Croatia vs England

England did ok considering the way their path to the semis opened up for them. They are ranked 12th in the world. They beat the 16th, 21st, 24th and 55th ranked teams.....they lost to the 3rd and 20th ranked.

They aren't great, don't score many from open play and have limited quality in the middle of the park.
What they do have however, is camaraderie, a great team spirit and a manager who is intelligent, diligent and who the players 100% believe in and respect/like.....and that's really good for England
 
Serious question for the "Croatia's equaliser was a foul" posters - why wasn't it at the very least referred by the VAR for the on-field ref to have a second look?

Could it be they had the benefit of replays from several angles and concluded that Walker's head was down and it was a legitimate goal?

The ref had an absolutely terrible game last night. But not for the reasons being made out here.
 
Peter_OHanrahahanrahan said:
Serious question for the "Croatia's equaliser was a foul" posters - why wasn't it at the very least referred by the VAR for the on-field ref to have a second look?

Could it be they had the benefit of replays from several angles and concluded that Walker's head was down and it was a legitimate goal?

The ref had an absolutely terrible game last night. But not for the reasons being made out here.
Click to expand...
Same could be said about the 2 penalties shout Kane should have had reviewed against Tunisia, same for Messi penalty against Nigeria I think. It's also barely been used in the knockout games, which is strange considering how often it was during group stage
 
England were as they have been on many occasions outfought, outplayed (technically and tactically) by a much more driven and motivated team. Southgates determination to play and pander to sterling proved his undoing, the boy offered nothing and you could visibly see him shrink after every move that broke down with him. (Not to mention the chances he fluffed in previous games)

Dele Ali was largely a passenger in a midfield that lacked any real creativity, the Croatian press pretty much had England lumping aimless high balls for most of the second half. Like Murty Southgate was far too slow to make changes and his naive tactical approach was brutally exposed by a very savvy Croatian coach and team.

England will learn from this and perhaps the coach and players will wake up this morning bemoaning the enormity of the opportunity they just passed up. The Croatians on the other hand just wanted it more, their natural pride and adversity of their recent history had them looking superhuman at times. England on the other hand looked out on their feet and bereft of any real idea of how to break the Croatians down.

Once the Croatians equalised there was going to be only one winner, they pressed harder and protected the space in behind. Had England gone two up the Croatians would have had to come out at which point England’s pace could have been decisive.
 
BeakerB said:
You are talking crap mate,you had to live in Scotland to get a vote! Christ if you were a Scot living in England you couldn’t vote! You are either fishing or someone’s telling you porkies?
Click to expand...

Bill the Butcher said:
Which overseas postal vote was that?
Click to expand...

The Armed Forces and Crown personnel.

Kilwinnin Bluenose said:
Scottish Nationalists lying? Never! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

What have i lied about?

Any expats (around 40,000 eligible to vote out of 5 million which in all likely will change to allow all to vote in national affairs) and the nearly the 620,000 that lived in the rest of the U.K were not allowed to vote (which contradicted U.K policy of the time to encourage British expats to vote) but the nearly 684,000 non Scots living in Scotland were. Unheard of in British politics, unheard of in the rest of the world concerning expats voting rights.

But those Scots registered to vote in Scotland regardless of where they live are still able to vote in Scottish parliamentary elections just not the independent vote. This is opposite to what happened in the U.K independence vote where Brits living outside the U.K where as normal allowed to vote. Like i said i will accept any vote if it is fair. This is not fair and to say otherwise is completely dishonest.

British Unionists being ignorant of the facts, Never :rolleyes:
 
sifter said:
Same could be said about the 2 penalties shout Kane should have had reviewed against Tunisia, same for Messi penalty against Nigeria I think. It's also barely been used in the knockout games, which is strange considering how often it was during group stage
Click to expand...

It is used to review EVERY goal mate. The video referee obviously looked at it and deemed no foul, which is fair enough. Had it been against Rangers I'd certainly have shouted for it - but, in truth, I wouldn't have expected the referee to disallow the goal.
 
Foolback said:
The Armed Forces and Crown personnel.



What have i lied about?

Any expats (around 40,000 eligible to vote out of 5 million which in all likely will change to allow all to vote in national affairs) and the nearly the 620,000 that lived in the rest of the U.K were not allowed to vote (which contradicted U.K policy of the time to encourage British expats to vote) but the nearly 684,000 non Scots living in Scotland were. Unheard of in British politics, unheard of in the rest of the world concerning expats voting rights.

But those Scots registered to vote in Scotland regardless of where they live are still able to vote in Scottish parliamentary elections just not the independent vote. This is opposite to what happened in the U.K independence vote where Brits living outside the U.K where as normal allowed to vote. Like i said i will accept any vote if it is fair. This is not fair and to say otherwise is completely dishonest.

British Unionists being ignorant of the facts, Never :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Who to say that all the 620,000 would have voted Yes?? That is what you are implying.
 
cambie gers said:
Who to say that all the 620,000 would have voted Yes?? That is what you are implying.
Click to expand...

No that's not what i was implying. Just as i am not implying the non Scots in Scotland would have voted yes, The point here is this was a stacked election for what every reason, of that there is absolutely no debate and to to argue the contrary is intellectually dishonest. As Denis Healey once candidly admitted “World events do not occur by accident. They are made to happen, whether it is to do with national issues or commerce; and most of them are staged and managed by those who hold the purse strings.”
 
Foolback said:
No that's not what i was implying. Just as i am not implying the non Scots in Scotland would have voted yes, The point here is this was a stacked election for what every reason, of that there is absolutely no debate and to to argue the contrary is intellectually dishonest. As Denis Healey once candidly admitted “World events do not occur by accident. They are made to happen, whether it is to do with national issues or commerce; and most of them are staged and managed by those who hold the purse strings.”
Click to expand...

BAN this clown this is a football forum ffs
 
Foolback said:
The Armed Forces and Crown personnel.



What have i lied about?

Any expats (around 40,000 eligible to vote out of 5 million which in all likely will change to allow all to vote in national affairs) and the nearly the 620,000 that lived in the rest of the U.K were not allowed to vote (which contradicted U.K policy of the time to encourage British expats to vote) but the nearly 684,000 non Scots living in Scotland were. Unheard of in British politics, unheard of in the rest of the world concerning expats voting rights.

But those Scots registered to vote in Scotland regardless of where they live are still able to vote in Scottish parliamentary elections just not the independent vote. This is opposite to what happened in the U.K independence vote where Brits living outside the U.K where as normal allowed to vote. Like i said i will accept any vote if it is fair. This is not fair and to say otherwise is completely dishonest.

British Unionists being ignorant of the facts, Never :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


620,000 scots living elsewhere in the UK should they have been given a vote would have made the result all the more embarrassing for the Yes campaign. It would be overwhelmingly against independence.

Anyway, this has %^*& all to do with Croatia v England ya tadger
 
YoungGer97 said:
620,000 scots living elsewhere in the UK should they have been given a vote would have made the result all the more embarrassing for the Yes campaign. It would be overwhelmingly against independence.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately we will never know because it was a stacked election.
 
YoungGer97 said:
620,000 scots living elsewhere in the UK should they have been given a vote would have made the result all the more embarrassing for the Yes campaign. It would be overwhelmingly against independence.

Anyway, this has %^*& all to do with Croatia v England ya tadger
Click to expand...

100% agreed ya tadger, disgraceful that certain individuals brought it up. Not surprising people with opposing views responded to them.
 
Foolback said:
No that's not what i was implying. Just as i am not implying the non Scots in Scotland would have voted yes, The point here is this was a stacked election for what every reason, of that there is absolutely no debate and to to argue the contrary is intellectually dishonest. As Denis Healey once candidly admitted “World events do not occur by accident. They are made to happen, whether it is to do with national issues or commerce; and most of them are staged and managed by those who hold the purse strings.”
Click to expand...

The franchise and the wording of the question was selected by the Scottish Government. It was stacked yes. In favour of the losing side.

"In January 2012, Elaine Murray MSP of Labour led a debate arguing that the franchise should be extended to Scots living outside Scotland, including the approximately 800,000 living in the other parts of the UK.[38] This was opposed by the Scottish Government, which argued that it would greatly increase the complexity of the referendum and stated that there was evidence from the United Nations Human Rights Committee that other nations "might question the legitimacy of a referendum if the franchise is not territorial"

Unsure what this has to do with the game last night however....
 
Foolback said:
Not allowing Scots to vote and allowing non Scots to vote in Scotlands future was stacked in the Yes side, that seems logical!
Click to expand...

Given the Scottish government argued for the franchise to be territorial based as opposed to nationality based, then yes completely logical. You think they would have argued the case had the opposite been seen as beneficial to their cause? *FACEPALM*
 
steve1873 said:
The franchise and the wording of the question was selected by the Scottish Government. It was stacked yes. In favour of the losing side.

"In January 2012, Elaine Murray MSP of Labour led a debate arguing that the franchise should be extended to Scots living outside Scotland, including the approximately 800,000 living in the other parts of the UK.[38] This was opposed by the Scottish Government, which argued that it would greatly increase the complexity of the referendum and stated that there was evidence from the United Nations Human Rights Committee that other nations "might question the legitimacy of a referendum if the franchise is not territorial"

Unsure what this has to do with the game last night however....
Click to expand...

Of course they are those that have different opinions to the pros and cons of the implementation. That is why i do not or ever have supported any political party. Form my point of view in any independence vote anywhere in the world it should be conducted by the nationals of the said country not non nationals. It has nothing to do with any other country or organization. The SNP and British Government both had vested interests concerning their favoured outcome, it has nothing to do to what was best for the Scottish people. Point being the expat Brits had a vote on Independence from Europe but the Europeans got no vote even though it effects them. It was a stacked election regardless of the reasons.

I am with you what has it got to to with last nights match. Why would anyone bring politics into it but they did. Those with a different viewpoint quite rightly responded.
 
MCMLXXXI said:
You're clutching at straws mate, not a chance that goal should be ruled out & I was born in England and obviously wanted them to win.

They only have themselves to blame, they had a couple of good chances to put the game to bed at 1-0, didn't take them & paid the price.

That said they've had a good run & exceeded expectations.
Click to expand...
They had the chances to kill the game but if that’s not dangerous play, nothing is, so you would be as well as scrap the rule.
 
England have always struggled to beat elite international teams - stretching back to 1990 they've been knocked out by Germany, Italy, Portugal and Brazil and failed to get out of a World Cup group with Uruguay and Italy. All that happened this World Cup is that they played that elite team later on than they usually do and when they did they got beat. For all the chat about progress they've not actually came on at all.
 
Superrangers said:
They had the chances to kill the game but if that’s not dangerous play, nothing is, so you would be as well as scrap the rule.
Click to expand...

It may well be technically but the reality is it will never get given - a bit like the 6 second rule for the keeper. TBH I don’t even think it is dangerous play but that’s just my opinion. He’s not really endangering his opponent so don’t see how it could be given.

Croatia just about deserved to win, England got punished for not taking their chances.
 
mart22 said:
The world cup is a contest where the best 32 football nations in the world qualified to take part. England reached the semi final. The last 4 out of 32 teams. You can try to do down their achievement with tribal, ill informed snipes at nations they played to get there. But such comments are only made by angry, jealous, bitter Scots incapable of recognising the hard work and skill of our brilliant neighbours. England earned respect and admiration in this world cup. Not from people of your mindset, but that's because you are all anti English, rather than giving any kind of fair assessment of England's performance.
Click to expand...
That was a fair assessment that i gave as far as i'm concerned and just for your information i live in the North West of England, have done 35 years, have family that are English and plenty of friends that are English and i can fully recognise the hard work that the manager and staff have put in getting to the world cup but nothing changes the fact that they have been, once again, overhyped and make no mistake the majority of English were caught up in all this coming home nonsense without realising that they had neither played nor beaten any of the truly strong and fancied nations, that is the fact of the matter, no matter how you and others try to play it.

Not a chance am i anti-English just realistic about them.
 
Last edited:
I've got quite a lot of hours under my belt watching teams that are young and inexperienced, are underdogs, don't carry a burden of expectation, but are well coached and sometimes do better than expected.

I doubt England fans will appreciate me comparing their national side to Hamilton Accies, but the cap fits. What happens to teams like that is they often lack resilience, such as coming back after losing a goal, and they typically fall before the final hurdle.

My overall assessment is that's what happened to England. They could have beaten Croatia, and with a 1-0 lead for over an hour they probably should have. But their inexperience showed when it mattered - as in the Colombia game (and to an extent, the Tunisia game) they didn't react well to conceding. They needed one or two strong leaders on the park, and when the chips were down, they didn't have them.
 
Living down in Gatehead and taking a lot of good natured banter (I just say One Day Cricket is Scotland's national sport),I am very surprised that this England team seem to be exempt from criticism. If you look at it they had a very easy run to the SF, not their fault, granted, but even when they played Belgium it only showed that the Belgian fringe players were better than their fringe players. Beating Tunisia with an injury time goal & gubbing the worst team in the competition would normally have had the English media questioning Southgate's tactics. But not this time!! McLaren & Hodgson must be feeling a wee bit hard done by. As it happens, I actually said to a couple of guys in work that all it would take to expose their 3 at the back would be some clever forwards in the box as Walker is a full back & never a central defender & Stones falls asleep at least once a game ( thought the Colombian's would have done it but their main man was injured).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top