Christ Almighty.

Without Kane, Lingard, Henderson, Trippier etc I’d be worried about Japan. 

Id be worried anyway, it’s the World Cup, anything can happen, and well... it’s England.

Iceland seemed like an ideal last 16 tie last tournament.

Or the last minute winner against Tunisia after playing well... what a yawn-fest.

Look, we didn’t lose on purpose.

We rested our most important players to give us a chance in the next game.

I’m starting to think that some of these that are giving Southgate grief about the fact Colombia won their group would be the first to give him pelters if Kane had done his hamstring or Henderson got a red in a match we didn’t need to win.

It really is The Impossible Job isn’t it?

12 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

But Southgate rested players to give us an easier quarter final in order to get to the semi final. If he had played our strongest side last night we would have had a much better chance at beating a weakened Belgium team, which would have meant we would've topped the group and had an easier last 16 game against Japan instead he looked further ahead and now we have Colombia. 

Personally, I don't see it that way.

He rested the key players in order to give us a better chance in the last 16 game, no matter who it was against.

The game was of little consequence really and it would have been a gamble to play Kane et al.

We were still going to have to play a difficult knockout game against a decent side no matter the result - there are no 'easier' games in a World Cup and the idea that Southgate deliberately lost the match is ridiculous.

I'm a bit dumbfounded at some of these comments to be honest, England supporters in general need a reality check about how good we really are, especially at the moment.

I like Southgate, he's flushed out a lot of ageing bigheads and put a young, exciting team together that have a good attitude and team spirit - if they aren't good enough to beat Colombia then so be it, I would just like to see us go out fighting and playing with freedom.

I would hate for him to get the boot and for us to start all this bollocks over again with someone else.

Do you think that the Colombian press and fans will be demanding heads roll if we beat them? Perhaps they might, but what have we ever done to suggest that we are better than the Mexicos, Colombias and Croatias of the world? So why do we EXPECT we should beat them?

It's been a cracking World Cup and although I'd be disappointed if we went out in the last 16, I wouldn't be angry. We could learn a lot from other countries who are proud of participating within the top 16 in the world and don't kill their teams or chances with misplaced and arrogant over-expectations.

That Loftus-Cheek is proper wank though.

Game of two halves this COL v SEN. Fantastic.

Just now, barry_ said:

why wouldn't you be? 

No real reason? But I could see a branding agency reckoning it looks a bit dated and needs to be modernised, they'd have a point to an extent. 

I remember seeing some mock ups someone did on here a while ago and thought they looked great.

Wouldn't be surprised if we see a new crest ourselves in the next few years... hopefully we don't do a Leeds.

Wtf I love VAR now!

Kiss of death but Iran doing well against Spain so far...

In other World Cup news, did anyone see Alan Sugar’s tweet before the Senegal game?

What an absolute prick.

1 hour ago, ChrisPriceBaldSpot said:

Pickford

Walker Stones Dier

Trippier Henderson Rose

Alli Lingard

Rashford Kane

That would be my starting 11 for the Panama game

 

Tend to agree, but think Sterling needs 60+ minutes more against Panama to hopefully get his confidence up in an England shirt.

When he's on it, he's on it, and if he's dropped straight away I think it will do more harm than good to his effectiveness in the (inevitable ?) latter stages of the tournament.

I was more than happy with the performance, haven't seen anyone MUCH better yet.

Nice article here - https://www.football365.com/news/the-world-cup-is-pure-just-and-so-very-beautiful

21 minutes ago, Vinjay17 said:

Because I like him more as a person (Messi can be a bit of a prick at times albeit nowhere near Ronaldo level) and he still wins things. Pretty sure if you asked on Blue Moon whether they would rather have Ronaldo would say exactly same as I have. Cantona won more than Shearer would you rather have had him? ?

I CAN’T HELP BUT BITE SOMEONE STOP ME RONALDO AND MESSI DON’T WIN THINGS NO MORE

Just now, DeeCee said:

Ronaldo's 51st hat trick, the World Cup's 51st hat trick............

Yes I heard it on the telly

CINEMA

Just now, Vinjay17 said:

I don't particularly like Sterling and I don't like Delph. Granted neither of them are as good but that's not the point. I still like Yaya even if he's been a bit silly playing the race card and all. I would rather have Aguero in my team than Messi or Ronaldo as well. Like I've said certain players bring success no matter what. So what if he hasn't won the CL it's a knockout tournament.  

Ex United or not my points about his egotism are accurate. If you want to be paranoid perhaps I'll suggest it's because he's ex-United why some people prefer him over Messi? Or perhaps I won't because it's baseless paranoia...right?

Well, yes.

It is.

And you can have Aguero if I can have Messi or Ronaldo... I fancy me chances.

Just now, Vinjay17 said:

...and because he played in England which for some reason seems to be a key factor with some. 

As for "who it was" I'll give you a clue. His name was rather similar to one of them. 

Ah right of course.

Good argument for him of certainly, as far as “naturals” are concerned at least.

But he never played in England though, so obviously I think he was shit.

7 minutes ago, Vinjay17 said:

Lighten up. ? In the 1990's (not counting Maradona at that stage) there was one player who was as good as either of them. Whether you think there was another or not could still be very much open to debate. 

Someone on twitter bringing up that Messi hasn't played in the Premier League. Not sure why that should be any part of the debate for me. Messi's stayed in Spain for good reason and Ronaldo became even better after going there. I'm not interested in which has had more influence on domestic English football.

Enlighten me as to who that was? 

Genuinely interested.

3 minutes ago, Stuart said:

I don’t know why but I took an instant dislike to Costa and I’ve never taken to him. Maybe it’s the Chelsea connection but I can’t quite put my finger on it.

Couldn’t agree more James.

And he is the epitome of professionalism. The condition he is in for his age is a testament to that.

I‘ve said it before, but imagine if more players with a good amount of natural talent (even our own Bradley!) had the dedication and pure drive to dedicate every waking moment to be the absolute best footballer that they can be.

The fitness, focus and sheer will of the man makes me personally find him more entertaining than Messi - not that Messi doesn’t work hard of course, but he is such a natural phenomenon that it is a different conversation.

I remember when Ronaldo was Januzaj level when he first came through - he carved himself into football history because he wanted it more than anyone else has, ever.

Cracking game.

And I fancy him, obviously.

Just now, Vinjay17 said:

In other words you think Ronaldo's better looking. Not sure why that should be part of the assessment. He's a spotlight hogger though Tv channels don't help by seemingly having a contractual obligation to show closeups of the egomaniac every 2 minutes.

In psychology, they call this “projection”.

Just now, roverandout said:

When spain play like this theres no point in anyone else turning up...how can england ever compete with a technically brilliant team like spain?

Play like Portugal?

And sign Ronaldo.

An argument that will go on for many years.

IMO Messi is technically the best footballer to ever play the game, but CR7 is so... cinematic. Pure drive, passion, and big moments.

Can tell the grandkids we saw him on the same pitch as Keith Andrews.

I just don’t believe this.

A quote for you @Vinjay17 -

“Football, bloody hell.”

1 hour ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Sean Clare at Sheffield Wednesday, anyone know about this guy? Heard we are in talks 

Would be very happy with this from what I've seen of him, he's a great prospect and highly rated at Wednesday, but out of contract I believe - can't be true!

Really? The opposite to me!

I see it as two advanced wing backs, one holding mid and three quality, positive number 10s (perhaps Sterling is a striker).

I wouldn’t expect Lingard and Alli to be in the same team against Belgium, for example.

10 hours ago, speeeeeeedie said:

 

For those who didn't click;

                     Pickford

         Walker Stones Maguire

Tripper       Henderson         Rose

      Lingard   Sterling    Alli

                        Kane

I can justify Rashford being sub. He won't complain, and will cause havoc when he comes on. I didn't see the friendlies so don't know how England played with only one holding midfielder. My impression was that England would play with 2 covering the back 3, with Dier being in for another attacker.

My worry in that team is Trippier. Could Lingard do Trippier's job, and have Dier in there too?

We don’t need two holding midfielders against Tunisia and Panama.

Let’s go for it. Shackles off.

47 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Very true. I saw a picture today that Adam Armstrong put up on Instagram, it was him and his wife with a comment along the lines of "6 years married to the love of my life" After I finished crying, I thought that's a really, really good idea for young footballers careers. Rarely see it these days. I can understand why as well though to a point... 

I don't know if getting married at 15 is a particularly good idea but good luck to them.

Imagine if Dack was CR7 fit - he'd be on the plane.