World Cup 2018 #4 - Football's coming for to carry me home

[bgmnts]

I am actually giving England vs Sweden and Brazil vs Belgium a miss.

I'll do a sudoku or something.

[BlodwynPig]

I am actually giving England vs Sweden and Brazil vs Belgium a miss.

I'll do a sudoku or something.

Hiking, with catch-up and feet-up later if the results go your way.

[Danger Man]

I've nicked this from the Guardian:

So far, in qualification and in the event itself, England have beaten the likes of Slovakia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Scotland, Panama and Tunisia. We have lost to a Belgium B side and drawn with a James-less Colombia.
Sweden qualified from a group that included France and the Netherlands. They disposed of Italy in the play-offs and then topped a World Cup group featuring Mexico and Germany. Switzerland are no mugs, either.
I actually think England have a reasonable chance against Sweden, but it's a bit of a mystery why so many people think we are favourites.

[The Boston Crab]

Because no Sweden guys make a career from the leftovers of de Bruyne, Silva, Sane et al.

[BlodwynPig]

I've nicked this from the Guardian:

So far, in qualification and in the event itself, England have beaten the likes of Slovakia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Scotland, Panama and Tunisia. We have lost to a Belgium B side and drawn with a James-less Colombia.
Sweden qualified from a group that included France and the Netherlands. They disposed of Italy in the play-offs and then topped a World Cup group featuring Mexico and Germany. Switzerland are no mugs, either.
I actually think England have a reasonable chance against Sweden, but it's a bit of a mystery why so many people think we are favourites.

Did you see Sweden play. Shiiiite.

[greencalx]

Have I got it right that all the remaining England games are on the bbc?

We'll need to find another scapegoat.

[chveik]

RUS v CRO and SWE v ENG have snoozefest written all over them.

[mothman]

Have I got it right that all the remaining England games are on the bbc?

We'll need to find another scapegoat.

If that's how the match allocation has worked out then ITV must be kicking themselves. Sure it was an unlikely turn of events but I though England games were often disproportionately assigned to ITV in past tournaments.

[Beagle 2]

Isn't it just because the BBC always sign up to show the first couple of games and give ITV the next two? Isn't that literally the reason for the "ITV curse"?

[kenneth trousers]

I thought they tossed a coin/drew lots? The channel that gets just the one group game choses which one, followed by the first knock out game.

[imitationleather]

Is Raheem Sterling still being persisted with because he appears, for some reason, to make other teams completely irate by his mere presence in the starting XI and they use him as a foul-testing dummy for the duration on the match? It's already pretty clear that a lot of Southgate's tactics thus far have been about drawing as many free kicks and penalties from the VAR system, which have been our best chance of scoring, and for some reason the presence of Sterling on the pitch appears to totally enrage the opponents who will take every possible opportunity to commit professional fouls on him over and over?

I can't see them doing that on Rashford, and I also I do agree that at this stage in his career he still works better as an impact sub rather than a starter. Sterling on for Rashford after seventy minutes when a performance is required just doesn't inspire the same "Something could happen here, lads!" confidence that Rashford on for Sterling does.

[Depressed Beyond Tables]

I've nicked this from the Guardian:

So far, in qualification and in the event itself, England have beaten the likes of Slovakia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Scotland, Panama and Tunisia. We have lost to a Belgium B side and drawn with a James-less Colombia.
Sweden qualified from a group that included France and the Netherlands. They disposed of Italy in the play-offs and then topped a World Cup group featuring Mexico and Germany. Switzerland are no mugs, either.
I actually think England have a reasonable chance against Sweden, but it's a bit of a mystery why so many people think we are favourites.

All pretty good points. The thing is though that Sweden are far better at defending than Tunisia. If it wasn't for a late defensive brainfart by the Tunisians that game would have ended a draw. There was a good 60 minutes where England where struggling to get through the Tunisian defense.

Southgate stuck with Kane and in fairness it paid off, but the defending for that late goal was, without bias, abysmal by anyone's standards - a free header a yard from goal. The fact that they plowed away for 60 minutes without an effective tactical change could be seen as admirable, but against a better team may prove to be headless.

Were Sweden to nick a lead they should be able to do a better job than Tunisia at shutting out England, you'd imagine. I think I've aired this point more than once, so I'll stop now with it.

_{What is point Vardy?}

[imitationleather]

I thought they tossed a coin/drew lots? The channel that gets just the one group game choses which one, followed by the first knock out game.

BBC did the first two groups, ITV opted for the last, choosing the "glamour tie" against Belgium, which turned out to be total dogshite. This got ITV the first knock-out, and so BBC now have the quarter-final. From the semi-final onwards both channels will show England games live.

[Uncle TechTip]

It's actually ITV with exclusive first pick of the semi-finals although there's fevered speculation (on digital spy) over whether this would actually happen should England get there. But they did show Wales exclusively in 2016. A lot of people seem to think the BBC has some moral duty to broadcast an England semi-final.

[imitationleather]

It's actually ITV with exclusive first pick of the semi-finals although there's fevered speculation (on digital spy) over whether this would actually happen should England get there. But they did show Wales exclusively in 2016. A lot of people seem to think the BBC has some moral duty to broadcast an England semi-final.

I'm pretty sure that the arrangement is that England semi-finals (that numerous, biannual event, that we have tonnes of examples to draw from) have always been on both channels. Could be wrong, though. Wales in '16 was a bit different because, while I was happy to see them there and genuinely wanted to see them somehow make it to the final, they weren't going to be pulling in the viewing figures that an England semi would be.

[Ferris]

an England semi

Steady on!

[itsfredtitmus]

50 on england to beat thomas quick

[bgmnts]

Is Raheem Sterling still being persisted with because he appears, for some reason, to make other teams completely irate by his mere presence in the starting XI and they use him as a foul-testing dummy for the duration on the match? It's already pretty clear that a lot of Southgate's tactics thus far have been about drawing as many free kicks and penalties from the VAR system, which have been our best chance of scoring, and for some reason the presence of Sterling on the pitch appears to totally enrage the opponents who will take every possible opportunity to commit professional fouls on him over and over?

I can't see them doing that on Rashford, and I also I do agree that at this stage in his career he still works better as an impact sub rather than a starter. Sterling on for Rashford after seventy minutes when a performance is required just doesn't inspire the same "Something could happen here, lads!" confidence that Rashford on for Sterling does.

I don't watch Spurs a lot but I never knew how much Kane went down. Pretty big lad and he is falling on the floor like a little bitch. Quite sad.

[dandoystevski]

What's really sad is the state of your current account.

[Uncle TechTip]

We are now playing to the same rules as the rest of the world.

[DrGreggles]

I don't watch Spurs a lot but I never knew how much Kane went down. Pretty big lad and he is falling on the floor like a little bitch. Quite sad.

Kane goes to ground very easily.
In fact, England players go to ground very easily.
In fact, all footballers go to ground very easily.

Always found it weird when being pulled back causes someone to fall forward...

[greenman]

It's actually ITV with exclusive first pick of the semi-finals although there's fevered speculation (on digital spy) over whether this would actually happen should England get there. But they did show Wales exclusively in 2016. A lot of people seem to think the BBC has some moral duty to broadcast an England semi-final.

The ultimate test as to which Neville is better.

[monolith]

If we make the final I hope there is a dedicated Maradona cam. Don't want to miss him having a heart attack and dying if we were to win it.

[DrGreggles]

The ultimate test as to which Neville is better.

Aaron

[phantom_power]

I've nicked this from the Guardian:

So far, in qualification and in the event itself, England have beaten the likes of Slovakia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Scotland, Panama and Tunisia. We have lost to a Belgium B side and drawn with a James-less Colombia.
Sweden qualified from a group that included France and the Netherlands. They disposed of Italy in the play-offs and then topped a World Cup group featuring Mexico and Germany. Switzerland are no mugs, either.
I actually think England have a reasonable chance against Sweden, but it's a bit of a mystery why so many people think we are favourites.

But then Holland and Italy are massive under-achievers and Germany were terrible but still beat Sweden. Also the team that qualified may well not be the same, both in terms of personnel and style/tactics/etc, as the one that qualified. I agree that it will be a tough game but I think the big names of their opposition flatter them a bit, in the same way that the lesser names that England have played look less impressive on paper but don't tell the whole story. Also, it was the England B side that lost to the Belgian B side.

There is also the possibility of England improving with confidence and having played more together and learnt from the Colombia game. They are a limited team but still haven't really gelled as much as you would hope, certainly around the opposition area. If that clicks for whatever reason then they will be a different prospect given the ability of Sterling, Kane, Lingard, Rashford and Alli/Loftus Cheek

[EOLAN]

But then Holland and Italy are massive under-achievers

Well that should make them perfectly prepared for England then.

[DrGreggles]

But then Holland and Italy are massive under-achievers and Germany were terrible

Yep, they're certainly no Tunisia or Panama...

[phantom_power]

I am not saying Sweden are shit or England are great but those statements need a bit more context and the big names Sweden beat aren't necessarily a sign of great quality. Tunisia are also the highest ranking African nation, ranked above Sweden even

[EOLAN]

But isn't a lot of the people talking up or pointing out some positives about Sweden; trying to redress the belief that England are on the easy side of the draw and are pretty much guaranteed a semi-final shoot-out with Croatia.

[phantom_power]

But isn't a lot of the people talking up or pointing out some positives about Sweden; trying to redress the belief that England are on the easy side of the draw and are pretty much guaranteed a semi-final shoot-out with Croatia.

Possibly. I don't know. Most people I speak to are pretty realistic that it will be a tough game and are aware of Sweden's progress to get here. I think most people just think it is the easier side of the draw, which it almost certainly is