Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

IF YOU CAN'T SIGN IN, CLEAR COOKIES FROM YOUR BROWSER CACHE

If you aren't sure how to do that, see this thread: whu606.com/discussion/7162/why-am-i-having-trouble-signing-in

If you still can't log in, email whu***@gmail.com (where *** is replaced by numbers I am sure you can work out.) giving the name of the browser and whether you are on PC or mobile device.
Categories +
Table +
PhysioRoom +

So, how does this World Cup England team compare to teams gone by?

Split from the 'World Cup (but not England)' thread.
«1

Comments

  • My thoughts exactly, Wombat. But I am enjoying this World Cup and I can't remember any tournament I enjoyed this much since 96.
    deehammer
  • My thoughts exactly, Wombat. But I am enjoying this World Cup and I can't remember any tournament I enjoyed this much since 96.

    This is better
  • Thus far we played better in Euro 96 against better sides IMO.

    But this has the potential to eclipse that

    Slaven_Cups_His_BeardBazBuena
  • Thus far we played better in Euro 96 against better sides IMO.

    But this has the potential to eclipse that

    We have scored more goals this time?
  • Thus far we played better in Euro 96 against better sides IMO.

    But this has the potential to eclipse that

    Also is that Belgium game resting players?
  • imagelost said:

    Thus far we played better in Euro 96 against better sides IMO.

    But this has the potential to eclipse that

    We have scored more goals this time?
    Against Panama and Tunisia though? ;hmm
  • Obviously, people will give a subjective opinion about which they prefer, but you aren't comparing like with like. This WC we have VAR, which has resulted in many more penalties than is normal. Players are playing under different 'rules' if you like - there's Goal Line Technology also.

    imagelost
  • MrsGrey said:

    Obviously, people will give a subjective opinion about which they prefer, but you aren't comparing like with like. This WC we have VAR, which has resulted in many more penalties than is normal. Players are playing under different 'rules' if you like - there's Goal Line Technology also.

    Indeed
    We have been 1 nil against Brazil and seamen gets loobed
    Back ham sent off
    Rooney sent off
    Fat franks disappointed goal
  • imagelost said:

    Thus far we played better in Euro 96 against better sides IMO.

    But this has the potential to eclipse that

    We have scored more goals this time?
    Against Panama and Tunisia though? ;hmm
    If we win the World Cup, next your be saying” but it was easy route “
  • ... or indeed, if we lose? ;wink
    imagelost
  • Can't have that kind of language on here MrsG, you should know better. ;wink
    MrsGreyimagelostKuchinghammer
  • I don’t know th teams we played in 66... Apart from the final...

    Sweden finished top of a group with with Germany and Mexico and knocked Italy and Holland out in qualifying...

    No doubt the Belgium loss has made things easier but the performance yesterday was excellent....
  • edited July 8

    I don’t know the teams we played in 66....

    It was boycotted by all the African nations, so none of them, for a start.

    It was more of a 'Some of the World' Cup. ;wink

    #justthefactsma'am
  • But we did donk Portugal who had Eusabio playing, so there ;wink
    MrsGrey
  • We also beat Argentina in the quarters. They were a bit dirty and Sir Alf called them animals.
    imagelost
  • And we beat Argentina in the quarters and France and Mexico in the group
    imagelost
  • edited July 8
    Most of you are dissing this England team, and trying compare to 20 0dd years ago
    Differently
    The dentist chair do me a favour
    MunichHammer
  • edited July 8
    I haven't read anybody 'dissing' the team?
    BazBuena
  • Thus far we played better in Euro 96 against better sides IMO.

    But this has the potential to eclipse that

  • MrsGrey said:

    I don’t know the teams we played in 66....

    It was boycotted by all the African nations, so none of them, for a start.

    It was more of a 'Some of the World' Cup. ;wink

    #justthefactsma'am
    So in this case England can not be called World Cup holders ,
  • You can only beat who is in front of you. If we had beaten Belgium and then gone out to Japan the team would have been called a failure. I certainly know what I prefer.

    Germany got an easy route to the final in 2002. Today, people only remember Kahn's howler in the final. How they got there is forgotten.

    If 2018 ends with a second star nobody will care whether we beat Panama, Tunisia and Sweden. We lifted the trophy and that's what counts
    imagelostwhupathmanIronHerbBubblesNeverDiesPrestonHammerchicagohammerHammerwombatVorselaarhammer
  • ;clap
    Munich
  • imagelost said:

    Thus far we played better in Euro 96 against better sides IMO.

    But this has the potential to eclipse that

    So, what - you are saying that baracks' opinion that the 1996 team played better, and against better teams, so far) is 'DISSING' this team?

    Depends how you define 'dissing' I suppose.

    I don't interpret it that way, personally.

    Especially when taken in context with the last bit - 'this has the potential to eclipse that'.

    But, you know, each to their own.
    BazBuenaSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
  • In '96 we also played 3 at the back with Venables. The highlight was the win over Holland. We did have some cracking players in the team and, without bias, if we'd have got past Germany to get to the final, nobody would've really been serious if they said we hadnt deserved to get through. The Czechs in the final were a weaker team and heavily suspended too. It was a real missed opportunity to win the Euros for the first time.

    The country was definitely in massive feel good mode and, for those of us who remember, its certainly draws comparisons with the current excitement over the tournament (from what I can see in news, fan clips etc on you tube)

    Our current team is as bonded/together as I have ever seen/known. That alone endears them to me. Whoever wins the World Cup will have deserved it.

    If we win it, then it could be seen as Leicester like in surprise as nobody would have seriously expected us to even get close to a final (but not with the Leicester ugliness lol) and, football wise, I'd most likely die a happy man
    Slaven_Cups_His_Beard
  • I make Barracks right, the actual football we played in 96 was better and against better quality opponents

    That being said i think it’s been absolutely fabulous what Southgate has achieved with this squad. He’s mainly played players on form rather than reputation and he’s developed a style they seem comfortable, plus mentally they look strong and are playing for each other, no ego’s

    Sterling is an easy target and his finishing and decision making can be lacking at times but he makes some excellent runs, also Henderson has been massive in this World Cup holding it all together and we’ve been pretty disciplined as well

    They’ve already over achieved in my book and given themselves a great chance

    ;scarveng
    Cuz1
  • edited July 9
    All I know is that I was to young to remember 1966, my whole life has therefore been bereft of a major international trophy.

    I am actually traveling to Spain on Thursday to spend a few days with a bunch of guys who all grew up together, (twelve sixty ish year old blokes in a villa, what could possibly go wrong) we will certainly be watching the final and if it means that we are all together in a bar and we end up winning this thing - I will indeed die a happy man.

    Incidentally we were all at the same villa in Spain when Spain won the cup in 2010, the town we were in went absolutely bonkers - it was quite a night
  • Slav, have said on here I don’t rate Henderson but have to echo your sentiments ref this World Cup, five down two to go
  • I think in 96 we played more open football and had some very memorable games beating Scotland with Gazza's goal smashing Holland 4-1 beating Spain on penalties with Pearce scoring after missing in the world cup shoot out. Other than the Columbia game penalties most matches so far have been fairly unmemorable. I think the teams are v different Southgates team has no one central figure a Gazza/Beckham on which the media focuses on its more a team effort with hard work. I don't think you can compare one team directly with another as the circumstances for each team are different they are both great in their own way
  • But we only beat Holland in 1996, no mean feat I know. We drew with Switzerland, beat Scotland and were fortunate to get past Spain, I think they had a goal ruled out incorrectly for offside (?) and lost to Germany. Don't get me wrong I loved it too and was bitterly disappointed when we went out but only the Holland game really stood out. We did have the likes of Gascoigne, Shearer, Adams and Seaman but we now have a young team with only Kane as an out and out superstar.
  • I think the main difference is in 1996 it was being played in England, to me beating Scotland stood out and seeing Pearce score that penalty against Spain left a lasting impression , I like this current England team as its been just about the football and the team no wags/dentist chairs etc
Sign In or Register to comment.