Switzerland look just as good as any of the sides on the other side of the draw (drew with Germany, comfortably beat Italy). But I guess because they're not a traditional big name, we should beat them easily of course. Is that right?
Not at all. I think we will lose. But the traditional big sides are the powerhouses of football with the elite players and tradition of winning. They are the teams EVERYONE wants to avoid. Switzerland would rather plan Slovakia than us, for example - even if Slovakia are a good side and beating us had proved they were better than us. I think you seem to have taken offence to my viewpoint that England under Southgate have not overachieved, for some reason. I certainly haven't said we should be winning this tournament. I am giving my opinion that England are not only painful to watch under Southgate but have very rarely exceded expectations. And, sorry, but it is wholly disingenuous to say a team that beats Spain, Italy and France on the way to the final has done no more to get there than a team beating Slovakia, Switzerland and Luxembourg. Draw does matter.
It’s genius from the team really. How often do we see teams play down to the level of the opposition? England stroll through the first 80 mins of games chilling and lulling other team into false sense of security. Then, BOOM, because England are by far the best team on paper in the tournament they just up it and **** the other team up late on. Helps of course that Slovakia have maybe 4 players who would even get into Saints’ team let alone a good one, but they will successfully use the same formula against Switzerland again
Switzerland are a good team, but lack the 'star players' and have limited fire power. They have been playing well and if they play as they have been and we play as we have been...they will win quite comfortably. If we were playing as a proper balanced team, even without the tactical nous of a good manager, we have the players to beat them. However, we are not, so we either improve a lot with the setup of the team, our star players dig us out of another hole with a moment of quality, or we lose.
I'm not offended, but it does irk me that Southgate is regarded as the enemy of English football. This tournament has been woeful, but the previous two tournaments we had a very good team; (unbeaten at Euro 20; beaten by France only because of Kane ballooning his penalty). We picked up some very good results in those tournaments and played some good football. This tournament is one too many for Southgate. The things I used to like about him were that he was loyal to players, and that he tried to create a team instead of just a bunch of individuals. But he doesn't do this anymore. He didn't pick the tried and trusted (Rashford, Grealish, Sterling, Maguire, and yes, Henderson even), and he hasn't created a 'team' ethic. He is shoehorning certain individuals into the team selection, which was the crime of previous managers. Regarding the 'luck' of the draw, half the fancied teams usually underperform, and there are always two or three dark horses who outperform. So yes, on paper you'd choose Switzerland over, say, Germany, but in reality it isn't always the case. Austria topped the group with France and Netherlands, beating the latter, so it strikes me as a bit weird to say they are 'easy', just because traditionally they're usually not that strong.
Chatting to my Dutch chums pre match yesterday who consider their team is underperforming but not to the extent of England. Plenty of attacking potential but managed by a defensive coach in Southgate was one opinion. It could be the Oranje we meet in the semi should we somehow manage to stumble past the Swiss.
Statistically, the bigger and more successful teams beat the smaller, less fancied teams more often. Yes, you have to beat what is put in front of you - but I I think it is hard to argue that we have been great against the teams who are in the top tier. If you accept we are not a top tier team, then fine. He has done well.
The six results in our group at this year's tournament, were the exact same six results from our group in Italia 90. How weird is that? 1-1 x3 0-0 x2 1-0 x1 And in the second round at Italia 90 we needed an acrobatic last minute goal against Belgium. This time we needed an acrobatic last minute goal against Slovakia. So we'll scrape past Switzerland and then go out in the semis on pens. And the Germans will win the whole thing.
Yeah agree to disagree. It's the whole 'top tier' thing I'm not easy with. Every tournament is different. If England between 2006-2016 were a top tier team, then immediately that concept is debunked. Sure there are the favourites; Spain and Germany currently. But then there are another dozen teams between whom there really isn't much difference. I think its more the pressure of the occasion than the opponent that causes issues for lots of players/teams. So winning a quarter or semi should never be considered 'easy'.
Yet, the only two teams who beat the odds - Denmark and Greece - to win the tournament without being considered a top tier team did it with A) tremendous work rates, B) tremendous team spirits and C) (In Greece's case) tremendous organisation. England, in my opinion, lack all three.
Jude telling it like it is, calling the fans and pundits idiots. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c0xj8vd9l0no
I think the issue is more that none (or very few of us) believe we are good enough to beat Switzerland on current form, so the win feels a bit flat and like delaying the inevitable. Even more dispiriting because the draw has opened up so kindly for us. Of course we SHOULD beat Switzerland with the players at our disposal, but we have been absolutely putrid since the squad was called up with no real deviation and complete denial from the players and manager about the quality of performances, which indicates we will play the same in the next fixture. I will of course wholeheartedly admit I am wrong if England go on to win, no matter how turgid the performances, but right now extremely few of us believe this is remotely possible, which is wild with the players we have, but they have looked a shadow of themselves for 6 games on the bounce now so its no flash in the pan.
They are playing very well and are decent, but a well managed England side should beat them for sure. Its like Man City or Arsenal playing against Brighton, its a competitive fixture but you would expect the former to be solid favourites. With England in their current state, i'd have to say Switzerland feel like comfortable favorites which shouldn't be the case.
Do they not sit down and watch the games back afterwards? Or do they only do that with a positive commentary from Southgate. These players are used to playing good football, dominating teams and winning games with their clubs. Surely they are aware of the difference between that and the **** that they've been playing as a team at this tournament. If they truly and honestly can't see that, then I'll assume it's more of a brainwashing camp then a football one. You'd think they'd be able to take the criticism on board, but just appears to be a strange burying head mentality going on among the players. Winners would be saying that they've not been playing well and that they will be better in the next game.
They clearly know they have underperformed and most have said as much. When Kane said "we know we can be better and need to improve" that is him acknowledging they have been crap. But he can't come out and say "we were dogshit and lucky to get through" even if it is true!
Teams in the Premier League are different from those at international level, for the reason that they play week in week out together, sometimes fifty games or more per season. In international football, the squad gets together what, three or four times a year. They play 7 or 8 times (in a non-tournament year). The very art of international football is bringing together a bunch of relative strangers, all playing different styles for their teams, and getting them to gel. 'Smaller' nations are often better suited to this because they have fewer top-level players to choose from. Thus a player will be selected at around 20 years old, and stay in the squad for another 15 or so years. Therefore they often play much better as a team, as opposed to the big nations that have a massive pool of players, and often - especially in the case of England - dump a player as soon as he hits a bit of bad form, because some new youngster is apparently ready to step up. England have never played like a team because of this. So it's more like Brighton playing against eleven randomly selected players from the top 6 of the Premier League. On paper the top 6 team would look better, but in reality Brighton would probably be equal to them.
