Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Sign in to follow this  
Haguey

Which team goes furthest, England or Belgium?

Who goes furthest?  

40 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Who goes furthest?


  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 02/07/18 at 17:30

Recommended Posts

After England and Sir Gareth's brave boys solid 0-1 defeat against Belgium giving us a tougher round 2 match, but potentially easier half, who do you think will go furthest?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon Mexico will knock Brazil out and its a moot point anyway 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you can see why martinez couldnt cut it in england. he dosent have the smarts like our big gaz s' does

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the outrageous predictions I said Belgium winners and England 3rd. Still feel the same way, although I chose my poll answer before seeing all options haha. 

I say outrageous predictions but they are genuine ones, I wasn't just saying stuff for the sake of it :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Belgium will crumble against the first decent side they'll face.

England have the semis booked already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Belgium have the 'easier' R16 game so it would be a big shock if Japan knocked them out so then it's Belgium vs Brazil/Mexico in the quarters. Brazil is the most likely here and that's a close, close match. Could go either way. 

England have the tougher R16 game but then the more favourable Quarter Final match. England really should be making the Semi Finals now. 

So yeah, England. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beating Brazil could be the 'statement game' that this Belgium team needs to catapult to winning something

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Columbia are not an easy game but James injured gives England a boost. Belgium can’t lose this round but have a horrific quarter final game whereas England have the easiest possible QF. Most likely England lose in semis and Belgium lose in quarters but it’s possible England lose next round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

England will easily beat Sweden whle Belgium stands no chance against Brazil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Gorando said:

England will easily beat Sweden whle Belgium stands no chance against Brazil.

What I'd give for an easy win ala Denmark in 2002 WC! It's gonna be tough though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gorando said:

England will easily beat Sweden whle Belgium stands no chance against Brazil.

I think Brazil will win too, but let's not take it for granted, crazier things than Belgium beating Brazil happened in this WC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously England now.

Januzaj should win Player of the Tournament for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Citizen Kane said:

We won't easily beat anyone unless Panama fancy another game

At this stage I doubt anyone will beat anyone 'easily'.

Look at all the last 16 matches, it's tense out there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Razzler said:

At this stage I doubt anyone will beat anyone 'easily'.

Look at all the last 16 matches, it's tense out there

There is potential for some real hammerings though. I doubt it will happen, but it wouldn't be hard to see Brazil smash Belgium, Uruguay exploit France or Russia take a tanking. It's not like they're a good team, Russia, they were just up against am abysmal Spain team who showed no intent. Uruguay showed how easily Russia could be beaten. Croatia have the potential to absolutely batter them, but I don't think they will. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or you might be Irish. How far did they get in this World Cup?

Had a chance to qualify and then lost 5-1 to ****ing Denmark in the playoff. 5-1!!

Edited by av3ry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, av3ry said:

How far did Scotland get in this World Cup?

About as far as we expected to. Even though we're *****, I'd still back us to score more than twice from open play in six matches against Tunisia, Panama, Belgium, Colombia, Sweden, and Croatia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cedrik said:

Thank god Ireland and Scotland did not participate in this tournament.

Agreed. Two of the worst teams to watch in world football. Especially Ireland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. I actually genuinely really like both countries, had a lot of fun in Glasgow a couple of months back, but their football is genuinely ****. A bit comparable to what Sweden offered us this WC, and that hurt my eyes tbh. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Boltman said:

Agreed. Two of the worst teams to watch in world football. Especially Ireland.

Aye, bad enough watching England’s set piece hoof ball. No need for more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cedrik said:

Exactly. I actually genuinely really like both countries, had a lot of fun in Glasgow a couple of months back, but their football is genuinely ****. A bit comparable to what Sweden offered us this WC, and that hurt my eyes tbh. 

True but England are up there as well. They were so terrible to watch this tournament. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoof ball :D Thanks for making it absolutely clear you watched very little of England, of the criticisms you can level at England this tournament hoof ball is definitely not one of them. Don't turn the bitterness into lies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, EnterUsernameHere said:

True but England are up there as well. They were so terrible to watch this tournament. 

I am holding back since I know there are a lot of English folks here. I'm actually afraid to be straight forward about my opinion :D. England did well making it to the semi final :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Cedrik said:

I am holding back since I know there are a lot of English folks here. I'm actually afraid to be straight forward about my opinion :D. England did well making it to the semi final :).

Being honest is part of the fun...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Marc Albrighton said:

Hoof ball :D Thanks for making it absolutely clear you watched very little of England, of the criticisms you can level at England this tournament hoof ball is definitely not one of them. Don't turn the bitterness into lies.

Brutally succinct quote from Šime Vrsaljko "The all-round perception was that this is a new-look England who have changed their ways of punting long balls upfield but when we pressed them it turned out that they haven't. "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't have a midfield to speak of, and while they're not 'punting' it in the classic sense of the word, if you don't have anybody in midfield who wants to play behind the ball (besides Henderson), or anyone who can put their foot on it, slow the play down, and create from deeper positions, you are, for all intents and purposes, reduced to playing a form of hoof-ball simply because of the fact your players are really only comfortable receiving it further up the pitch, and therefore spend the match loitering about up there. Again, England don't 'punt' it, but the midfield is non-existent. There's often a massive gap, like, huge acres of nothing, between the CB with the ball and Ali, Lingard, or Sterling, so they're playing long passes through that space rather than to someone sitting in it.

Edited by Boltman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, EnterUsernameHere said:

True but England are up there as well. They were so terrible to watch this tournament. 

 

22 minutes ago, Cedrik said:

I am holding back since I know there are a lot of English folks here. I'm actually afraid to be straight forward about my opinion :D. England did well making it to the semi final :).

Which teams were not terrible to watch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, PMLF said:

 

Which teams were not terrible to watch?

Quite a few had at least a few good games. England didn't really - tonight was good in the sense a semi final is always interesting, Colombia was interesting because of non-footballing things. Every other England game was dreadful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PMLF said:

 

Which teams were not terrible to watch?

Peru, even though their pretty football had no cutting edge and no end product. 

Uruguay, criticised for being too defensive and sterile, but they do actually attempt to attack when they finally do have the ball. They're nothing like as tedious or regressive as Portugal, who do something similar, but without any of the forward impetus in possession.

Bizarrely enough, I thought Germany were ok to watch if you discount their total ineptitude in the penalty box, but they still play nice football up to that point.

The Croatian midfield is good to watch, but not so much the rest of the side.

Japan, for their energy and speed of transition.

Belgium, when they're 'on' it's great, it just doesn't happen often enough.

Yeah, it's not been a great World Cup, so I suppose it's natural it hasn't featured many watchable teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EnterUsernameHere said:

Being honest is part of the fun...

Okay, since you're asking ..

I think England has been laughable this whole tournament. They would have been ****ed by for example , France, Brazil or Belgium. Their football has been painful to watch, they've been lucky against Tunisia,  did well against Panama , but something tells me that if James was there they would have lost against Colombia. Tonight again utterly lucky by the free-kick by Trippier, that perhaps makes it all seem a lot. Footballing wise though, my god so much overestimation.  The current England squad is likeable, but bang average quality-wise. And English people seem to think that Pickford is really good, or Trippier, or Kane, no mate, no. All really, really, average. Only player that I think was good on English side was probably RLC in the minutes he got. But I doubt he will get a lot of time at Chelsea coming season.  

And I am not hateful against England at all as a country, love visiting, lovely country, good people. But when it comes to football people seem to have their heads in the clouds. 

Edited by Cedrik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Cedrik said:

Okay, since you're asking ..

I think England has been laughable this whole tournament. They would have been ****ed by for example , France, Brazil or Belgium. Their football has been painful to watch, they've been lucky against Tunisia,  did well against Panama , but something tells me that if James was there they would have lost against Colombia. Tonight again utterly lucky by the free-kick by Trippier, that perhaps makes it all seem a lot. Footballing wise though, my god so much overestimation.  The current England squad is likeable, but bang average quality-wise. And English people seem to think that Pickford is really good, or Trippier, or Kane, no mate, no. All really, really, average. Only player that I think was good on English side was probably RLC in the minutes he got. But I doubt he will get a lot of time at Chelsea coming season.  

And I am not hateful against England at all as a country, love visiting, lovely country, good people. But when it comes to football people seem to have their heads in the clouds. 

Good post. Hopefully you won't get attacked for it - think it's just people from elsewhere in the UK who would :D

I think a Pickford and Trippier were good though. Good being the key word, not much more than that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can people stop with the utter bollocks that England would have lost to Colombia if James had come on? He's a world class player but he wasn't fit all tournament. He looked good in one game against a Poland side who were right up there as one of the worst sides in the tournament. He wouldn't have even kept up with play let alone being a game changer. 

Revisionist nonsense 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

England have a lot of really average players? 

Have a word with yourself @Cedrik

I'm not English, don't have any affinity towards the nation or its team. But to say they don't have a single top quality player in a pool containing Harry Kane (had a poor tournament tho imo, despite probably winning the Golden Boot), and RAHEEM THE DREAM is stupid. Not to mention that Lingard, Alli, Stones, Walker and Trippier are all better than "average". 

You're right in that they don't really have any world class players - only Kane (for club) is arguable but to say they're all just really average :DWhat are you smoking? 

I'm watching the game tonight just now. Going forward England really need to add in another central midfielder to support Henderson. All the long balls are daft. Delph or RLC linking the defence and attack would've been better for England. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Can people stop with the utter bollocks that England would have lost to Colombia if James had come on? He wasn't fit all tournament. He looked good in one game against a Poland side who were right up there as one of the worst sides in the tournament. He wouldn't have even kept up with play let alone being a game changer. 

Revisionist nonsense 

Also weren't Colombia absolutely terrible and only scored their goal because England basically thought it was game over and failed to mark the final setpiece of the 90?

Let's not make out like Colombia are some superpower of World Football. They're not even in the T3 South American teams, historically or recently. 

E: Brazil, Argentina, Peru, Uruguay and even bloody Chile who failed to qualify are all above Colombia in the world rankings :lol:

Edited by JDownie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JDownie said:

Also weren't Colombia absolutely terrible and only scored their goal because England basically thought it was game over and failed to mark the final setpiece of the 90?

Let's not make out like Colombia are some superpower of World Football. They're not even in the T3 South American teams, historically or recently. 

Yep. I'd argue they could have played better football if they hadn't decided to spend most of the game being shithouses. But they were not good. 

England should have comfortably out Tunisia away too, poor finishing let them down. And the less sad about Sweden the better really. 

What did England tonight was less the big moments like Kane's miss, and more the general things we'd warned about: they would need to drop one of Alli or Lingard to create more of a midfield, with Delph or RLC coming in, and Kane would nees better movement to help Sterling. Henderson had far too much to do. We bascially had two up top doing nothing because they couldn't get service. We didn't adapt well at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

England should recall Zaha to the team btw. He is better at executing the role Sterling has been asked to do. That's what Zaha does at Palace and has had a great season. 

Just an option off the bench innit. Don't think he'd start but can't be any worse than Rashford or Vardy have been for England at the WC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been joking with England all the time, but lets start to be realistic. I think you have done really well. England has one of the youngest teams in the WC, only just to be beaten by Croatia who have players at all the best competitions in the world. You may get there in 2020 or 2022 or at least reaching semi's again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, JDownie said:

England should recall Zaha to the team btw. He is better at executing the role Sterling has been asked to do. That's what Zaha does at Palace and has had a great season. 

Just an option off the bench innit. Don't think he'd start but can't be any worse than Rashford or Vardy have been for England at the WC. 

Zaha has declared for the Ivory Coast. Partly because of the abuse he got. Partly because England picked and then completely discarded him for several years 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Zaha has declared for the Ivory Coast. Partly because of the abuse he got. Partly because England picked and then completely discarded him for several years 

Oh fair enough, had absolutely no idea!

I just remember hearing the commentators during the Sweden England game mentioning Zaha being in the England squad previously, and then watching Sterling again tonight it made me think. It seems like a really obvious comparison now but hadn't thought about it like that before. 

Not that it matters if he's playing for Ivory Coast :D

Share this post


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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×