With everybody having finished one game of group play what was your favorite game of the round? I think Spain-Italy was the best game of the round, followed by Ukraine-Sweden. Both were fairly wide open and had lots of chances.
I thought the first half of the Spain Italy game was quite dire. Crap pitch which ruined Spain's passing. But the second half was probably the best game so far. Ukraine and Sweden was very exciting, along with Denmark and the Netherlands. The England France game from a neutral point was the most boring.
Agree that England France was my least favorite game so far. Poland-Greece also didn't do much for me, as I thought both teams looked pretty poor.
I actually thought the Poland Greece game was exciting! So did most pundits on English TV Although I agree from a technical point of view it wasn't good. But in terms of excitment and the way Greece fought back and missed a winning penalty I thought it was very interesting. I enjoyed the Russia game that was very good.
In terms of quality: Italy-Spain In terms of drama: Ukraine-Sweden (honorable mentions: Poland-Greece) In terms of attacking play: Russia-Czechs Worst match in every category: France-England
I was only able to listen to France-England on radio at work (so I can comment less)....I thought Germany Portugal was a little boring as well.
1. UKR/SWE 2. IRL/CRO 3. ESP/ITA ENG/FRA was a stinker. In fact, England were so poor I put them at the same level as the Czech and the Irish. At least the Czechs and the Irish had tried to attack.
Ther Germany Portugal game was most boring for me.. at least the players in our game had an excuse for playing a very slow tempo game as it was 35C, and there were some good moments. I struggle to remember anything interesting about Germany v Portugal
Wait until next Tuesday and you will see how "poor" England are against Ukraine. A team who rely on Shevchenko can not call anyone else poor. Ukraine V Sweden was a fun game between two poor teams. England V France was a poor game between two good teams.
Claiming England are on the same level as Ireland and the Czechs is borderline trolling. England dominated at least 40 minutes against France. Let's see how well Ukraine do against France and England before claiming England are poor.
It was rather dire, but the last 20mins was edge of the seat stuff as Portugal had chance after chance. And before that, there was the goal, the Boateng tackle, some Hummels heroics, some (albeit infrequent) nice moves and, most importantly, there was always at least one team that showed the will to win and the error rate was much lower than in the England game.
I enjoyed the opening game between Greece and Poland, 2nd half was quality. Russia vs Czech's a good match also with plenty of goals. I like the first half of denmark-holland, 2nd half I found boring. 2nd half of Germany vs Portugal I enjoyed due to the tactical battle in midfield and Portugal had some good chances to equalise. Italy vs Spain the best match for me and the best quality. Ireland vs Croatia wasnt a bad watch and had some goals, as well as contentious decisions. France vs England first half I thought was good, 2nd rubbish. Ukraine vs Sweden was cool in the 2nd half. Tonight, there will be some great football and I'm expecting plenty of goals in both games. I think Denmark v Portugal might be a 2-2 or 3-2 either way. Same for holland-Germany game. I'm pumped!
England were poor in the game against France. There is no way to deny it. It is irrelevant how Ukraine do against France. This is the one fact we do have - England were attrocious. Ireland and the Czechs had, at least, gone forward in numbers, England did not. Instead of getting mentally erect, you should just hope that England are better against Sweden than they were against France. P.S. I must have missed the 40 minutes of English domination you speak of.
So Guillem Balague, the Spanish football expert, who is totally impartial, is an idiot? Let me quote his twitter: Guillem Balague @GuillemBalague 50 good minutes of England, poor ending though. But the rival was an improved France. See you at the quarters (if we qualify that is!) Guillem Balague @GuillemBalague Many positive things that Eng is doing today: pace, some possesion, solidity Hmm I wonder who's opinion I respect more? Yes, that sounds really attrocious doesn't it? England had the best Chances until Nasri scored. And had control of some of the second half. France barely created anything more.
I'm guessing you're one of the many who only watched edited highlights? There are plenty of non biased football experts who believe England were the better team for much of the first half. If you want to deny this, keep it up. Guillem Balague @GuillemBalague "50 good minutes of England" I love all the England haters. You're so bitter England didn't lose. Sorry to disapoint.
I wouldn't say England at any point dominated, but they played very effectively for the first 30 minutes of the match. They were organized at the back, but not so far withdrawn that they didn't have outlets for attacking chances on the other end. After their goal, they spent too much of the match playing with 8 or 9 men in the defensive third, and had no outlet to relieve the pressure the French were applying. As for the thread topic: For me, it was Ukraine - Sweden. This match was not loaded with "big names," but the ones there were came to play. Lots of open play, and a very evenly contested match that could have gone either way. The scenes of the host nation celebrating and the two goals by their aging superstar put this one over the top in terms of drama as well.
I do not know who this Guillem Balague is but even he does not say anything about English dominance. And, yes, if someone suggests that England "dominated" at any time of that match they are an idiot. Besides, somehow i do not care if you respect my opinion or not. What you must do is respect my right to state my opinion. Just like I respect yours.
He is Spanish, works for Sky Sports Spanish coverage, writes for AS the Spanish paper. You're making out England were poor and atroicious which is total rubbish. Even if England didn't dominate, they were not dominated either for most of the game. I respect opinions that are not irrational. Saying they are as Poor as teams who had lost 3-1 and 4-1.
They were as poor as the teams that had lost 1-3 and 1-4, they were just lucky not to let in 3 or 4 goals. France had a 19-5 shot advantage. Even the Czechs who lost 4-1 did not look so bad. Regardless, when I said England were poor, I did not make a general statement on their form but on what they looked like in the France match. So - relax.
We weren't lucky to not let in 3 or 4 goals at all.. re watch the match and you'll see that France only had one clear opportunity from a corner that Diarra headed wide. The rest of their shots were long range, and their goal came from a good shot from Nasri. At no point did France look like they were going to score. We could have easily won that game had Milner finished into the open goal, and if Gerrard had been given the blatant free kick on the edge of the box.
What about Benzema at the end of the first half? Or Ribery in the second half? England had 1 shot on goal. France had 15 and half a dozen were very good chances.
France had about 2 chances in the second half that even troubled the keeper. 15 mostly weak off target attempts yes. Laurent Blanc: “They started well in the first 20 minutes. We were timid and were punished.” I agree England offensively need to attack a lot more however. Not losing was the prime objective.
