Jump to content

Match 51 THE FINAL: Italy vs England - 8pm Sunday BBC1 AND ITV1 LIVE FROM WEMBLEY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, profii said:

Wasn't really sure if there is a thread dedicated for this so I post here.

The reaction to the racism, as in people don't want to support it and they want to support the players is probably the biggest I've ever seen.

I'm sure some people think BLM is some political thing and taking the knee is pointless but the last couple of days are evidence to me that society is rejecting racism more and more so that is good to see 

What was more encouraging and somewhat surprising to see was the calling-out of the people who only "support" the kick-it-out movement for appearances or for their own ends only. Seeing people like Mings calling-out Patel and people pointing out that the Prime Minister also has made contradictory statements on the matter.

This would not have happened 12 years ago. So something is really changing. Slowly, but yes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, enigmatic said:

Mancini who produced 7 shots in 120 minutes in a semi final won on pens is "in a league of his own" and Gareth who produces 6 is too passive? Fine margins...

Italy were clinical against Spain in a performance that was average compared with the rest of their tournament (bar Austria), 7 shots with 4 on target is pretty much what we’ve been doing all tournament and it was one of their ‘bad’ performances. They’ve been consistently playing good attacking football alongside a solid defensive structure, so I feel you can forgive them for riding the storm to a final against a good Spain side.

Aside from Denmark and Ukraine, England have relied on a safe approach with clinical finishing to win games. To me it felt as though we eroded any home advantage with our low risk approach in the final. You’re going to naturally go into a shell after an early goal but it’s clearly the case that we became flat, lacked any counter threat and conviction to press. 

Southgate was outclassed on the day, he had a poor game and I don’t have any huge issue with it nor him given the position we’ve ended in. Mancini is simply a better manager whose side deserved the victory on the day. 

The lack of attempts has been my main frustration throughout the tournament, given the attacking talent we have and the teams we have played, producing 8, 9, 5, 5, 10, 20 and 6 attempts across all the games is pretty dire. Granted we have a great, reliable defence and so I get the approach to an extent but he seems so hellbent on the safe approach that it becomes a detriment to the team at times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Baptista_8 said:

Did Italy not produce 6 on target and 9 off target? While we produced 1 on target and 4 off?

And they had 62% possession, on top of that.

Italy vs Spain and England vs Italy. Spot the difference....

image.png.ef82a06461b31a9a2f3c9fbe171df752.png

image.png.ed11c6e60081199a9fa7063eed918730.png

Italy weren't actually defending a lead for very long either.

Either sitting back and giving up a lot of mostly non-threatening shots is perfectly sensible against a packed midfield (my view) in which case surely it's fine for Gareth to do the same, or Mancini isn't a good manager, he's a very lucky boy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I make it 127 attempts for Italy vs. 63 for England across the whole tournament, which is a pretty staggering difference between two finalists and I’d argue we have the better attacking players.

Edited by ArsenalFan7
Link to post
Share on other sites

On a Croatian news portal, there is an article retelling a story in the Daily Mail (I know) that Southgate actually picked the penalty takers based on scores from months' worth of penalty kick training. Saka apparently scored every time. From what I hear of Southgate, it seems this is plausible.

Edited by Bunkerossian
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

On a Croatian news portal, there is an article retelling a story in the Daily Mail (I know) that Southgate actually picked the penalty takers based on scores from months' worth of penalty kick training. Saka apparently scored every time. From what I hear of Southgate, it seems this is plausible.

Telegraph reporting something else.

 

 

Screenshot_20210713-081431_Chrome.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ArsenalFan7 said:

and I’d argue we have the better attacking players.

It's not even arguable, England has a way better attack, especially if we include the benches.

Chiesa and Sterling were on similar level, by far the best attacking players of their teams.

Kane had some nice build-up moments, but goal against Ukraine was the only relevant striker moment he had. Germany was a tap-in when they went all-out attack.
But then we have to wonder why is Kane sitting 40m away from the goal? He surely didn't decide to do so by himself.

If Southgate decided to use Kane as a deep forward, which is ridiculous in the formation he used, why didn't he use Rashford at all then?

Anyhow, Insigne has shown that he's a one-trick pony, did nothing useful in th end except for that goal against Belgium. Immobile is not good. Berardi and Belotti are two hardworking players, decent subs, nothing more. Bernardeschi is useles.

This is honestly  the weakest attack of any team that has won a big tournament for as long as I can remember.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, GunmaN1905 said:

It's not even arguable, England has a way better attack, especially if we include the benches.

Chiesa and Sterling were on similar level, by far the best attacking players of their teams.

Kane had some nice build-up moments, but goal against Ukraine was the only relevant striker moment he had. Germany was a tap-in when they went all-out attack.
But then we have to wonder why is Kane sitting 40m away from the goal? He surely didn't decide to do so by himself.

If Southgate decided to use Kane as a deep forward, which is ridiculous in the formation he used, why didn't he use Rashford at all then?

Anyhow, Insigne has shown that he's a one-trick pony, did nothing useful in th end except for that goal against Belgium. Immobile is not good. Berardi and Belotti are two hardworking players, decent subs, nothing more. Bernardeschi is useles.

This is honestly  the weakest attack of any team that has won a big tournament for as long as I can remember.

I'm not sure Portugal were any better?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

This is honestly  the weakest attack of any team that has won a big tournament for as long as I can remember.

Are we not counting the Spain team that literally played without any strikers?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Crazy_Ivan said:

Screenshot_20210713-081431_Chrome.jpg

It's probably just a journalist making stuff up, but if he's getting briefed this info from a couple of players thats a bit of a ****** thing to do.

Edited by Coulthard's Jaw
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, ArsenalFan7 said:

I make it 127 attempts for Italy vs. 63 for England across the whole tournament, which is a pretty staggering difference between two finalists and I’d argue we have the better attacking players.

And yet when it came to games and moments that were tight as opposed to bombarding weak teams it took a long time to score against in the group stages he did exactly the same as Gareth. I mean, he sat on 1-1 with a possession advantage against an a nervy England, anybody that thinks he (or most managers) wouldn't have relied on their strong defence more than attack if they'd scored in the second minute of a final against a good side is crackers

And who gives a **** about the group stages? I mean, yes Italy were vibrant there unlike their other tournament wins, but surely we're not going back to "it's no accomplishment because we had a bad game against Scotland"? :lol:

We didn't lose by scoring  fewer goals than Italy, we lost because we missed one more penalty.

Edited by enigmatic
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

Are we not counting the Spain team that literally played without any strikers?

When you have Xavi, Iniesta, Fabregas, David Silva, Mata, Cazorla and Jesus Navas in the squad, you don't need strikers. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, EnterUsernameHere said:

I'm not sure Portugal were any better?

Cristiano?

Nani was still good and Quaresma was way more useful than for example Insigne, not to mention any other Italian winger.

10 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

Are we not counting the Spain team that literally played without any strikers?

That one is hard to evaluate, I'll give you that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Marius_R said:

When you have Xavi, Iniesta, Fabregas, David Silva, Mata, Cazorla and Jesus Navas in the squad, you don't need strikers. :D

Casually dropping Jesus Navas in :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Baptista_8 said:

Casually dropping Jesus Navas in :D

Was a decent player coming off the bench for Spain tbf. After all, he is a World Cup and European Championship winner. :ackter:

Edited by Marius_R
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Barry Cartman said:

He's actually been an amazing right back for the past few years in La Liga 

Tbf I was very impressed with him in the Europa final the other year. He's not in the same league as the others mentioned though, and as a winger was fairly one dimensional IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Baptista_8 said:

Tbf I was very impressed with him in the Europa final the other year. He's not in the same league as the others mentioned though, and as a winger was fairly one dimensional IMO.

Don't get me wrong he was **** for City, but he was always a useful player for Spain 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, enigmatic said:

We didn't lose by scoring  fewer goals than Italy, we lost because we missed one more penalty.

obv thats interesting choice of words framing it as having 'lost' as opposed to WIN it. essentially a subconscious recognition of england's approach and even broader insight into england approach/mentality and also as to why pens are a historical issue. 

Had you framed it as didn't win it would be more useful to have a bigger picture approach to being more of winning team/tournament team...southgate's cautious approach essentially was reactive throughout the tournament. instead of an attempt to win with a more proactive controlling possession to 'go and win it' with a higher percentage game as opposed to conceding possession/territory/ground to the opposition england should be trying to WIN by scoring more goals given such a fast start...you could argue by not front foot attempting to score more goals than italy they didn't WIN it therefore were left with situation where it went to penalties and lost it. obv very simplistic corollary is england didn't WIN it by not scoring more goals

By having that reactive approach a team can have a subconscious negative mindset putting them on a backfoot approach which can feed into players subconscious mindset for pens where fear of losing/missing is more of a determining factor than trying to WIN it...all having being infused into their mentality had they been playing throughout the game/tournament to go out and win with a more positive/controlled approach (as oppposed to having possession by default of lesser teams sitting back).

without realising it england traditional approach can be affected by that. as much as british bulldog spirit is a thing in football the domestic game week in week out year in year out isn't that which engenders a dogged approach like say more traditional italian teams to sit in and defend to grind it out

just interesting on your choice of words where you chose 'didn't lose' as opposed to 'didnt win' there

Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, akkm said:

obv thats interesting choice of words framing it as having 'lost' as opposed to WIN it. essentially a subconscious recognition of england's approach and even broader insight into england approach/mentality and also as to why pens are a historical issue. 

Had you framed it as didn't win it would be more useful to have a bigger picture approach to being more of winning team/tournament team...southgate's cautious approach essentially was reactive throughout the tournament. instead of an attempt to win with a more proactive controlling possession to 'go and win it' with a more percentage game as opposed to to conceding possession/territory/ground to the opposition england should be trying to WIN by scoring more goals given such a fast start...you could argue by not front foot attempting to score more goals than italy they didn't WIN it therefore were left with situation where it went to penalties and lost it. obv very simplistic corollary is england didn't WIN it by not scoring more goals

I mean, I'm not framing it as WIN it because we didn't win, and saying "we didn't not win it" is just terrible grammar. There's not much insight you can get into my psyche from that, never mind England players'.

Same applies in reverse. Italy didn't win it by scoring more goals or having more shots across the tournament or by the semantics of winning/losing, they won it by missing one fewer penalty. Two games in a row actually, including the occasion they had considerably less possession and shots than their opponent.

They deservedly got the applause for their stylish wins in the group stages, but they won the tournament by avoiding defeat and playing the percentages against strong teams, not by extra goals scored in early games or missing more shots from distance.

It's pointless to pretend that there is something uniquely wrong with England's approach because it was the one the tournament winners used their last game. Which is a completely normal route to winning a tournament, and one which very nearly worked out for England instead of Italy. 

Edited by enigmatic
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

I mean, I'm not framing it as WIN it because we didn't win, and saying "we didn't not win it" is just terrible grammar. There's not much insight you can get into my psyche from that, never mind England players'.

Same applies in reverse. Italy didn't win it by scoring more goals or having more shots across the tournament or by the semantics of winning/losing, they won it by missing one fewer penalty. Two games in a row actually, including the occasion they had considerably less possession and shots than their opponent.

They deservedly got the applause for their stylish wins in the group stages, but they won the tournament by avoiding defeat and playing the percentages against strong teams, not by extra goals scored in early games or missing more shots from distance.

It's pointless to pretend that there is something uniquely wrong with England's approach because it was the one the tournament winners used their last game. Which is a completely normal route to winning a tournament, and one which very nearly worked out for England instead of Italy. 

tenor.gif

Cmon man, that's embarrassing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

I mean, I'm not framing it as WIN it because we didn't win, and saying "we didn't not win it" is just terrible grammar. There's not much insight you can get into my psyche from that, never mind England players'.

Same applies in reverse. Italy didn't win it by scoring more goals or having more shots across the tournament or by the semantics of winning/losing, they won it by missing one fewer penalty. Two games in a row actually, including the occasion they had considerably less possession and shots than their opponent.

They deservedly got the applause for their stylish wins in the group stages, but they won the tournament by avoiding defeat and playing the percentages against strong teams, not by extra goals scored in early games or missing more shots from distance.

It's pointless to pretend that there is something uniquely wrong with England's approach because it was the one the tournament winners used their last game. Which is a completely normal route to winning a tournament, and one which very nearly worked out for England instead of Italy. 

Yeah just proved the point there lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, akkm said:

obv thats interesting choice of words framing it as having 'lost' as opposed to WIN it. essentially a subconscious recognition of england's approach and even broader insight into england approach/mentality and also as to why pens are a historical issue. 

Had you framed it as didn't win it would be more useful to have a bigger picture approach to being more of winning team/tournament team...southgate's cautious approach essentially was reactive throughout the tournament. instead of an attempt to win with a more proactive controlling possession to 'go and win it' with a higher percentage game as opposed to conceding possession/territory/ground to the opposition england should be trying to WIN by scoring more goals given such a fast start...you could argue by not front foot attempting to score more goals than italy they didn't WIN it therefore were left with situation where it went to penalties and lost it. obv very simplistic corollary is england didn't WIN it by not scoring more goals

By having that reactive approach a team can have a subconscious negative mindset putting them on a backfoot approach which can feed into players subconscious mindset for pens where fear of losing/missing is more of a determining factor than trying to WIN it...all having being infused into their mentality had they been playing throughout the game/tournament to go out and win with a more positive/controlled approach (as oppposed to having possession by default of lesser teams sitting back).

without realising it england traditional approach can be affected by that. as much as british bulldog spirit is a thing in football the domestic game week in week out year in year out isn't that which engenders a dogged approach like say more traditional italian teams to sit in and defend to grind it out

just interesting on your choice of words where you chose 'didn't lose' as opposed to 'didnt win' there

BRUH It's not that deep - Kevin Hart | Meme Generator

Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

tenor.gif

Cmon man, that's embarrassing.

No, what's embarrassing is your insistence that two managers who took their teams from total failure to tournament finals are both too cowardly to succeed...

(Interesting choice of manager for the graphic by the way. Not the man I'd be picking to make the "sitting on a lead never works" argument :lol:)

 

 

9 minutes ago, akkm said:

Yeah just proved the point there lol

lol, you mean you went to all that effort to link bad grammar, pop psychology and a bunch of England players that have never met me and it was just a troll? And I thought I had too much time on my hands :D 

 

Edited by enigmatic
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

(Interesting choice of manager for the graphic by the way. Not the man I'd be picking to make the "sitting on a lead never works" argument :lol:)

First major trophy landed in Rome not even a week after his arrival. :cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, enigmatic said:

No, what's embarrassing is your insistence that two managers who took their teams from total failure to tournament finals are both too cowardly to succeed...

(Interesting choice of manager for the graphic by the way. Not the man I'd be picking to make the "sitting on a lead never works" argument :lol:)

 

 

lol, you mean you went to all that effort to link bad grammar, pop psychology and a bunch of England players that have never met me and it was just a troll? And I thought I had too much time on my hands :D 

 

Yeah even more emphatic proof. It wasn't personal at all. Just an observation...no need for a disproportionate reaction. Plus spending some free time on the golf course with the sun shining so I'll leave u to it. 

Its as I said it is re your subconscious choice of words plus ur small picture acceptance that it was the pen. Of course matter of factly it was in the match but there's so much more to it than that. You either see it or you don't. As for ur defence of mount that reveals a lot in terms of not losing instead of trying to win as well.

Anyway back to the golf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey just fyi don't mean ur personal psyche @enigmatic more that England's style is more geared towards not losing after the many years of underachievement perceived or otherwise england are almost ok with not winning kind of thing

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're... not making any more sense. I said "England didn't lose because..." to rebut this forum's weird fondness for reframing the match (and tournament) as England losing by being taught a lesson in attacking football rather than the actual shootout finale to a team that hasn't conceded a second goal to anyone else in the last five years either, not because I'm obsessed by not losing or have any connection at all with what the England team think.

Enjoy the 19th hole, sounds like you've been there a while :)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

as England losing by being taught a lesson in attacking football

Being 1-0 up after a minute on a full Wembley and not making a single shot until the rest of regular time is the definition of being taught a lesson.

Let's just say that if you copy-pasted this game into club football, any EPL and CL game, with Mourinho in Southgate's place, every single media outlet would still be trashing him for parking the bus.

Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Astafjevs said:

Enigmatic has been a consistent embarrassment with his description of Italy's run. Just ignore it. You'd think we stumbled through the knockouts and won by luck. 

What? I've said you were great in the opening rounds, I've said your tactics against Spain were perfectly justified before and after you won when even some of your own fans were less happy, I've said you did enough to deserve an equaliser our defence made your forwards work hard for, I filled my team of the tournament with Italian players, I just think it's total bollocks to act like Italy (and frankly any other nation) would never stoop to defending without the ball or pretend that only England had any luck. 

Frankly, I think it's far more insulting to the Italian team to insinuate the only reason they equalised and England didn't carve them open was Gareth.

You won a tournament by getting the big moments right. Well done. If we won the shootout all the people lining up to suggest Mancini and your forwards were clueless and cowardly bottlers would also be wrong.

Edited by enigmatic
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Being 1-0 up after a minute on a full Wembley and not making a single shot until the rest of regular time is the definition of being taught a lesson.

Let's just say that if you copy-pasted this game into club football, any EPL and CL game, with Mourinho in Southgate's place, every single media outlet would still be trashing him for parking the bus.

The definition of being taught a lesson in attacking football is getting spanked, not Italy shooting from all angles until they earn an equaliser and then playing it safe (but ironically the two chances they did have in the last 53 minutes were the best open play chances all game, because more gaps at the back). They scored the same number of goals as us. And no, our shots weren't all in extra time, and Italy didn't look vulnerable once we added Grealish and a winger 

Mourinho might get trashed all the time, but he's also won a **** ton of trophies, despite penalty shootout record that's nearly as bad as ours. Pretty sure Gareth wouldn't mind a Mourinho comparison...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Final comment about the penalty takers- no manager in the world is going to select players to take a penalty in a shoot out without having strong evidence from practice that they are capable and ready for such a task and is sure that they will score.

The problem is that players who can have a high % success rate in training when there is no pressure, but the match situation and pressure cannot be replicated in training, so nobody really knows how the player will react.

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, FrazT said:

The problem is that players who can have a high % success rate in training when there is no pressure, but the match situation and pressure cannot be replicated in training, so nobody really knows how the player will react.

Not to belabour the point too much, but that's known to the manager as well, which makes it all the more surprising that he would still turn to someone who's never been under even a remotely similar amount of pressure to take the decisive pen when there are seasoned professionals available who've at least taken penalties at the club level.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Amazing Dale Watkins said:

Not to belabour the point too much, but that's known to the manager as well, which makes it all the more surprising that he would still turn to someone who's never been under even a remotely similar amount of pressure to take the decisive pen when there are seasoned professionals available who've at least taken penalties at the club level.

I don't dispute this at all and the decision is certainly open to question.  All that I am saying is that the decision will not have ben made randomly and all factors from the training field and coach input would have been taken into account before arriving at the players and their order.  No manager or coach is going to chose a player for a task and think that he cant perform that task.

Out of curiosity- how many penalties has McGuire taken in his career?  His was without doubt the best one but I don't recall him as a regular taker.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FrazT said:

I don't dispute this at all and the decision is certainly open to question.  All that I am saying is that the decision will not have ben made randomly and all factors from the training field and coach input would have been taken into account before arriving at the players and their order.  No manager or coach is going to chose a player for a task and think that he cant perform that task.

Out of curiosity- how many penalties has McGuire taken in his career?  His was without doubt the best one but I don't recall him as a regular taker.

Is that Maguire's Scottish cousin Hamish who's still celebrating their famous 0-0 thrashing of us?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FrazT said:

Out of curiosity- how many penalties has McGuire taken in his career?  His was without doubt the best one but I don't recall him as a regular taker.

Maguire had taken fewer than ten pens before Sunday night iirc.

There was a tweet the other day listing the penalty record of the England side, player by player, and it was notable how few experienced penalty takers there were.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The_jagster said:

It's because they were all so young, fearless and unburdened by previous failure. 

I guess it's only right then that another generation of young England players have a penalty loss on their rap sheet. 

It's the England way after all.

Edited by craigcwwe
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, m_fenton said:

Is that Maguire's Scottish cousin Hamish who's still celebrating their famous 0-0 thrashing of us?

Must also be related to 'Steven McDonald' who supposedly forced a world class save by Pickford in the same game according to Matterface,

 

We will take no lessons on ignorance from you lot :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The_jagster said:

It's because they were all so young, fearless and unburdened by previous failure. 

considering Maguire is generally somebody Twitter has a go at (or he's the butt of a joke) for the PL, I think a lot of people respected the fact that he had the balls to take a pen and took it really well :thup: I know Southgate said he picked the players on some sort of criteria of the players taking pens but you still have to put it away

although I expect it will be back to normal when he makes a mistake for Man Utd :D

Edited by TM
Link to post
Share on other sites

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...