport in most countries though, and I think to some extent we have made some progress, we did better than we did in 2008 where we never even qualified and 2010 when we looked like a demotivated shambles.

That notwithstanding we could have done better, one thing that stood out to me was our inability to maintain a good performance over a whole game. For the first 30 minutes against France and Italy we looked good but then as the games wore on we got more and more jaded. Is it a fitness issue. I dunno, baldrics been quite good on question time though.

We were in a weak group, with all due respect to Sweden (population about 7 million) and Ukraine (ranked about 50th in the world) these are teams we should be beating. We were far from convincing in either game.

Italy are a very good team but lets not polish turd and pretend that England are better than what we are.

A weak group eh, strange that because France had been unbeaten for 20 odd games before going into the tournamanet and were one of the fancied teams.
Why should we be beating Sweden? We had never beaten them before, with better teams maybe, so why now?
We also had to get a result against host country Ukraine n their own back yard when they were desperate for a win.
Noone is saying England are world beaters, just that we actually got some decent results and were finally beaten by a very good team (only on pennas like).

Concurring.

People have gone overboard on the slagging off of England. They did slightly better than I expected, never got beat and were impressive in parts. Yes, they are overpaid, but it doesn't stop most English people wanting them to do well. As well as doing better defensively than the Germans against Italy we also created more chances against them than they did. I very much doubt we could win the world cup but I reckon we will do well.

England are not genuine contenders for major championships. In truth, they're a good, dangerous group team who teams i guess would rather avoid. Once, it gets to the business end and teams shift up a gear, we're pretty much quarter final fodder. Its been proved over and over again. Our so called golden generation, we're in truth more over a silver generation.

who called them that tho?

it was hype from the papers and just put more pressure on them

Loving this thread. England were shite and noThing more your average workmanlike premier league fodder the stoke city of world football. It's even a myth to say we defended Well.

Just a bunch of hard working jpurneymen that Couldnt sting two passes together.

The most wprrying Thing is that ajme of you believe we were ok.

Deluded.

Balatelli gets slaughtered here by our so call ed export and fans but despite being a bit part player, he is light year ahead of any english striker.

And if Balatelli was english hodgson wpuldnt pick him.

Just realised that i cant use a mobile phone to type

I only watched the first half but Italy were different gravy against the Germans. They defended en masse, attacked on masse and played at a much higher tempo than against us. I got the impression they were taking the game to the Germans whereas with us they just had to wait for a mistake.

Defended better than the Germans!?

Created more!?

I watched both games and would seriously dispute that, yes Italy didn't score but that was more down to them being wasteful than it was us marshaling them well.

Look at the stats;

Shots England 8 Italy 31

On target England 4 Italy 18

Possession 37-63

Shots Germany 17 Italy 11

On Target Germany 8 Italy 5

Possession 53-47

So to suggest what you are is a pretty deluded way of thought.

By the way I'm not 'slagging' England I just think we're some way off these teams and need to look to how we are going to get closer.

So what shall we do just sit here n slag the team off non stop?

We cant sign anyone so for now we are stuck with what we've got.

We had about 10 injuries and a manager who took over 3 weeks before the tournament began.

We've got a solid base to work on over the next 2 years to make us better before 2014.

all these flair players you previously mentioned we left out just dont exist, we dont have any, barring wilshire n he's injured.

Judge the management we have at the moment this time in 2014, if we go to brazil n play like this i'd be a bit gutted as we wont have progressed at all.

Total unbalanced tripe, how do you finish top of your qualifying group then top of your tournament group without losing a game if you're shite?

Do you expect other teams to roll over and let us smash 6 past them, football is the national passion of virtually every country in the world and teams are just as desperate to do well as England are.

Nobody has suggested we were great or anywhere near where we would like to be, but this gleeful biased nonsense is embarrassing.

He's only pissed off with England cos the Fa have made changes to coaching

Not that I give a rat's arse about it, but the colonel is speaking the truth in my opinion.

In what way?

Cos he said we were shit?

How brilliantly observant, it must have took him months to come to that conclusion

Dont know why I am bothering here cos you is a bit of a thick bounder, but here goes:

England were shite, utter shite. But we could have been at elast a bit better, even with the players we had at our disposal.

But like I explained, we have a manager that:

1) left the best avaialble right back at home
2) played Johnson at right back, so didnt dare play Walcott, because he knew Johnson was defensively retarded.

with me so far?

3) could have played Oxlaide Chamberlain. Did so in the toughest match, then didnt against the lesser teams, yet persisted with the awful Young. Why? Cos Young tracks back better, and this manager loves his workhorses....all over the pitch.

4) Hodgson took Downing , yet left Johnson at home. Downing got no minutes.....but at elast Johnson can excite, and create if needed.

5) He played Scott Paker, who ran round like an average sunday league player....throwing himself in front of people like a very desperate man.

6) you talk about all these injuries??????????????????????/ Like who? Gareth Barry Lampard?? A failure at three previous championships??

7) We played 4 4 2, in the traditional english way. That should be enough to tell you all you need to know. Which premier league team played like that last season? Any of the top ones??????? Stoke maybe?

8) How many of this england squad would get in a 16 man best of squad from this championship? I would suspect only Hart would get close. Please dont say Gerrard....Spain have 6 better midfielders on the pitch at any one time than him.

9) The best of all though: Some claim we defended well.

Did we? Really?

Shall we look at the facts, Yes, lets do.

France should have beaten us. They had enough chances.
Sweden scored 2, and could have had others.
Ukraine DID score past us, and in the opinion of most professional observers ran the game, and would probably have won had it stood.
Italy. Well the stats for that embarrassment have already been put up. Did we defend well against them? Well they scored 0 so we must have done eh?

10) and finally the most shameful bit, and this is the one which all of you that play the game should know about.

Our ability to give the ball to the opposition when under no pressure, was only bettered by the Irish.

We are not an emerging nation you know. We have some of the highest paid footballers in the world, playing in the so called best league in the world.....yet our players cant pass the ball.....and in some cases could barely control it.

Our ability to play 4-5 passes across the back and then pass back to the keeper to launch it long is the stuff of legends.

Our ball retention is shit, as it was in 2006, the quailifiers of 2008, and in 2010.

We have had great sides in the past 1986, 1990, and 1996.

Even then Bbby Robson got lucky. He didnt play Hoddle, until his favourites got injured and sent off. Yet Hoddle would have played for every other team.

He didnt want to play Gazza either......but realised he had to eventually.

Injuries?

Try Cahill, bent, wilshire, Smalling, Rodwell, lampard, Barry, walker.

More than half a team.

I'm happy to admit we were poor I just don't see the point in revelling in it

We are sub standard both tactically and in terms of ability against the top international teams in Europe. My expectation level finally died in this competition. I didnt expect us to win it, but christ almighty, the sight of an international team blatantly camping in their own half for an hour against the Italians was more than a bit embarassing as was the fact that we couldnt string three passes together all game. Our pundits were quick to slate Greece for doing it, but we were just as bad. Ive said it before, we may well do well in the group stages, but once the quarters start and the best teams shift up a gear, we go home. That is the hard reality of it. And i dont see it changing.

A lot of that is true, but if we had defended our way to the final & luckily won it on a penalty shoot out against Spain, like Chelsea did in the Champions League final, then no-one would have cared. Yes we have our limitations, but like Yubep has said why keep revelling in it!!

To answer the colonel.....

1. Micah Richards was on standby and basically told England to fuck off, I'm on 100k a week and my boots are way too big for standby. Kelly then got what would have been micah's call up. So your point here is irrelevant.

2. Glen Johnson had his best games in an England short in this torny. He defended extremely well and was rarely beaten. How these performances can be classed as ' retarded' seems you were watching him through tinted glasses.

3. Completely agree with you on this 1. Young kept his place on merit amd certainly not form, at least the ox had a go at defenders when selected.

4. Agreed again. I think roys biggest mistake was leading ad at home who has proved he can score and create for England, something which downing hasn't.

5. Average sunday league performances. You must be blind. He kept us un defeated IMO. His defending was immense. Must have had bruises all over his body with the ammount of goal saving blocks he flung himself infront off. Wore his heart on his sleeve and certainly isn't a player who deserves criticism.

6. Lampards form going into the tourney was the best of our midfielders. He was awesome towards the en of the season player a holding role and his selection would have allowed gerrard to go forward and maybe might have attacked more. I beleive the loss of Lampard was a big 1 indeed along with
Wilshire.

7. I agree as most teams seem to adopt a 4231 at this level. Losing Lampard IMO stopped us from doing this. Playing the 442 tje way roy had us was way too defensive and offered very little up top.

8. If you mean on performances from this tourney, Terry would get in for certain. He was an absolute rock and silenced all the critics busting for him to fail.

9. Yes we defended very well. The 2 set pieces v sweden I'll grant you but on the whole we were very solid as a back 4.


We set up tactically to defend, we paid the price in terms of pocession and chances. However we finished joint 5th which isnt at all bad and can take positives away. No need to be down hearted. Put the knives away and chill out. If we lost on pens in the final the threads would be the same. No need at all really. We certainly wernt expected to win the comp so why drone on as if we were

It's interesting that people keep saying we defended so well, had Italy taken three or four of the several good chances they had to score would anyone be?

Surely good defending is not giving the opposition several opportunities to score that should be taken at that level? Yes some of our defending was brave, committed and last ditch but we massively rode our luck and on another day could have lost heavily. Is someone hitting the post from a few yards 'good defending?'

N if we'd taken our 3/4 good chances against Italy we'd have won, that's football.

Name our 3/4 or good chances!?

Johnson early on....

I'm struggling now.

They had 31 attempts at goal!!

Johnson early on, young 2nd half where he scuffed wide, Rooney over head kick, Rooney header first half.

There you go 4 easy

Rooney overhead kick

He scored one and it's talked about as one of the best ever Premiership goals, it's about one in fifty that you connect with that right.

You've recalled four times we actually got in the box though, well done.

the majority of there 30 odd 'chances' were from 25 yards or further, I'd take our 4 over that like. Johnson had best chance of match and that's a fact so we did something right

However 37yo Paul scholes wasn't selected so we obviously went out

You asked me to name 4 chances n I did, they were all decent chances too

I wonder if Chelsea fans were really pissed winning the Euro league because the other teams really played better, had more possession and should have taken their chances.
I bet Greece fans were sick as fook when they won the Euros because really they werent that good but they somehow managed to beat better teams.
Its called having a game plan, a manager picks the best way for his team to play based on the players hes got. Hes not gonna turn Parker into Pirlo.
Unfortunately the likes of Colonel thinks a manager can coach pace and natural ability into a player.

I said 31 odd attempts, which is a fact, being able to read is not a lot to ask.

You'd take England's four

You're talking as if we went through, we were massively second best, rode our luck then still went out. I reckon Italy ' take' being in the final. As for Johnson's being the best chance of the match, did you shut your eyes every time Italy were in possession? De Rossi missed a sitter, Ballotelli had as many openings as England on his own.

I'm not slagging off England, I'm not anti England, exactly the opposite, but come on you've got to admit we were completely outplayed and were pretty fortunate to get to penalties. Even Roy Hodgson said that, and that our performance was poor in the match. If we just accept that we'll never get better, you've got to ask why?

Klinger WE LOST.

We wouldn't have give a shit had we won BUT WE LOST.

Yeah we lost and we got outplayed, Italy has a much better team than us.
But overall we still did better in the tournament than I thought we would. More positives than negatives for me like.

Everybody ought to know by now that if England keep a clean sheet it's because they were either lucky or the opposition missed loads of sitters.
When Pools keep clean sheets the back five and the tenacious attitude of the people in front of the back five take the credit, the manager purrs over the clean sheet and the fans are happy. Although there are some people who will criticise a clean sheet. Those people usually have a small penis and are therefore used to failure.
People talk about the basics, ball retention, stringing myriads of passes together etc etc ad nauseam but the most obvious basics are, the team that keeps a clean sheet doesn't get beat and the team that scores the most goals FOR, generally wins, including penalty shoot outs.
If certain people on this board say today is Saturday, others will disagree and to be frank it's getting tedious.

30 'odd' is 31. For somebody who is so so clever and intelligent as you think you are you couldn't grasp that.maybe you should try reading more, just a thought.

Wasn't johnsons 3 yarder a sitter??

We didn't progress because the defensive tactics wernt correct, no argument there, well that and the fact were shit in penalty shoot outs. However we were nowhere as bad as some are making out. The England are crap thread title was a joke