Very true in 1990 England where terrible against Ireland and Egypt in the group stage but played well against Holland They where second best against Belgium and Cameroon but came through Played really well agaist West Germany in the semi and suddenly he was a hero Great club manager but didn't have a great record as England manager
Belgium were so superior in that game it was untrue, slick passing and movement, controlling the midfield etc Gashcoin dived to win that freekick, then Platt scored his goal which everyone focuses on rather than 119 mins of being second best.
The difference is that, the Cameroon game excepted, we weren't conceding in that tournament. We didn't score many but we didn't need to. The current team is shipping at least 2 goals a game and if you have to score 3 goals to win a game you are always going to struggle in competitions.
We were never behind in any game in 90 (except in pens at Torino). People saying we should have had Cole, Terry with Cahill- why not use your best players? But if we had, and we had lost , Hodgo would have been blamed for not blooding the youngsters. If you win you're an astute genius, if you lose you're a moron. One thing's for sure Jagielka and Baines have been found out. Phil Jones and Smalling> Curtis Davies and James Chester.
They looked like headless chickens running around. Uruguay are South American champions and that team organisation ended up counting over 90 minutes.
To me Baines was perhaps the biggest disappointment. I mean, I knew the rest of the back four were ****e but I thought Baines had something.
Agreed. I thought he was a bit **** against us at their place(diving twat), but assumed he was actually normally much better, or we'd have taken Cole.
