...?? to qualify for '98 England had to top a group containing Italy.....to qualify for '02 they had to top a group containing Germany.....currently you have Spain and France in the same qualifying group with only ONE sure to advance to the world cup.....
Personally I think a team that contained Cole, Terry, Ferdinand, Neville, Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard, Owen and Rooney (WC 2006) should have had more than enough to reach at-least the semi-finals. I don't recall all this talk of England being so bad starting until after the shambles of WC 2010. Obviously Euro 2008 must have started it all off but I still seem to remember everyone going into the WC 2010 with a lot of optimism, unlike Euro 2012 when a lot of people (laughably) suggested that we would be lucky to make it out of the group and that Ireland had more chance of winning it than us.
i voted no. superpower = brazil germany italy world power = argentina spain france uraguay holland englands bench mark seems to be a quarterfinal every so often. besides their controversal win on home soil in 1966 theyve gone as far as the semifinals on only one other occasion, 1990. their euro record can only be described as embarressing, never advancing past the semifinals. just not the record of a so-called world power
We beat Spain in Euro 96? Also in past Euro tournaments where the finals consisted of only 4 or 8 teams we have beaten the top teams. Until not too long ago the Euros was an 8 team tournament. We have beaten Germany and Argentina quite recently in tournaments, albeit not in the KO stages. Brazil is not an elite team atm, they were easily beaten by England at Wembley just over a month ago and are nowhere near as good as they were a decade ago.
Even with Brazil far from its usual status it doesn't make England any better. England hasn't made it to a final since 66 not even in euro or Olympic tournaments. It would take a lifetime for England to reach the status of Argentina's, Germany, Spain,France etc.England with all respect is 2nd tier.
I didn't say Brazil are a elite team now,I obviously meant historically.Hence why I didn't list Spain as historically they haven't been an elite team.Before 2008 they had only won one Euros and had never come close to winning the World Cup.
Look every team loses but 1 loses in tournaments, so there's a chance of 89% that Germany will get knocked out of a tournament by somebody, to be that person is not that big of a deal. Now.. Only 1 team wins the tournament.. and for every tournament Germany probably has an 11% of winning it! and likely 11% of the time they'll win it. England.. that chance drops to 1%.. Brazil it goes up to about 17%. So you see how statistically a team losing a tournament or getting beaten by somebody is quite normal, but a team winning is quite impressive? That's why most times we look into winners and not who you beat to get to the end of the tournament. History forgets those. in 2009 and 2010 Brazil were #1 in the world... how is that a decade? Short memory fail.
as previously stated england has never got past the semifinals at a euro. you only got to play that 3rd/4th place match after you had lost the semifinal, mate!
[It still would've been considered getting past the semis and then playing in the 3rd place match in tournament progression of the day... Why don't you stick w/your March Madness brackets and calculating yards lost per "sack" in your fantasy gridiron, MATE? ]
Eh? In 2009/10 Spain were (they still are) clearly the best team in the world. Netherlands and Germany were also superior to them, probably Argentina as well, and Uruguay if you count the WC. Brazil were solid but pretty boring under Dunga, but never had the quality to win the WC with that squad. They were playing Melo and Gilberto Silva still..
In case you haven't noticed, England doesn't have a team at the Olympics... True we haven't made it to a final since 1966, we have a colapsed at the vital stages of tournaments since then and overall, whilst consistently making the QF, we have to say that we have a poor tournament record. 3 semi finals since 1966 is not good enough. However, these so called other 'super powers' such as Netherlands have never won a trophy. Argentina have not won since 1986. Take into account also that it is harder to win the Euros than the SA equivalent when you have 2 or 3 contenders compared to 6/7 even 8 in Europe. Another interesting thing I found, England is unbeaten (in normal time) against the following countries: Argentina since 1986 - 2W 3D Brazil since 2009 - 1W Spain since 2005 - 1W Italy since since 2002 - 1W 1D Also, we only have losing records to Brazil, Italy and Romania. Every other country we have beaten more times than lost.
England are one of the most overrated soccer nations. The only place they're a world power is in the minds of their supporters. They haven't done fuck all in an international tournament since 1966, and the U.S. has advanced as far as them in two of the last three World Cups. They are overhyped by the English tabloids and by the hype surrounding the Premiership, which is marketed as the best league in the world. Tactically, the English have always been somewhat retarded -- they pioneered kick-and-chase, Route 1 football. I think the US will win a World Cup before England ever wins a second one.
hey dont attack the messenger! whether its being said by an american a swede or a chinaman, it doesnt change the fact that you guys have never reached a euro final. In the competitions history 12 different european nations have reached at least 1 euro final. that list includes supposedly lesser nations such as greece,belgium,denmark,yugoslavia. and it doesnt seem to matter if we stick with our march madness and super bowls, you guys still can't beat us at the world cup. embaressed you in 1950 but at least you scraped a draw in south africa.
not really from the Confed Cup until the end of the World Cup Brazil was #1. But people tend to have really short memory, because of the result of the WC. Brazil went into that WC as the #1 team in the world.
[You upset us w/the help of a dodgy ref crew and suspect inaction from the Brazilian FA in '50: actually LEARN some of YOUR OWN football history, mate. Or better yet, stick w/Kobe dropping forty on the Bucks by "lighting it up from downtown"!! ]
We were the European Champions of 1988. If I recall it correctly your team never made it into the Finals of that tournement. But if it is necesary to piss on other teams to lift yours, your proving the point of people talking down yours. But lets put side by side the performance of your team with that socalled super power , the Netherlands. Each one a trophy. Since 1966 the Orange team 3 times in a WC Final. England? I will not bother to bring in the performance comparison of both teams in the European Champion tournement, because it is the same story.
Holland made it to finals won a euro. In SA its all against all. There aren't little teams like San Marino, Faeroe Islands, Macedonia etc. England is just more bark than bite and nothing more. They are just a textbook style team that wont make it to a final.
They consistently qualify for major tournaments and make it it if the group stages. That's a pretty big achievement. No team has a divine right to success and England should be happy with the levle of success they achieve. But they are definitely underachieving with the talent they have. They're always in the mix in international tournaments which is more than you can say about 90% of the teams in the world. Yeah it'd say they're pretty good.
This is basically bs and why anyone would 'rep' such drivel is a total mystery. Were England able to win pk shootouts their record in European championships and World Cups would be on a par with Germany's......as far as 'route 1 football' goes...England haven't played any more 'route 1' than anyone else for the past twenty years or more....As far as the USA goes the fact is they have failed to produce a SINGLE outfield player who can play for one of the World's very top clubs.....not one.....and no, Spurs are NOT 'one of the world's very top clubs'... the Dutch are not generally considered 'route 1'...but check out their winner vs Argentina in the '98 World Cup for the ultimate 'route 1' goal....
Name an American player that would get anywhere near the England squad? Howard might be third choice keeper if others are injured, and Dempsey again may make the odd squad if a few of the other strikers are injured. Donavon? Possibly, would have a few caps, mostly off the bench. We might not be as good as Spain but we are much, much better than the US.
of course, I forgot everytime England exit a major championship its down to bad luck, poor officiating, the pitch, sepp blatter, Michel platini. am I leaving anything out?
good god man, you actually believe englands euro record would be on par with Germany if you won a few penalty shootouts? Germany's are 3 time champions, you guys are no-time champions. Germany have made the final 6 times, you guys have made zero finals. Germany have been to the semifinals on 8 occasions, you guys twice. changing a few England PK losses into wins won't turn you into germany