So the draw has been made, I've ranked them in their positions, so the first two teams on the list play each other first: Group B France England Switzerland Croatia Other groups: Group A Portugal Greece Spain Russia Group C Sweden Bulgaria Denmark Italy Group D Czech Republic Latvia Germany Netherlands This is a good draw although France are a top team. The group is stronger than Group A, but fortunately if we get through the group we're in the easier side of the draw 13 June - France 17 June - Switzerland 21 June - Croatia
Not too bad really. Obviously main problem is France but as the lads on the BBC said, France are notoriously slow starters. Let's hope it's true. I can't wait to see some group D games - should be good.
There are some real crackers in this group stage: Portugal - Spain Denmark - Sweden Germany - Netherlands These are three of the fiercest rivalries in Europe. England - France should also be a great game with so many of the French players in the Premiership or on their way there.
I don't think thats an easy group by any means.The Swiss are no mugs and can be dangerous.We'll have to play to our ability to progress or we'll be out. That being said, i do think we can get out of this group, perhaps not win it, but certainly get out of it. The draw does favour us after that though i would agree.
A good draw, the fact is we should get out of this group and if we do we wouldn't have to face France again until the final (should we get there).
I think this is a good draw for us, France will tough, but we get the hard game out of the way and we then should beat both Switzerland and Croatia, even though they are both good teams.
The opportunity is there, but this is a very tricky draw - way more so than first appears. Switzerland are a very handy side and Croatia have come back from their WC '98 hangover. And France being slow starters? Perhaps, but they are the only side to take maximum points, and rather easily, in the qualifiers. France to win the group, I think, and the number two spot wide open. There's work to be done if England are to qualify further. (I wonder what the yobbos make of this draw - assuming yobbos think, of course.)
Doesn't really matter what I'd prefer - England are in this group and it is more difficult than initially appears, with a lot of work to be done to qualify further. Neither Switzerland nor Croatia are anyone's mugs.
No team at Euro 2004 is a mug. I don't think anyone would say that, but certainly as a group this is very fair and there for England to get through.
For those of you wondering who plays for Switzerland, here is our qualifying roster: Goal Jörg Stiel (35, Borussia Mönchengladbach) Pascal Zuberbühler (32, Basel) Fabrice Borer (32, Grasshoppers) Defense Bruno Berner (26, SC Freiburg) Bernt Haas (25, West Bromwich Albion) Stéphane Henchoz (29, Liverpool) Ludovic Magnin (24, Werder Bremen) Remo Meyer (23, 1860 München) Patrick Müller (27, Lyon) Murat Yakin (29, Basel) Marco Zwyssig (32, Basel) Midfield Fabio Celestini (28, Marseille) Benjamin Huggel (26, Basel) Christoph Spycher (25, Grasshoppers) Johann Vogel (26, Eindhoven) Raphaël Wicky (26, SV Hamburg) Hakan Yakin (26, Basel) Mario Cantaluppi (29, Basel) Ricardo Cabanas (24, En Avant Guingamp) Forwards Stéphane Chapuisat (34, Young Boys) Alex Frei (24, Rennes) Marco Streller (22, Basel) Milaim Rama (28, Thun) Johann Vonlanthen (18, Eindhoven)* *Didn't play a second in qualifying, but has been starting for our U21 team. He's getting quite a bit of playing time with PSV lately, so I wouldn't be surprised if he makes the Euro 2004 roster.
Hakan Yakin is the main threat. The centre back partnership of Henchoz and Murat Yakin should be decent, but I've heard there have been some dressing room problems between them. Considering the Swiss have had a lot of youth team success recently I'm very surprised to see so few genuinely young players in there. No-one under the age of 22, apart from the 18 year old you mentioned who hasn't been called up yet. Should be a good match and I reckon Switzerland-Croatia could be very interesting viewing indeed.
oh really.. just like you proved that at the world cup against the likes of denmark ,uruguay and senegal..
England are perfectly capable of getting at least a draw out of the France game. That's all we need to make sure France will have to play to win all the way through to the third game. France still have Barthez as their number 1 keeper and their central defence is far from settled. Mexes is vastly overrated, Boumsong is so far inexperiencd at the highest level, Desailly's best days are behind him, Gallas is talented but inconsistent and Thuram is very strong but has spent too long playing at right back. I also think their fullbacks are another potential weakness, Sagnol is average while Lizarazu is another who was great at his peak but is on the decline now. Their attacking midfielders and strikers are exceptionally talented at going forward but lazy at tracking back. On the counter attack with the pace and sharpness of Owen and Rooney, plus the energy and determination of Beckham and Gerrard in midfield, England have enough to get what they want from the game. It won't be as easy as the Rugby, but the game will be well fought.
Le lol, how long and hard should I laugh at that? Reality is more like Mexes will make Owen his bitch. The only chance you stand at a draw or winning would be playing 11 men back like Denmark and Urugay in 02, then hoping for some opportunism in counter attacks.. February 99, Wembley, England-France, anyone remember that one? I believe you were bitch slapped. Really badly. "Allez les blue, allez les blue" , "ole, ole, ole", I think is what your fans were singing at the end of the match when the French were toying with you, in contrast to "stand up if you hate the French" or "I'd rather be a **** than a frog" at the begining of the match.
Are you trying to wind me up with "France is better than England" smack? Ha ha ha ha ha. Club before country ya numpty. At the moment the Frogs are a shade better, don't have to be a flipin genius to see that fella, and i wont lose any sleep over saying it either. However, they play these games on the field for a reason.
LOL! That's the best you can manage? One friendly from nearly five years ago when Howard Wilkinson was caretaker manger? Remind me again as to the player who scored both goals for France that day...ahh Nicolas Anelka was the name I believe... now remind me exactly where he'll be come June time? Nice to see you're completely overlooking the last time England and France played. Which was in Paris, and I remember the French were 1-0 up and trying to play the "ole ole ole" football and acting as arrogant as possible, until Dyer ripped right through your feeble defence and Mickey Owen volleyed it in Keep going with your little smack talk frog boy, if you truly believed in your team then you wouldn't need to come in here and mouth off.
I think a draw in the first game, but if we do beat France in the first game, will France lose there nerve like they did in the World Cup? There current team certainly isnt any better than that of 2002. Whatever happens, it wont be easy for either team.
If you truly believed in YOUR team you wouldnt be justifying being crushed by France at Wembley and praising a draw in Paris. Who gives a shiat where Anelka will be in June? Besides, that just shows the strenght of our team, we got 4-5 guys that can takeover his role, (and it wasn't 2 goals he scored, it was 3, the semi-blind linesman didnt see the ball go past the line). By the way, is it just me, or is managing always the typical English excuse for poor performances?
Managing is a perfectly valid excuse when the man in question is Howard Wilkinson. Let alone the fact that the team that day will bear no relation to how England will be at Euro 2004. Also you seem to be conveniently forgetting how the French coach at the World Cup was quickly used as a scapegoat for the team's poor performance and forced out. I think there isn't a club or country in the world which doesn't hold their manager responsible for poor performances and unacceptable results. As for Anelka, I think we all know that although France have a strong squad, but after Henry and Trezeguet they are light in genuinely top quality strikers. Cisse and Wiltord are not good enough at present to produce consistently at international level. So boasting about that position rings a little hollow. When you can afford to have people like Kluivert and Makaay on the bench, or have the 3 R's up front like Brazil, then you can come talk about having great depth.
Disagree with you about the French defense, but agree about most other things. I think Gallas is excellent - if not THE best EPL defender, then one of them. I've always thought he was better than Terry. Thuram will likely play at RB, where he is more than adequate The other CB spot is a bit unsettled, but when you have choices like Boumsong, Mexes, Silvestre, Desailly or even Thuram, you manage. I don't think the French CBs are much better than England's, but I think they have the advantage on the flanks. Ashley Cole doesn't really defend that well, and I think Thuram or Sagnol are better than Neville. Both keepers are shaky, too. Cudicini is eligible to play for England this July, I think......... Either way, it ought to be a great game, one that I'm really looking forward to. P.S. PBD - Anelka is the 2nd most talented striker you have. You haven't really replaced him - Trez is inconsistent, Wiltord isn't international level, and Cisse has never impressed internationally.