|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2012 13:54:10 GMT 1
Not surprised there was frustration in the crowd, I bet there was none against Andorra at Wembley in 2009.
It took until the 87th minute for that god awful rendition of "God Save the Queen" to play by the most talentless band to ever exist, let alone have a top 40 hit. Wonder if they actually get any money from Pukka Pies sponsoring them?. It's usually played all the way through, this time it was not, which shows their lack of positive feeling during the game. "Three Lions, Five Goals" The Sun claimed, absolutely pathetic and typical hyperbole they get from the media, it's only San Marino and England are a very overrated team going by their FIFA World Ranking and dreadful tactical playing systems, while playing a very basic formation.
Up until they scored the passing was a joke and was from the second until the third. Just pass the ball, score the goals and stop trying all this fancy stuff. I know I'm a one to criticize as Wales only beat them 2-1 a few years back, but Wales are no way expected to thrash anyone, not even San Marino.
Maybe I still have a chip on my shoulder that the team selectors keep turning down Swansea's English players, with Nathan Dyer not being in the team starting off a Twitter frenzy.
|
|
Tom
Member
*Of Royal Blood*
Posts: 15,419
|
Post by Tom on Oct 14, 2012 16:11:13 GMT 1
i haven't seen it back but I wasn't convinced by the first half penalty either which was at our end. Having not seen any highlights I also didn't realise we were denied other penalties, which ones were they? It was a definite penalty. The keeper came flying out, Welbeck knocked the ball past him, and the keeper just took his legs out. The keeper's assault on Walcott early on should've been a pen and there was one of the set pieces where an England player (can't rememebr who) was simply wrestled to the floor by a defender and it wasn't spotted by the officials. There was another strong penalty shout during the first half but it was rightly turned down. Completely agree about the one on Walcott, and after posing that question suddenly remembered that one. I thought it was a pen at the time but the lack of response I got when I suggested it, and also the lack of appeals seemingly from the crowd or the players suggested I was wrong! Just assumed maybe that the keeper made the save and caught Walcott completely accidentally after, but actually thinking about it now i'm not sure why i seemed to be the only one who was convinced it should have been given! At the end of the day he injured him badly enough for him to miss the next game (although at one point it looked like he might carry on when he was standing on the touchline) and it was clearly inside the box. Anywhere else on the pitch and it surely would have been a free-kick. The other penalty appeal, vaguely remember a handball incident? But it would have been harsh as it was ball to hand and the ball wasn't going towards goal, seem to remember it was a cross.
|
|
|
Post by o on Oct 14, 2012 16:41:07 GMT 1
I'd get some sauce to go with those chips on your shoulder Caitlin. I dont rate England either, and hate them being talked up each tourno, but they did what needed to be done and won 5-0, which should have been higher. End of.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2012 17:21:33 GMT 1
That's what annoys me the most about England, the media and ITV getting in on it and even the bookies big them up to nauseous levels.
England won 5-0 against a team they should have scored more against, that's the bottom line really and as Ukraine messed up, it's only the three points that matter for them so far.
They don't have a good record in terms of how well they actually play against these European minnows anyway. They did not beat Liechtenstein in any of their WC 2002 qualifiers convincingly, are the victims of San Marino's fastest goal, which is also the fastest World Cup goal ever, were held 0-0 by Andorra at half time twice and lost to Norway 2-1 in 1981, who at the time usually propped up their qualification groups.
So 5-0 is not that bad considering England's reputation against the weaker nations, while San Marino probably felt satisfied at keeping the score down to a relative low one for them.
|
|
Tom
Member
*Of Royal Blood*
Posts: 15,419
|
Post by Tom on Oct 14, 2012 17:51:17 GMT 1
I dont rate England either, and hate them being talked up each tourno, but they did what needed to be done and won 5-0, which should have been higher. End of. I think possibly going to the game can influence things, along with the atmosphere, of which there was none during that period in the 2nd half. We failed to meet my expectations (which tbh aren't generally that high and which i'd like to think are fairly realistic) and a lot of the football bored me so felt pretty deflated. If either of those had been different then i'm sure i would have felt happier about it, but I did wonder how i'd have felt if i'd watched it at home. Probably differently and ok about it i think, but maybe i'm just being too harsh!
|
|
|
Post by suedehead on Oct 14, 2012 19:15:11 GMT 1
I think the lack of a penalty decision in the first few minutes is another problem with mismatches like this. If the penalty had been given then the goalkeeper should probably have been sent off. I can't help feeling that the referee was reluctant to make it even more of a no-contest so early in the game.
|
|
|
Post by o on Oct 14, 2012 19:46:55 GMT 1
I dont understand how you can be bored with 33 goal attempts? I did mean to ask how much the tickets were though Tom, as my son says England are playing next September on his birthday and he's angling to go.
|
|
|
Post by Maximo Mark on Oct 14, 2012 20:37:06 GMT 1
It's boring because it's one team vs. a brick wall for the entire game, you're essentially having to watch the same thing the whole time, one team trying to work out how to get round or through a block of blue that doesn't want to move much. To be honest I don't see the difference in beating San Marino 2-0 or 12-0. You learn absolutely nothing either way as you're not going to play a game like it until your'e drawn in the same group again. At least other poor, defensive teams have some adventure to them.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2012 20:51:16 GMT 1
I was thinking that earlier on today. They charged something like 55 pounds, and was thinking that considering who they were playing against, it should be cheaper!.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2012 0:55:08 GMT 1
Personally, I think the weaker UEFA nations should enter into a pre-qualifying round like the FA Cup and CONCACAF lower-ranked teams. Although I said earlier playing teams like Andorra every two weeks, isn't good for tourism resulting from travelling support, nor income to the football association for that nation, it would increase domestic attendances for the games, as their own national teams have a chance to actually win some competitive matches. I just see too many reasons for this:
1) By reducing the main stage from 9 groups of 6 to 6 groups of 6, you would reinvigorate International Football. England vs France, Portugal vs Spain. Imagine a group of Spain-France-Sweden-Turkey-Scotland-Austria; Entirely possible with 6 groups of 6, where the top 2 qualify for tournament, or the top 1 with teams 2-3 playing playoffs. Much much more interesting groups and matches.
2) By reducing the main stage from 9 groups of 6 to 6 groups of 6 you would make it much harder for the main teams to qualify. Every time. In the current format the big teams can play badly and still get first, whereas in this format they would potentially fall into the playoff places. By having a qualifying stage, you things to play for even if you can't qualify. If the bottom two countries of each group have to pre-qualify for the main stage next time, then the football remains interesting to the last.
3) By having the bottom nations actually play each other, it stops them losing every single game. I'm not sure whether San Marino would prefer to play Netherlands and lose 11-0 or play Lichtenstein and actually have a chance, but it just makes sense. Getting to the main stage would also feel like a great achievement for those teams. And it would be.
4) It stops groups of 5 for the main stage. Not having every nation play at the same time on the final day is stupid.
5) It would also be fairly simple and wouldn't mean teams hardly every play games. Over the regular 2 year period 6 groups of 6 for the main stage whilst at the same time 3 groups of 5 or 6 play the first round to qualify for two years time. The bottom team of the Main Stage and the top 2 of the First Qualifying Round play in the 2nd Round; 2 games in the playoffs, 4 games in the summer whilst the Euros/World Cup is going on.
|
|
Tom
Member
*Of Royal Blood*
Posts: 15,419
|
Post by Tom on Oct 15, 2012 12:07:51 GMT 1
I dont understand how you can be bored with 33 goal attempts? I did mean to ask how much the tickets were though Tom, as my son says England are playing next September on his birthday and he's angling to go. I didn't realise it was that many I thought it was about half that! Although i missed injury-time at the end of the game to go to the loo so may have missed a few In the first period of the 2nd half we seemed reluctant to have any shots or put crosses in. I think it was during this time that the result became more important for me than anything else, became a bit desperate for a 6-0. But as i said the atmosphere wasn't much cop for large portions of the game, and none of the people around us seemed that happy, apart from one guy who seemed particularly keen for it to stay 5-0! If you'd watched the game where we were you may felt the same Watching a game live rather than on TV is different, one example being the Reading-Newcastle game recently where i was hacked off that we didn't get what we deserved having watched it online, but all the comments from people who were there were very positive. I don't think it helped that I was asked what I thought Spain or Germany would have done to San Marino, think this may have been 1st half, and I couldn't help thinking they would have got double figures.. I'm not saying we're as good as them but we were saying to play a similar way and for San Marino's most famous qualifying result, a 1-1 draw in Latvia, Latvia had something like 50 shots on goal and hit the woodwork umpteen times. I expected us to have plenty of shots on goal, that was a given really. This sums it up well. It's boring because it's one team vs. a brick wall for the entire game, you're essentially having to watch the same thing the whole time, one team trying to work out how to get round or through a block of blue that doesn't want to move much. Tickets, this one was 25 quid but they vary, often for other qualifying games or a prestige friendly like Spain they're more than that. Also, the game was announced as a sell-out but we were sitting just above the wheelchair section behind the goal England were attacking in the 1st half (so may have been on TV ), there were 2 guys next to me but other than that the rest of the row past them was completely empty!
|
|
Tom
Member
*Of Royal Blood*
Posts: 15,419
|
Post by Tom on Oct 15, 2012 12:45:58 GMT 1
Forgot to add, I do agree it could have been more though. I said around half-time that the score-line flattered San Marino a bit.
|
|
|
Post by o on Oct 15, 2012 13:01:31 GMT 1
They said on the telly there were 84500 there, I cant remember what it is supposed to hold? I think the game Sam has his eye on is against San Marino so maybe would be £25 again which is doable.
|
|
Tom
Member
*Of Royal Blood*
Posts: 15,419
|
Post by Tom on Oct 15, 2012 14:30:41 GMT 1
They said on the telly there were 84500 there, I cant remember what it is supposed to hold? I think the game Sam has his eye on is against San Marino so maybe would be £25 again which is doable. I think its 90000 isn't it? I just assumed that it was 84500 because the full away allocation hadn't been taken, San Marino supposedly brought 2000 fans with them, so it was surprising to see the empty seats when I was expecting all the seats for England fans to have been taken. Isn't that San Marino game away? We're surely not playing them at home again next season!
|
|
Tom
Member
*Of Royal Blood*
Posts: 15,419
|
Post by Tom on Oct 15, 2012 16:29:15 GMT 1
Paul Hawksbee and Andy Jacob were saying on their Talksport show earlier what a terrible game of attack v defence the England-San Marino game was.
|
|
ligerdog7
New Member
hollyyyyyyyyyyyy..... ages get bak post laters
Posts: 1
|
Post by ligerdog7 on Oct 16, 2012 17:49:45 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Panda on Oct 16, 2012 19:32:56 GMT 1
Poland v England looking doubtful due to torrential rain and a waterlogged pitch...
|
|
|
Post by Maximo Mark on Oct 16, 2012 19:38:44 GMT 1
|
|
ligerdog7
New Member
hollyyyyyyyyyyyy..... ages get bak post laters
Posts: 1
|
Post by ligerdog7 on Oct 16, 2012 19:41:01 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Panda on Oct 16, 2012 19:43:59 GMT 1
Poland are 3rd in this World Cup qualifying group, which is a million times more important than the world rankings.
|
|