World Forums

Bineaz

For sure, if it is in the UK, England will qualify.



Let me ask you this: assuming it is in South Africa, will England qualify whereas Croatia does not?

I hope you have considered the current factors at play in all of this.

One: Croatia has a new generation of highly rated players that are going to new clubs. They already what it is like to beat England and, true to Croatian tradition, simply do not fear nor get intimidated by so called major soccer nations.

Two: There are some tough opponents in tough areas of the world who will especially be geared up to beat a nation who is perceived, wrong as it is, negatively.

Three: Are you really sure England is better than Croatia even on paper, even with a Mourinho or Capello at the helm?

By the way, I think Jose would actually be better for the English. I am past the point of believing that English players can show the kind of conniving and subtle tactical guile that Capello can instill and encourage. After a decade of flattering to deceive, enough is enough. Hell, a decade? Other than a brief spell in the early 90s, it has been several decades.

Jose on the other hand would know how to best leverage existing English strengths, obviously through his Chelsea experience. He knows English psychology. He would put them in a system they are most comfortable with. But, I am not so sure he can come up with something to overcome what I consider an emerging Croatian team.

When all is said and done, I am very confident that a spine consisting of at least Modric, Petric, Rakitic, Edvarado, Kranjcar, and Corluka can breach Gerrard, Lampard, J. Cole, Ferdinand, A. Cole, and Co. At the end of the day, all things being equal, it comes down to the players.

I assume all things will be equal when it comes to coaching. I really believe we have better players...or will have by the time qualifying rolls around. Let's see.

How good is Capello's English ? There was talk that if he were to get the gig, then someone like David Platt would be his right hand man. (Platt played for Sampdoria)

Maybe even a Roy Hodgson would work out if he were to leave his post as Finland's manager, as he spent a few years at Inter & Udinese.

But now that "the special one" has thrown his name into the hat, then I'm sure he'll get it.

mate wrote:Markino

Some strikers absolutely bring something extra to their squad, making it more likely that they will win. I think of Davor Suker and Alen Boksic as classic examples for Croatia. How about the old Ronaldo for Brazil?

...

We'll have to agree to disagree on Owen in this regard. I just can't see his goals as something a range of other forwards couldn't have done. I will even go one further and say that Owen is not the match of Rooney, a forward that does bring in something extra to England. A more extreme example is Schevchenko with the Ukraine back in the day.

I'm sorry but Sukor and Boksic had a MUCH BETTER team than Owen ever had. Come on now, play fair. You put Owen on that team and he wouldn't have faired any worse than Sukor or Boksic. Those guys were good but they did not bring something more to Croatia than Owen has done for England.

As for Ronaldo, of course he raised the level of any team he played for and he was payed accordingly. Owen never reached that level and if anyone ever claimed that he did, they ought to be committed to an insane asylum. That type of Ronaldo you get to see once every ten or 15 years.

Why are you even comparing Owen to Rooney? Rooney isn't even a striker. Of course Rooney has more technical ability.

Geez. Even I know that Owen is limited. For starters, he doesn't have a left foot.

I repeat: his job has been to score goals and he has done so, especially in big games, for England.

Interesting article by Galnville

HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF
29/11/07

Well, it has happened before. Five times before, actually; and twice under the aegis of the sainted Alf Ramsey. Meaning England’s failure to qualify for a major international tournament. Six times really, but when Alf took over the team in season 1962/63, England were already down and out of the European Nations Cup.

His first match in charge, when he simply wanted to have a look at the current England team, resulted in an embarrassing 5-2 defeat in Paris by the French. Having won the World Cup at Wembley in 1966, Alf failed to qualify for the 1968 European finals, when his tactics in the two quarter finals against West Germany were sadly awry. No midfield tackler to contact Netzer at Wembley, a wretchedly negative team with no hope of reversing the 3-1 defeat at home. After which Netzer memorably complained, “The whole England team has autographed my leg.” Nor did England qualify for the ensuing 1974 World Cup in West Germany, beaten in Katowice by the Poles, who then so surprisingly drew under pressure at Wembley.

Enter, uneasily, Don Review; double unsuccessful. The Czechs, in Bratislava, were too good for an England team which failed to respond to Review’s regime of carpet bowls and prolix dossiers; largely used for recording card stores. As for the 1978 World Cup, Italy beat England 2-0 in Rome and by the time Ron Greenwood took charge, all was lost and Revie had sloped off to Arabia to make his fortune.

Graham Taylor was arguably the worst England manager till it came to the pitifully inept Steve McClaren, installed and defended by the boobies and buffoons of Soho Square. Why, just a couple of weeks before the final elimination, Desperate Dave Richards, top banana of the Premiership and vice chairman of the FA, was assuring us that England, just beaten in Moscow, had in McClaren a manager who was “doing a bloody good job,” No, I could make no sense of that either.

But even Taylor, an addicted long ball man who tried to change his spots with England, did manage, largely courtesy of a dreadful display by Ireland’s goalkeeper Packie Bonar against the Poles, to get England to the European finals in Stockholm. Where he distinguished himself in the match lost in Stockholm to Sweden by pulling off Gary Lineker, on the brink of matching Bobby Charlton’s record number of goals for England, and installing Alan Smith; to hold the ball up when what was needed at all costs was an equalizer.

As for the 1994 World Cup, his muddled choices and tactics eventually came to grief in Holland where, somewhat fortunately, beat England. But the nadir has come with Taylor’s daft dispositions in Oslo against Norway, which virtually presented them with victory.

There seemed little sense in Taylor’s appointment, but even less in that of McClaren; even before a ball was kicked in the 2006 World Cup finals. No other competing country was so precipitate. I felt and wrote from the first that McClaren would be a disaster and so he proved. It would have made sense to have sacked him, whatever it cost – and £2.5 million has landed in his lap, anyway – after the folly of his 3-5-2 tactics in Zagreb when they, plus a horrific error of Paul Robinson, presented the Croatians with victory.

So far as Robinson was concerned, McClaren just went on dicing with death when the keeper’s form fell apart with club as well as country. He gave away an awful goal at Wembley against Germany yet, inexplicably, McClaren confirmed him in Moscow against Russia when he blundered again. All of which prevented England from blooding a substitute goalkeeper, so that when at long last Scott Carson was called up he had just one futile game against a flaccid Austria, went into the essential match against Croatia, and let in that abysmal early goal.

It was gratuitous and arrogant of Michael Owen, who missed that game to declare that not a single Croatian player would get into the England side. What! Not even the splendid little Luka Modric, who gave a classical inside-forward display which, on that supposedly unplayable pitch, put the England midfield to shame. Poised, adroit, elusive, shrewd and penetrating in his use of the ball, he was never mastered.

England’s midfield by contrast was in the first half an over populated fiasco. McClaren has always found it hard to drop Frank Lampard, despite the fact he nullified the prowess of Steven Gerrard. In the first half McClaren deployed an overmanned midfield in which Lampard sunk without trace. Leaving Peter Crouch, arguably the only England player to distinguish himself, to plough a lonely furrow up front. Quite what bird brain picked Lampard as England’s man of the match, to a loud and proper chorus of boos, eludes me. Shades of Sven Goran Eriksson failing to choose Manchester United’s outstanding Cristiano Ronaldo, in that Cardiff Cup final against Millwall.

David Beckham Heaven help us is already talking of “revenge” against Croatia in that dismal World Cup qualifying group; with a prize for every qualifier of travelling to AIDS ravaged, murder frenzied, rape-ridden South Africa in 2010.
Beckham, McClaren’s far from magnificent obsession, shouldn’t even be pushing the skip. Only a deluded soul like McClaren could have flown twice to Los Angeles, without even being able to see Beckham, so hopelessly short of match practice, play. At Wembley, Beckham did at least produce one of his immaculate crosses to enable Crouch, with splendid skill, to score. But what else did he do? What else does he ever do? Ideally, he would play under American gridiron rules, when a designated kicker comes off the bench to kick goals or try to, then returning to the bench having done so.

Were Fabio Capello to take the England role, which seems a valid idea to me, who has known him since his distinguished playing days, there would be little scope for Beckham, whom Capello last season dropped somewhat harshly from his Real Madrid squad when David announced he’d be leaving for LA. Only to restore him later with some success.

How well I remember Fabio telling me, after watching England limply lose one of their three disastrous games in the 1998 European finals in Germany, that he missed the rabbia, literally the rage, with which England teams traditionally responded to potential defeat. But was John Barnwell joking when he suggested Sam Allardyce? Look at the wretched form of Newcastle United. And why the calls for Alan Shearer, who’s never, so far as I know, managed or coached in his life?

Markino

I'm sorry but Sukor and Boksic had a MUCH BETTER team than Owen ever had.

This is one of my points.

You put Owen on that team and he wouldn't have faired any worse than Sukor or Boksic. Those guys were good but they did not bring something more to Croatia than Owen has done for England.

I just cannot rate Owen with Suker and Boksic. At least Suker did big things with Real and the Croatia NT, vastly eclipsing Owen. I just can't see exchanging the two and expecting Owen to get the same result. No way.

As for Ronaldo, of course he raised the level of any team he played for and he was payed accordingly. Owen never reached that level and if anyone ever claimed that he did, they ought to be committed to an insane asylum. That type of Ronaldo you get to see once every ten or 15 years.

Well, my main point was that certain forward brings something extra to their team. Ukraine are different with Shevchenko. Ivory Coast are different with Drogba. Brazil with Ronaldo back in the day. I don't see the absence or presence of Owen impacting England so much...exactly because I don't think that Owen is not that good.

Why are you even comparing Owen to Rooney? Rooney isn't even a striker. Of course Rooney has more technical ability.

Hmmm, Rooney plays more or less a striker role no matter how he lines up for England or United. He is relied upon to score goals and often does. United definitely have something extra when he is playing, as he makes even Tevez more confident and aggressive. I also have seen Rooney often enough create chances and opportunities. He also seems to play with confidence and no intimidation, something I can't say for Owen.

Geez. Even I know that Owen is limited.

Again, this was my main point, which inspired my attack in response to his arrogant claim that better Croatian players could not make his NT.

I repeat: his job has been to score goals and he has done so, especially in big games, for England.

To be sure, he does score and he has scored in major tournaments. However, maybe we differ in terms of what constitutes a big game? I consider a big game one that, if won, will give his team an award of deep advancement in a tournament or league play. There has to be consistency.

Hence, given that England is not consistent in doing this, not many of her NT players are big game players at this level. Scoring against Brazil in WC 2002 is not a big game accomplishment as England did not win and basically were outplayed significantly.

At least that's how I see it.

Again, I have this hunch that the likes of Modric, Petric, and Edvardo will be better big game players than Owen. Of course, time will tell, but I am convinced of this simply by looking at the intangibles, at simply how good these guys are with the ball, their body language, and confidence.

Markino

That article by Glanville is spot on.

Bottom line: England need an injection of football intelligence and cunning, from top to bottom.

The fastest way to get there is to hire a top South American or Southern European coach. Capello should be the #1, but I am afraid Jose might get the nod.

Jose would probably have better short term results than Capello, but like Erikson, he wouldn't leave a foundational legacy for improvement. I think Capello would rock English football to its core...which is what is needed.

According to Sven, to be England's successful coach you gotta earn modest salary and have a quiet, almost non-existent private life.

That's what the Sun and the Daily Mirror do to decent people -

perhaps England should focus on his youth program rather than finding a foreign coach...

Maybe if they were better football player they could beat countries like Croatia, Russia, Israel etc....

and how do you get better football player ?

here's hint....Located 50 km southwest of Paris at Clairefontaine-en-Yvelines, Clairefontaine is arguably the finest football academy in the world - the French answer to the English FA Youth Academy, Lilleshaw. Former England manager Sven-Göran Eriksson once said if England had the equivalent to this they would have already won a major championship....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clairefontaine

ps : the new "cuvée" is quite promising with the arrival of Karin benzema & Athem Ben Arfa....

what players have come out of that academy, Mr. Tronche?

just that....

Nicolas Anelka
William Gallas
Thierry Henry
Louis Saha
Jérôme Rothen
Jimmy Briand
Philippe Christanval
Franck Dumas
Richard Dutruel
Jean-Luc Ettori
Pascal Olmeta
Issiar Dia
Grégory Proment
Johan Radet
Grégory Wimbée
Blaise Matuidi
Kemal Bourhani
Mourad Meghni
Jacques Faty
Ricardo Faty
Habib Bellaïd
Vassiriki Abou Diaby
Hatem Ben Arfa....

Tronche

You make a good point in noting that academies are exactly has given France huge advancement in football. But, it isn't just about having the academies, as it is also about recruiting a hungry and eager to prove immigrant base and letting them learn football the right way.

English academies, from what I read from sources like Four Four Two, take a very regimentated approach towards teaching young English kids the game. I read that they play on full fields and teach tactics, under disciplinarian coaches, from an early age onwards. On the other hand, France has established academies in Africa that try to provide basics.

Even in the ex-Yugoslav republics, and I admit Serbia is in the lead on this, there are football academies. However, the approach is to complement what kids are learning in their pick-up games in parks and the streets in small 3v3 or 5v5 games. Croatia has so many so called mali nogoment (small football) fields of grass and concrete where you can actually play as a walk on against excellent footballers. Even many professionals come back to their home town to play in a tournament or two.

I keep watching that England and Croatia game. Again, it's not like we dominated them. But surely we showed a bit more composure and class, all of it anchored in our individual players being more than comfortable on the ball. They were able to play the ball quickly and efficiently, with deliberation in crafting as many opportunities as we needed. We typically passed the ball out of the defense even under pressure.

England, for all its possesion, ran itself into the ground and worked so much harder for less clear cut opportunities. It was instructive how Gerrard was typically huffing and puffing and oten slide tackling. He just lacked the ability to settle down and thread subtle passes.

Honestly, if the pitch was dry, I thought England would have even been more vulnerable to our possession and short passing game. It all reminded me of what happens when England play teams like Brazil, France, and Portugal and simply struggle. Getting back to what I said about France leveraging her immigrants, this is also about psychology. It's all about being mean and angry and confident.

I believe the aforementioned nations still have such individuals, even Croatia. Our coach Bilic and our players truly wanted to stick it to England for the perception, right or wrong, of English arrogance. On the other hand, other than Rooney, I don't know of an English player right now who has the confidence and anger to take the game to their opponent.

It almost seemed that the English players were out there as a matter of routine. Hell, a lot of them almost ran to their dressing rooms after the match, led by the coach. Shit, take your medicine and face the other teams...and, most importantly, your fans.

I feel badly for England fans. After the smoke clears, I still have a soft spot for England. They simply gave too much to the world, let alone what they have and continue to do for football. Actually, I am disgusted and appalled at the anti-English sentiment spewed by all nationalities on YouTube. Suddenly, to many Russians, us Croatians are fellow slavic brothers.

I like to think the world is getting better and that such sentiments are honest, but I have my doubts. Anyways, I digress.

I've noticed it too

I'm only browsing very casually of a quite a few sites in the aftermath of England failing to qualify and I never realised how many people are happy to see them fail. England, next to Brazil, argueably have the biggest fanbases worldwide but they have a lot of haters too.

Thanks Tronche. Anelka and Henry would have been enough to prove the point.

mate - "To be sure, he does score and he has scored in major tournaments. However, maybe we differ in terms of what constitutes a big game? I consider a big game one that, if won, will give his team an award of deep advancement in a tournament or league play. There has to be consistency.

Hence, given that England is not consistent in doing this, not many of her NT players are big game players at this level. Scoring against Brazil in WC 2002 is not a big game accomplishment as England did not win and basically were outplayed significantly. "

This is where we disagree. Sorry, if a player continues to score in big (read ELIMINATION) games for his national team, in WC and Euro Nations Cup and his team fails to do THEIR part in advancing, I can't see how that works against the player when judging him.

Owen has shown up and scored in big games. What else was he supposed to do??? Score THREE times against Brazil??? Score another against Argentina at France98??? Score two times against Portugal at Portugal04 when Sven had them 11 behind the ball when Rooney went out with an injury???

He did his part: he scored in the big game putting his team up a goal EACH time.

It was England who blew those leads or lost the games only to be eliminated. And because England lost it's not a big game??? That makes absolutely no sense.

This is where we disagree. Sorry, if a player continues to score in big (read ELIMINATION) games for his national team, in WC and Euro Nations Cup and his team fails to do THEIR part in advancing, I can't see how that works against the player when judging him.

For qualifying, yes, especially against weaker teams, I agree. Other than Germany, England haven't lit anybody up in qualifying. Similarly, the English media make a major deal out of Beckham's free kick many years ago against Greece.

Anyways, for me, the big games are in actual competitions where one wins. Owen, to my recollection, didn't score against the likes of Argentina and Brazil and Portugal in winning situations.

That's completely irrelevant, Mate. I realise that you don't like what Owen said (and I can't think of a sane person who would agree with his nonsense), but enough with this unjustified criticism, please. You cannot seriously expect Michael Owen to win games on his own.

Michael Owen already has 40 goals for his country, an excellent strike rate at club level and was European Footballer of the Year in 2001. His credentials are unquestionable when it comes to goalscoring, which as a striker, is his main role.

I'm also aware that you're happy about Croatia's victory in England - as you should be, but let's not get carried away. We've beaten you before (I recall England winning 4-1 away in Yugoslavia as a kid when the best Croats, Serbs, etc played in one team), and will again. Congratulations on the qualification, but don't assume things will stay this way forever.

As for you rating Robert Kovac ahead of Ferdinand and Terry, I don't know what to say lol. Just bear in mind that neither of those players played against Croatia the other week, so they can't be blamed for that.

Mark

Owen is decent international class striker, nothing more, nothing else. I stand by my comments about him not being the type of striker who brings something extra to his team, of not making a winning impact in must win games at the highest level. He most certainly is not a world class striker. Above all, he is not at all worthy to make the sort of proclamation that he did about Croatian players allegedly not being able to make the England squad.

And, Terry and Ferdinand have nothing on Robert Kovac, who has been an outstanding club and NT player for a long time. I never have seen him break down catastrophically as did these English players on occasion. Mind you, that's not the be all and end all of defending, as mistakes are made. But, you have to be kidding me if you don't think Kovac is at least the equal of Terry and Ferdinand in terms of skill, position, and leadership presence.

I also don't put any stock whatsoever into England beating Yugoslavia, as Croatian players never put heart and soul into any such games for reasons we need not get into. Suffice to say, Croatia as an independent nation has more than outperformed England at the NT level. Yes, we were well beaten in Euro 2004, but these 2 games are rather definitive, no?

Look, I actually am defending England against some of the vile crap that people around the world spew in the aftermath of elimination. But, on some level, I can understand why people love sticking it to England because of the media and statements like Owen makes, which are ubiquitous. And

Nobody is getting carried away here, least of all Croatian fans like myself. We beat England home and away in critical qualifying matches. Hell, in Zagreb we beat a full England squad 2 - 0 in a dominating fashion.

But, we'll get another chance at this during WC qualifying. It should be really interesting. Like I said, I am excited about some of our young players. I hope we can keep the coaching momentum going, as Bilic probably will look for more lucrative opportunities once the Euros are over.

Sure wish Capello would give Croatia a good look.

mate wrote:Owen is decent international class striker, nothing more, nothing else. I stand by my comments about him not being the type of striker who brings something extra to his team, of not making a winning impact in must win games at the highest level. He most certainly is not a world class striker.

At this very moment, no he's not world class, as he's hardly played a great deal of football since Euro 2004. His career record is certainly close to "world class" as far as being a striker is concerned, however. He has been voted European Footballer of the Year, and you don't garner such an award for nothing.

mate wrote:Above all, he is not at all worthy to make the sort of proclamation that he did about Croatian players allegedly not being able to make the England squad.

He's 100% wrong on that point. But if he's not worthy to have an opinion, then neither are any of us on here, so we'll have to shut the place down :P

mate wrote:And, Terry and Ferdinand have nothing on Robert Kovac, who has been an outstanding club and NT player for a long time. I never have seen him break down catastrophically as did these English players on occasion.

Well, I can't profess to have watched every single game that Bayern Munich played while Robert was there, but I can assure you that when Rio Ferdinand is injured, it makes a difference to both Manchester United and England. John Terry is rather slow (Kovac isn't exactly a cheetah himself), but Chelsea struggled defensively in his absence last season.

Rio Ferdinand and John Terry have never broken down catastrophically as you put it, so I have no idea what you're referring to there.

Back to Kovac, one of the seasons he spent with Juve was in Serie B, so I'd hope he at least performed well in the second tier!

mate wrote:Mind you, that's not the be all and end all of defending, as mistakes are made. But, you have to be kidding me if you don't think Kovac is at least the equal of Terry and Ferdinand in terms of skill, position, and leadership presence.

No, I'm not kidding :P

mate wrote:I also don't put any stock whatsoever into England beating Yugoslavia, as Croatian players never put heart and soul into any such games for reasons we need not get into.

Then why did Yugoslavia reach the quarter-finals in the 1990 World Cup? Are you saying they deliberately let England thrash them in their own backyard, but tried in every other game in that period? LOL.

mate wrote: Suffice to say, Croatia as an independent nation has more than outperformed England at the NT level. Yes, we were well beaten in Euro 2004, but these 2 games are rather definitive, no?

Absolutely, those two games are definitive, in showing that Croatia are the better team at this moment in time.

Croatia has not "more than outperformed England at the NT level", as England progressed further in 1996, 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2006, whereas Croatia did better in 1998 and now 2008.

mate wrote:Look, I actually am defending England against some of the vile crap that people around the world spew in the aftermath of elimination. But, on some level, I can understand why people love sticking it to England because of the media and statements like Owen makes, which are ubiquitous.

I don't care what peasants around the world think about us, and I can imagine how intelligent the "debates" on You Tube might be. It's simply irrelevant to me what people who are not qualified to clean my bathroom have to say, and you really have no need to defend us. Your team qualified and you have the bragging rights - and it would be the same the other way around. That's cool.

Owen's statement is hardly ubiquitous, however. From what I've watched and read, most people over here regard this current Croatia team very highly. Indeed, after the Euro 2008 draw was made today, one of the BBC pundits suggested that Croatia might be a good bet for the tournament.

I think what annoyed people most was finishing behind a garbage team like Russia.

mate wrote:Sure wish Capello would give Croatia a good look.

Well, you never know. I think he'll most likely demand a very high salary (as he should with his CV), and I guess only a few Football Associations can/will pay that.

The English demise is quite exaggerated if you ask me, first of all they are hardly the worst underachievers among the big nations and second, a team that reaches the QF three consecutive times and goes out twice on penalty shootouts is obviously a contender. Missing once is a fluke, and can happen to any team.

Being the big fish that they are, and speaking a language that everybody understands obviously makes them an easy target for mockery. If people actually bothered learning Spanish, Aragones and his over bloated clowns would be the obvious laughing stock of Europe. Familiarity breads contempt as they say.

Sweden where lucky in the draw. Denmark and Hungary is manageable.

Mark

I wish it were just peasants and louts that spew xenophobic drivel, but unfortunately it's more than that and I think you know it. I have come across a few well read Croatians saying nasty things about the English after all of this that are simply wrong.

Likewise, I read some sharp witted and grammatically excellent retorts to baiting by many an Englishman, not just on YouTube. Don't get me wrong, as I agree with Glenn that England being strong as a nation on many levels and that English being the world's de facto vernacular stokes anti-English sentiment. But, so too do the English tabloids and mass media.

Come on, I have read so many posters on the BBC chat boards and such that routinely dismiss Croatian football, much as Michael Owen did.

Oh yeah...no way would I rate England having done better than Croatia internationally 1996 and on. We got a 3rd at WC 1998, which is quite significant. Both nations have missed Euros, but we get the nod because we knocked you out of this one.



Let's see which of us has to eat humble pie in the next 2 years. Actually, tell me how it tastes right now, so that I met prepare.

Of course they're peasants, which is why I pay little attention to their words. And I'm not talking about Croatians at all, who would have every right to gloat, but Russians and other pondlife.

As for your comment about the "media", I expect better from you, Mate. How is "The English media", which is vast and cannot be packaged into one neat little box, any different from any other country in the world? Yes, they are biased, but who isn't?? Why does the English media stoke hatred, when I'm sure it's no different from anywhere else?

That's the kind of nonsense I've come to expect from people like 'Uaglio, but he can't help it as he's most likely mentally deficient , but you know better.

I take your point about the 3rd place, and yes Croatia 1998 is better than any team England have produced in that era, but I still stand by my tournament-by-tournament breakdown :P lol

But I'll certainly concede the point that players like Boban, Boksic, Suker, Jarni and the genius that was Robert Prosinecki were part of one of the most talented European teams I've ever witnessed.

Humble pie? I'm eating plenty, and it tastes disgusting, rather akin to the "food" the greasy cafe in my neighbourhood produces, not the finely crafted hams I'm sure you're used to. I still remember when the draw was made, and I drank Russian vodka to celebrate such a generous group :P

So, yes, I deserve to eat plenty of humble pie for my arrogance.

The English tabloids is the obvious reason why the English language makes England an easy target for mockery, what countries tabloids isn't like that? Problem is that no one ever picks up der Bild Zeitung. Not to speak of New York Post, it beats any of the rubbish I picked up in London .Frankly I my self used to walk in to that trap before I settled in London. English media is no worse than media else where. I'd actually like to argue that Britons in general are the least bombastic about their country, having all that collective guilt about their history looming over them. Right or wrong.

Mark & Glenn

I was referring to both the tabloids and more respectable English media, especially with regards to forums where posters quickly post their opinions. Coupled with what a serious and well exposed English tabloid media say, yes, one can be forgiven for thinking there is a bit of reluctance to give Croatia their due...all of this exacerbated by the comments made by Owen.

Sorry guys, this wasn't just about the lowest common denominator cultural elements across a swath of societies. I read some nasty things and well written acerbic commentary posted by even Scottish, Irish, and Welsh supporters, let alone what Russians, Croatians, Nigerians, and others stated. And I understand that much of this is simple competitive rivalry.

However, like I said in the first paragraph, some negativity is stoked by the attitude of the considerably large English tabloid press. But, forget even the tabloids. I remember once Matt Clark and I ribbing each other when Four Four Two declared the United squad that won the Euro Cup in the late 90s as the greatest team ever, right ahead of the Brazilian NT that won the 1970 WC. Even Matt laughed with me on that one.

Plus, the same magazine once proclaimed Frank Lampard the 2nd best midfielder after Zidane. I even read one article that was titled according to a quote allegedly made by Gerrard called: Zizou! Want some?

I agree that people are entitled to their own opinion. But, I just think it is irresponsible on Owen's part to motivate his opponents to the nth degree already. I am not sure this is good psychology. Can you imagine what Croatia will do if Owen is playing during WC qualification? I bet the locker room will have news clippings of his statements saying that Croatians are not good enough.



Anyways, you both know me well enough to know that I am a general Anglophile and why. I stand by that. But at least in sport, England got what it deserved from Croatia this campaign. Now watch this come to haunt me if something goes amiss during this upcoming WC campaign for Croatia.

I've had humble pie often enough and don't at all like the taste.

Mate

My point was basically, that if anyone just would have read a Spanish, Italian, German or whatever country ditto, you would probably have seen some outrageous comments there as well. Happens in Scandinavia all the time, not so often when it comes to football perhaps, but other sports, I love it when they call some top athlete in a minor sport a world star or compare them with the likes of Muhammed Ali or Pelé, Boye used to be pretty good at that when it came to cross country skiers, in Sweden they have one in female hepathlon whom they constantly refer to as a world star of Beckhams proportions.

Happens once'n while here in the US too, but they may be forgiven considering the size of the country, even if some of their stars are known only in the flyover states.

When it comes to Owens comments, thats just normal pre-match trash talk, when does it not happen? We heard plenty in the run up to Italy-France and I suspect we will hear much more of it next year.

Glenn

I agree in general about tabloid cultures in general and specifically about English vulnerability due to the exposure of the language.

However, for even all the trash talk between France and Italy, I am not sure it cuts like Owen did against Croatia. For me, calculated trash talk is one thing. Denigrating the ability of your opponent is another, a fine distinction noted in many US sports. You don't want to give a real reason for the opponent to rise psychologically to the occasion, not that world class athletes can't without this, but I think you get what I am saying.

I think this holds for most team sports.

I get what you're saying, Mate, and have never defended Michael Owen's comments, as they were stupid and false.

But Glenn is 100% right. It isn't just the "English media" that are biased in nature, and I know you appreciate that, even if dumbasses like 'Uaglio don't.

One reason I make an issue of this, is because I remember Euro 2004 being discussed on here and a few people becoming upset because the pundits on BBC were biased towards England. Of course they were biased! They're English, and they played for the NT in their day. Nobody in their right mind could expect them to be impartial!

And I stand by my comments that the same would apply in any other country in the world.

I'm going to have to check up on Uaglio and see what he wrote.

Ah yes, this place is becoming alive again!

mate wrote:

Anyways, for me, the big games are in actual competitions where one wins. Owen, to my recollection, didn't score against the likes of Argentina and Brazil and Portugal in winning situations.

There is no other way than to put it bluntly: that is one of the stupidest statements you have ever made here.

I really don't want to offend you but really now. You will say anything to win an argument.

I've said what I have had to say. I'm thru with what was a good exchange and has turned into a stupid discussion. Thanks.

yeah, I think the good old times have returned...

M&M:

Wasn't part of your motto, big time players win big time games?

agentesecreto wrote:M&M:

Wasn't part of your motto, big time players win big time games?

No. Big players make big plays in big games.

Let's see. At France98, what was England's big game? Oh yeah, that's right, against Argentina. Did Owen make the big play? He sure did by putting England up 2-1.

Fast forward to WC2002, what was England's big game? That's right, you guessed it, against Brazil. Did Own make the play in that game? You bet he did, putting them up 1-0.

Fast forward again to Portugal04, what was England's big game? That's right, against Portugal. Did Owen make the big play in that game too??? You're darn tootin he did, giving England a 1-0 lead.

In my book, Owen is big game, or at least he was when he was winning Player of the Year awards.

He scored a hattrick in Munich against Germany in the WC06-qualification. In Europe a game doesn't get much bigger than Germany-England.

Glenn Stromberg wrote:He scored a hattrick in Munich against Germany in the WC06-qualification. In Europe a game doesn't get much bigger than Germany-England.

It was for WC2002 qualification.

The game was "Big" because of one important reason: at the time England needed a win, otherwise their chances for qualification would have been close to doomed.

They had lost to Germany 1-0 in London, drawn against Finland 0-0, and couldn't afford to drop anymore points even if they had beaten Finland in the return leg, beaten Albania and Greece.

A loss would have been devastating. That is why the victory in Munich was huge and the game "Big".

pramzan wrote:

mate wrote:

Anyways, for me, the big games are in actual competitions where one wins. Owen, to my recollection, didn't score against the likes of Argentina and Brazil and Portugal in winning situations.

There is no other way than to put it bluntly: that is one of the stupidest statements you have ever made here.

I really don't want to offend you but really now. You will say anything to win an argument.

I've said what I have had to say. I'm thru with what was a good exchange and has turned into a stupid discussion. Thanks.

Sit down, relax, and have a glass of vino. There is nothing stupid at all in what I wrote.



Look, I said what I said as plainly as I could. I just for the life of me can't see Owen as a world class player, as somebody reliable in a big game match. This is not about me winning an argument. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Hell, my being good natured shows I'm not interested in a parlor game of wits.



Ask Leo, I got sucked into such an exchange with a PhD on another forum in an exchange that has gone back and forth for near a year now. We're in the bowels of doing quantitative economic analysis that might be used as indicators for predicting nation building success.

For that, you can by all means call me stupid.

M&M has proven his point. Owen is a big time player.

agentesecreto wrote:M&M:

Wasn't part of your motto, big time players win big time games?

Haven't you figured out after all of these years that the bar keeps changing with this guy? He should run for political office although he probably would look a lot like Howard Dean.

He he he or a Republican for sure.

I don't think anyone can deny that Michel Owen during a period of his career was a world class player and that he scored a couple of important goals for England. He never reached the heights people expected though, much of it because of his injuries. Frankly no English player won any big games for years, isn't that what all this is about?