wigster
Andy Booth Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 3,183
Member is Online
|
Post by wigster on Jul 14, 2018 18:09:00 GMT 1
I may be being naive, but didn't England do what they always do in the big competitions ? Beat the weak teams and then as soon as we play anybody decent, not world beating (Belgium twice, Croatia) we lose. What's been different this year, apart from being a bit luckier than usual before we got a team that wasn't poor ?
|
|
|
Post by ACW on Jul 14, 2018 18:23:57 GMT 1
I may be being naive, but didn't England do what they always do in the big competitions ? Beat the weak teams and then as soon as we play anybody decent, not world beating (Belgium twice, Croatia) we lose. What's been different this year, apart from being a bit luckier than usual before we got a team that wasn't poor ? To be fair, Belgium are one of the best sides in the world. Had they been on our side of the draw they probably would have made the final. Only a set piece and some strong French defending stopped them getting to the final from the strongest half of the draw. Along with France I think they've been the best two teams at the tournament.
|
|
Thwarting Dog
Steve Kindon Terrier
UP THE TERRIERS, PLAY LIKE TERRIERS, YOU WON'T GO FAR WRONG
Posts: 1,626
|
Post by Thwarting Dog on Jul 14, 2018 19:21:26 GMT 1
Was wondering why he'd never registered with me. The money's not bad out there if you don't want to compete on the big stage of Europe that is.
|
|
|
Post by morleyterrier on Jul 14, 2018 19:27:57 GMT 1
I genuinely don't know the score. It was one nil to Belgium when I heard on the radio earlier.
Will find out at news at ten.
|
|
|
Post by lossiemouthtownfan on Jul 14, 2018 19:46:57 GMT 1
England are like a "journeyman" boxer. Keep taking the blows in the hope of one big payday....but it never happens.
It did for Rocky Balboa
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jul 15, 2018 0:28:20 GMT 1
IF we had played full strength first time round there is a strong chance we wouldn’t have got anywhere near the semis .. Southgate 1. Oti. 0 We would not have beaten Belgium with the first team in 5 attempts....what are you on about? Maybe maybe not. Belguim are a better team than us right now, don't think anyone will argue with that, Southgate included. I didn;t see the game as frankly i couldn;'t care less about a 3rd place play off, but what do you make of the stats- you being such a fan of stats apparently. England more possession, more shots, more shots on target, more corners, fouled more. Did they reflect the game? Let me guess- on this occasion the stats don;t mean anything??
|
|
|
Post by otium (EPBS) on Jul 15, 2018 6:51:19 GMT 1
We would not have beaten Belgium with the first team in 5 attempts....what are you on about? Maybe maybe not. Belguim are a better team than us right now, don't think anyone will argue with that, Southgate included. I didn;t see the game as frankly i couldn;'t care less about a 3rd place play off, but what do you make of the stats- you being such a fan of stats apparently. England more possession, more shots, more shots on target, more corners, fouled more. Did they reflect the game? Let me guess- on this occasion the stats don;t mean anything?? There were no glaring differences in the stats...they imply an even game. Small sample. If you see a Champions league qualifier like last week with 75% possession and 25 shots to 2 it tells you a lot. I look at this stuff. Telegraph today "England well beaten". They competed but were miles away.
|
|
|
Post by themanfromatlantis on Jul 15, 2018 9:38:31 GMT 1
Don't go there Slapps...
Oti will outwit you by responding... Again & again & again & again....
|
|
ram
Andy Booth Terrier
delete account
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by ram on Jul 15, 2018 10:06:17 GMT 1
I hear they are changing the words of "The England Song" from "Footballs coming home" to, "Fuckalls coming home"
|
|
|
Post by Mecha Corte on Jul 15, 2018 10:27:09 GMT 1
I hear they are changing the words of "The England Song" from "Footballs coming home" to, "Fuckalls coming home" England did well, that's a fact, they got to the semi-final of the World Cup. However 3 group games, 2 victories against teams they are expected to beat and a defeat vs Belgium. Followed by 4 later round games, two wins, one on penalties after e.t. and two more defeats, one after e.t. Those stats would tend to undermine the did well part.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 12:07:50 GMT 1
I may be being naive, but didn't England do what they always do in the big competitions ? Beat the weak teams and then as soon as we play anybody decent, not world beating (Belgium twice, Croatia) we lose. What's been different this year, apart from being a bit luckier than usual before we got a team that wasn't poor ? If we’re all brutally honest, nothing changed. We went out against the first decent side we played against. We can never beat a premier nation. We beat a decent Belgian side in 90- with a last minute wonder goal, we beat a cracking Dutch side and Spain at Euro 96- and we were the best side at that tournament. We failed to even reach the final. We were beating Brazil before seaman let one in from a corner in 02. We beat Germany well in a qualifier. We just don’t have what it takes to beat the top nations. The talent or the mentality. We are similar in level to the Scandinavian sides, which is funny because our economies will look like those in a few years too. Good qualifiers but bankers to get beat in the last 16/8. In this one we were found out defensively which was always on the cards when you’re playing an attacking fullback at centre back when he’s never played there before. That was a great selection against weaker sides but it lost us the tournament. Surely a traditional back line was the way to go against a superior Croatian side who were always going to dominate possesion. But I guess he felt the back up players weren’t good enough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 12:15:43 GMT 1
I may be being naive, but didn't England do what they always do in the big competitions ? Beat the weak teams and then as soon as we play anybody decent, not world beating (Belgium twice, Croatia) we lose. What's been different this year, apart from being a bit luckier than usual before we got a team that wasn't poor ? To be fair, Belgium are one of the best sides in the world. Had they been on our side of the draw they probably would have made the final. Only a set piece and some strong French defending stopped them getting to the final from the strongest half of the draw. Along with France I think they've been the best two teams at the tournament. Belgian are another team who cannot beat historically elite teams at major tournaments, never even reaching a final. It’s a mentality thing, not a talent thing. I’m not convinced Martinez or Southgate got the tactics right in the semi final too.
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jul 15, 2018 12:31:23 GMT 1
Maybe maybe not. Belguim are a better team than us right now, don't think anyone will argue with that, Southgate included. I didn;t see the game as frankly i couldn;'t care less about a 3rd place play off, but what do you make of the stats- you being such a fan of stats apparently. England more possession, more shots, more shots on target, more corners, fouled more. Did they reflect the game? Let me guess- on this occasion the stats don;t mean anything?? There were no glaring differences in the stats...they imply an even game. Small sample. If you see a Champions league qualifier like last week with 75% possession and 25 shots to 2 it tells you a lot. I look at this stuff. Telegraph today "England well beaten". They competed but were miles away. Oh I was right then. Conveniently this time the stats mean nothing. Youre amusing if nowt else mate.
|
|
|
Post by otium (EPBS) on Jul 15, 2018 13:49:47 GMT 1
There were no glaring differences in the stats...they imply an even game. Small sample. If you see a Champions league qualifier like last week with 75% possession and 25 shots to 2 it tells you a lot. I look at this stuff. Telegraph today "England well beaten". They competed but were miles away. Oh I was right then. Conveniently this time the stats mean nothing. Youre amusing if nowt else mate. What stats? Same possession, shots and corners. Belgium had better chances and Pickford saved a few. Stats mean a lot when there is particularly a lot of data. Here is a game this week. I wont say which one. Guess the score. Home team totals are first. 19-4 shots 8-0 shots on target 7-1 off target 9-2 corners Here is another. Guess the score. 30-5 shots 14-2 on target 14-3 off target 5-1 corners
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jul 15, 2018 14:06:23 GMT 1
Same possession, shots and corners? Well, no.. Belgium.. England Possession- 42...58 shots......12...15 Shots on target...4...6 Corners 4...5 fouls .. 11...4 Its one thing only using stats if it suits your argument and ignoring them if they don't. But now you're making your own stats up to suit? Stats are largely meaningless. Watching the game ( with some level of understanding!! ) is far better. I only mention them from yesterdays game now to prove what a blinkered performance youre putting on for everyone lately. Don't know the game your figures are for.. was it Poland v Iceland from a beach holiday somewhere?
|
|
|
Post by otium (EPBS) on Jul 17, 2018 7:29:00 GMT 1
Oh I was right then. Conveniently this time the stats mean nothing. Youre amusing if nowt else mate. What stats? Same possession, shots and corners. Belgium had better chances and Pickford saved a few. Stats mean a lot when there is particularly a lot of data. Here is a game this week. I wont say which one. Guess the score. Home team totals are first. 19-4 shots 8-0 shots on target 7-1 off target 9-2 corners Here is another. Guess the score. 30-5 shots 14-2 on target 14-3 off target 5-1 corners Seeing as you will not play along...both games finished 7-0. The stats tell it will be a resounding win for the home team.
|
|
|
Post by joeyjoneslocker on Jul 17, 2018 8:15:56 GMT 1
What stats? Same possession, shots and corners. Belgium had better chances and Pickford saved a few. Stats mean a lot when there is particularly a lot of data. Here is a game this week. I wont say which one. Guess the score. Home team totals are first. 19-4 shots 8-0 shots on target 7-1 off target 9-2 corners Here is another. Guess the score. 30-5 shots 14-2 on target 14-3 off target 5-1 corners Seeing as you will not play along...both games finished 7-0. The stats tell it will be a resounding win for the home team. Oti, i don't mind your posts mate. To be honest in amongst some of the dross on this board i always look out for what you have to say, if i see you have posted i always read, unlike some of the others i intentionally skip past. Generally stats don't lie but there is always the exception, take Man City at home last season. Man City had 80% possession, 14 shots, 5 on target, we had no shots on target, 7 corners to our 3, the game finished 2-1. Man Utd at home, again nearly 80% possession for United, 9 shots to our 5, 7 corners to our 4, we won 2-1. Stats don't always tell the true story.
|
|
|
Post by otium (EPBS) on Jul 17, 2018 8:18:59 GMT 1
Seeing as you will not play along...both games finished 7-0. The stats tell it will be a resounding win for the home team. Oti, i don't mind your posts mate. To be honest in amongst some of the dross on this board i always look out for what you have to say, if i see you have posted i always read, unlike some of the others i intentionally skip past. Generally stats don't lie but there is always the exception, take Man City at home last season. Man City had 80% possession, 14 shots, 5 on target, we had no shots on target, 7 corners to our 3, the game finished 2-1. Man Utd at home, again nearly 80% possession for United, 9 shots to our 5, 7 corners to our 4, we won 2-1. Stats don't always tell the true story. Not always...one game...short sample. Have a look at Red Star and Apoels stats last week before they play today....and are the Kosovan Drita really as bad as 70/1 chances?
|
|
|
Post by joeyjoneslocker on Jul 17, 2018 8:28:18 GMT 1
Oti, i don't mind your posts mate. To be honest in amongst some of the dross on this board i always look out for what you have to say, if i see you have posted i always read, unlike some of the others i intentionally skip past. Generally stats don't lie but there is always the exception, take Man City at home last season. Man City had 80% possession, 14 shots, 5 on target, we had no shots on target, 7 corners to our 3, the game finished 2-1. Man Utd at home, again nearly 80% possession for United, 9 shots to our 5, 7 corners to our 4, we won 2-1. Stats don't always tell the true story. Not always...one game...short sample. Have a look at Red Star and Apoels stats last week before they play today....and are the Kosovan Drita really as bad as 70/1 chances? Ok. One more stat. Home team 80% possession, 30 shots, 4 on target, 12 corners. Away team 20% possession, 0 shots, 0 corners and 10 men for 80 minutes. 0-0.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2018 12:41:49 GMT 1
Not always...one game...short sample. Have a look at Red Star and Apoels stats last week before they play today....and are the Kosovan Drita really as bad as 70/1 chances? Ok. One more stat. Home team 80% possession, 30 shots, 4 on target, 12 corners. Away team 20% possession, 0 shots, 0 corners and 10 men for 80 minutes. 0-0. Town V Swansea?
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Jul 17, 2018 13:18:06 GMT 1
Not always...one game...short sample. Have a look at Red Star and Apoels stats last week before they play today....and are the Kosovan Drita really as bad as 70/1 chances? Ok. One more stat. Home team 80% possession, 30 shots, 4 on target, 12 corners. Away team 20% possession, 0 shots, 0 corners and 10 men for 80 minutes. 0-0. look within the stats.. possession?? where on the pitch.. % of possession in the opponents half and touches in the opponents penalty area..? look at shots and shots on target.. corners is another decent indicator.. us and united were much closer than us and city.. city won.. harder to play against 10 men? swansea had zero attacking intent, therefore we had 50% of the games prime motivation and tactics not to worry about? the 10 man excuse is wholly dependent on who you are playing and then how they decide to go on with 10.. had the swansea keeper made 4/5 wonder saves etc then we might have had more of an excuse.. we only managed one decent save and a hit post and a couple of minor scrambles in 80 minutes of total 'ball retention and field dominance'..
|
|
|
Post by joeyjoneslocker on Jul 17, 2018 13:39:11 GMT 1
Ok. One more stat. Home team 80% possession, 30 shots, 4 on target, 12 corners. Away team 20% possession, 0 shots, 0 corners and 10 men for 80 minutes. 0-0. look within the stats.. possession?? where on the pitch.. % of possession in the opponents half and touches in the opponents penalty area..? look at shots and shots on target.. corners is another decent indicator.. us and united were much closer than us and city.. city won.. harder to play against 10 men? swansea had zero attacking intent, therefore we had 50% of the games prime motivation and tactics not to worry about? the 10 man excuse is wholly dependent on who you are playing and then how they decide to go on with 10.. had the swansea keeper made 4/5 wonder saves etc then we might have had more of an excuse.. we only managed one decent save and a hit post and a couple of minor scrambles in 80 minutes of total 'ball retention and field dominance'.. We could still be playing that game now and we may have hit the post again, maybe twice.
|
|
|
Post by otium (EPBS) on Jul 17, 2018 13:52:32 GMT 1
Not always...one game...short sample. Have a look at Red Star and Apoels stats last week before they play today....and are the Kosovan Drita really as bad as 70/1 chances? Ok. One more stat. Home team 80% possession, 30 shots, 4 on target, 12 corners. Away team 20% possession, 0 shots, 0 corners and 10 men for 80 minutes. 0-0. Yes, yes...Town. There are freaks, one-offs, anomalies.
|
|
|
Post by k1htafc on Jul 17, 2018 14:07:12 GMT 1
Ok. One more stat. Home team 80% possession, 30 shots, 4 on target, 12 corners. Away team 20% possession, 0 shots, 0 corners and 10 men for 80 minutes. 0-0. Yes, yes...Town. There are freaks, one-offs, anomalies. Another one for you. Home - Away Shots: 34 - 3 On Target: 9 - 1 Possession: 77 - 23 Corners: 10 - 4 Guess the teams and result.
|
|
|
Post by otium (EPBS) on Jul 17, 2018 14:14:00 GMT 1
Yes, yes...Town. There are freaks, one-offs, anomalies. Another one for you. Home - Away Shots: 34 - 3 On Target: 9 - 1 Possession: 77 - 23 Corners: 10 - 4 Guess the teams and result. Barca v Chelsea 2012...2-2? The point is anyone can single anomalies out. With the stats you have supplied the game would generally end 6-0 to the home team. I would expect them to lose with such stats once in 200 matches.
|
|
|
Post by joeyjoneslocker on Jul 17, 2018 14:14:33 GMT 1
Ok. One more stat. Home team 80% possession, 30 shots, 4 on target, 12 corners. Away team 20% possession, 0 shots, 0 corners and 10 men for 80 minutes. 0-0. Yes, yes...Town. There are freaks, one-offs, anomalies. That is 3 'one offs' i have quoted, all within the last 12 months, all in 20 seconds. But i get your point.
|
|
|
Post by k1htafc on Jul 17, 2018 14:15:24 GMT 1
Another one for you. Home - Away Shots: 34 - 3 On Target: 9 - 1 Possession: 77 - 23 Corners: 10 - 4 Guess the teams and result. Barca v Chelsea 2012...2-2? The point is anyone can single anomalies out. With the stats you have supplied the game would generally end 6-0 to the home team. I would expect them to lose with such stats once in 200 matches. Not quite. France 0 - 0 Luxembourg.
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jul 17, 2018 17:17:59 GMT 1
Another one for you. Home - Away Shots: 34 - 3 On Target: 9 - 1 Possession: 77 - 23 Corners: 10 - 4 Guess the teams and result. Barca v Chelsea 2012...2-2? The point is anyone can single anomalies out. With the stats you have supplied the game would generally end 6-0 to the home team. I would expect them to lose with such stats once in 200 matches. So baring in mind the ACTUAL stats, not the ones you made up, is this you admitting Belgium beating England in that 3rd place play off was a freak result?
|
|
|
Post by otium (EPBS) on Jul 17, 2018 18:43:35 GMT 1
Barca v Chelsea 2012...2-2? The point is anyone can single anomalies out. With the stats you have supplied the game would generally end 6-0 to the home team. I would expect them to lose with such stats once in 200 matches. Not quite. France 0 - 0 Luxembourg. Oddly i have already discussed that game on here...not too long ago. 4 days later Luxembourg played Sweden...the stats were just 58-42% possession. Corners 5-3 and shots 10-5. Sweden won 8-0! Earlier today (having looked at first leg match stats and recent form) i called Driti, the Kosovan champions, as too good a price at Malmo tonight. Well, its 0-0 currently and the draw is now 9/2 from 20/1. Made £300 already. Its a tough game but if you are prepared to do the legwork there can be rewards.
|
|
|
Post by otium (EPBS) on Jul 17, 2018 18:44:51 GMT 1
Barca v Chelsea 2012...2-2? The point is anyone can single anomalies out. With the stats you have supplied the game would generally end 6-0 to the home team. I would expect them to lose with such stats once in 200 matches. So baring in mind the ACTUAL stats, not the ones you made up, is this you admitting Belgium beating England in that 3rd place play off was a freak result? I really respect you Slapps..but bugger off
|
|