Putting into perspective | PASOTI
  • Welcome to PASOTI. Sponsored by Lang & Potter

Putting into perspective

Oct 31, 2015
5,151
2,441
I know this is a young team who have showed great character and bonded the players with the country but before anyone gets to carried away

P7 W3 D1 L3

I know we won on pens but it was a draw after 120 minutes.
Lets not get too carried away but hope Mr Southgate can build on these foundations going forward.
 

jespafc

✨Pasoti Donor✨
🌟Sparksy Mural🌟
Oct 23, 2005
2,094
738
www.johnstanlake.com
rsp4":u4nd9fpz said:
I know this is a young team who have showed great character and bonded the players with the country but before anyone gets to carried away

P7 W3 D1 L3

I know we won on pens but it was a draw after 120 minutes.
Lets not get too carried away but hope Mr Southgate can build on these foundations going forward.

With wins against Tunisia, Panama and Sweden.

We've done well, but I think a lot of glaring flaws have been ignored by the media.

Thankfully Keane, Neville and Hoddle were all quite adamant today that we really won't progress much further with this squad unless these players are playing week in, week out. Sadly, there are quite a few who won't be, and there lies one of the major problems.
 

Super horns

⚪️ Pasoti Visitor ⚪️
Jul 26, 2008
785
57
I do think there have been positives but even Southgate has said we need to improve which shows they won't think all is perfect - not a bad thing .

We certainly need more pace and creative play in the team.
 
Aug 4, 2011
2,689
1,929
To qualify for the World Cup we were in an extremely weak group which included Lithuania, Slovenia, Malta, Slovakia and Scotland!
Our World Cup group looked easiest on paper. Everyone expected us and Belgium to progress after 2 games. So we’ve had one of the easiest qualifying groups, possibly the easiest group stage of all time, and then a bang average Colombia in last 16 and below average Sweden in the quarter final. We were favorites in every single game since qualification inlcuding the Croatia game (Dead rubber against Belgium excluded). We’ve literally played nobody but have been very VERY fortunate with our draw.
Don’t get me wrong it’s been fantastic for the country and has built up great momentum, but we are still a long way off being able to win anything.

To me it’d be the equivilant of Argyle reaching the FA CUP semi final next season by being draw against non league teams in every round.
 
Sep 13, 2003
1,879
211
football-bet-data":1ayx720f said:
To qualify for the World Cup we were in an extremely weak group which included Lithuania, Slovenia, Malta, Slovakia and Scotland!
Our World Cup group looked easiest on paper. Everyone expected us and Belgium to progress after 2 games. So we’ve had one of the easiest qualifying groups, possibly the easiest group stage of all time, and then a bang average Colombia in last 16 and below average Sweden in the quarter final. We were favorites in every single game since qualification inlcuding the Croatia game (Dead rubber against Belgium excluded). We’ve literally played nobody but have been very VERY fortunate with our draw.
Don’t get me wrong it’s been fantastic for the country and has built up great momentum, but we are still a long way off being able to win anything.

To me it’d be the equivilant of Argyle reaching the FA CUP semi final next season by being draw against non league teams in every round.

Don't agree with all of that. Sweden were in a qualifying group and finished ahead of Holland then they defeated Italy in a two legged playoff. In the group phase they finished ahead of Mexico and the World Champions Germany. Its funny how everyone bigged Sweden up before we played them...then as soon as we put in a good performance in suddenly Sweden are "below average".

Italia 90 and Euro 96 were both littered with scrappy performances against so called average teams however the legacy of those tournaments will live on. Just like this one will.
If you couldn't enjoy that tournament I wonder how you would get any enjoyment out of watching third division football!
 
Mar 8, 2011
5,697
418
27
Plymouth
Clarke_B":1uugvgrs said:
football-bet-data":1uugvgrs said:
To qualify for the World Cup we were in an extremely weak group which included Lithuania, Slovenia, Malta, Slovakia and Scotland!
Our World Cup group looked easiest on paper. Everyone expected us and Belgium to progress after 2 games. So we’ve had one of the easiest qualifying groups, possibly the easiest group stage of all time, and then a bang average Colombia in last 16 and below average Sweden in the quarter final. We were favorites in every single game since qualification inlcuding the Croatia game (Dead rubber against Belgium excluded). We’ve literally played nobody but have been very VERY fortunate with our draw.
Don’t get me wrong it’s been fantastic for the country and has built up great momentum, but we are still a long way off being able to win anything.

To me it’d be the equivilant of Argyle reaching the FA CUP semi final next season by being draw against non league teams in every round.

Don't agree with all of that. Sweden were in a qualifying group and finished ahead of Holland then they defeated Italy in a two legged playoff. In the group phase they finished ahead of Mexico and the World Champions Germany. Its funny how everyone bigged Sweden up before we played them...then as soon as we put in a good performance in suddenly Sweden are "below average".

Italia 90 and Euro 96 were both littered with scrappy performances against so called average teams however the legacy of those tournaments will live on. Just like this one will.
If you couldn't enjoy that tournament I wonder how you would get any enjoyment out of watching third division football!
Agreed.

Also not forgetting Sweden also beat France during qualifying.
 
Oct 31, 2015
5,151
2,441
football-bet-data":px21h7q7 said:
Oh and not wanting to be pedantic but it was actually

PL 7 W 3 D 2 L 2

I took it after 120 minutes mate but take your point
 
Sep 6, 2006
16,424
3,963
Clarke_B":1lsruult said:
football-bet-data":1lsruult said:
To qualify for the World Cup we were in an extremely weak group which included Lithuania, Slovenia, Malta, Slovakia and Scotland!
Our World Cup group looked easiest on paper. Everyone expected us and Belgium to progress after 2 games. So we’ve had one of the easiest qualifying groups, possibly the easiest group stage of all time, and then a bang average Colombia in last 16 and below average Sweden in the quarter final. We were favorites in every single game since qualification inlcuding the Croatia game (Dead rubber against Belgium excluded). We’ve literally played nobody but have been very VERY fortunate with our draw.
Don’t get me wrong it’s been fantastic for the country and has built up great momentum, but we are still a long way off being able to win anything.

To me it’d be the equivilant of Argyle reaching the FA CUP semi final next season by being draw against non league teams in every round.

Don't agree with all of that. Sweden were in a qualifying group and finished ahead of Holland then they defeated Italy in a two legged playoff. In the group phase they finished ahead of Mexico and the World Champions Germany. Its funny how everyone bigged Sweden up before we played them...then as soon as we put in a good performance in suddenly Sweden are "below average".

Italia 90 and Euro 96 were both littered with scrappy performances against so called average teams however the legacy of those tournaments will live on. Just like this one will.
If you couldn't enjoy that tournament I wonder how you would get any enjoyment out of watching third division football!



What was the legacy of those tournaments then? We didn't even qualify for the wc following 1990. It's typical of the media to hype everything up. Either heroes or zeroes nothing in between which in reality it was. Neither great nor bad. If one of those pens hadn't gone in v Columbia they would have been on the players backs. Fine margins
 
Regarding the sweden game.
From a tactical point of view sweden playing to their strengths against us that day rather than exploiting
our weaknesses may well have contributed to their defeat.
A narrow defensive and well organised 442 with quick counters and a shoot on site policy had been very
successful for them, and their manager stuck with it throughout the WC campaign and our game
against them.
This suited us as we could play our football with lots of space for our WBS to get forward into.
352 all game it was for us then, and when we have been allowed time and space to play the 352,
like croatia first half, we have looked a pretty decent team. Perhaps lacking a bit of creativity
and experience perhaps, but with our setpiece threat dangerous opponents. And so it proved with
maguires crucial header. As the game wore on they had to come out of their shell leaving the space
for us to create and score a second.
Its when teams press high up on us, especially on the flanks that we have struggled, which up
to now southgate hasnt found a fix. Sweden never did this. Just sat back looking for quick counters.
Which they were good at as i recall them forcing pickford into some excellent saves at times
when we lost possession.
So perhaps their manager was right to concentrate on their strengths and not on our weaknesses.
It was still a good performance and result for us that day, but their style did help us win imho.
 
Aug 4, 2011
2,689
1,929
Clarke_B":1ssyjdr4 said:
football-bet-data":1ssyjdr4 said:
To qualify for the World Cup we were in an extremely weak group which included Lithuania, Slovenia, Malta, Slovakia and Scotland!
Our World Cup group looked easiest on paper. Everyone expected us and Belgium to progress after 2 games. So we’ve had one of the easiest qualifying groups, possibly the easiest group stage of all time, and then a bang average Colombia in last 16 and below average Sweden in the quarter final. We were favorites in every single game since qualification inlcuding the Croatia game (Dead rubber against Belgium excluded). We’ve literally played nobody but have been very VERY fortunate with our draw.
Don’t get me wrong it’s been fantastic for the country and has built up great momentum, but we are still a long way off being able to win anything.

To me it’d be the equivilant of Argyle reaching the FA CUP semi final next season by being draw against non league teams in every round.

Don't agree with all of that. Sweden were in a qualifying group and finished ahead of Holland then they defeated Italy in a two legged playoff. In the group phase they finished ahead of Mexico and the World Champions Germany. Its funny how everyone bigged Sweden up before we played them...then as soon as we put in a good performance in suddenly Sweden are "below average".

Italia 90 and Euro 96 were both littered with scrappy performances against so called average teams however the legacy of those tournaments will live on. Just like this one will.
If you couldn't enjoy that tournament I wonder how you would get any enjoyment out of watching third division football!
Fair points, but for quarter final opposition you couldn’t really have handpicked anything better. It certainly wasn’t a Brazil (who we’d have faced if we’d won the group) or a Germany as many expected pre tournament.
I expected us to beat Sweden and as soon as we scored I felt it was a comfortable victory.
Fair play to yourself for going out there, must’ve been a fantastic experience. I’m not usually a glass half empty sort of person, I’d have expected us to progress to the semis all through the 2000’s if we’d had a draw as favorable as that and certainly in ‘98 as well.
 

Frank Butcher

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿
✨Pasoti Donor✨
Oct 9, 2003
5,319
1,470
Gairloch
Dare I say it, but I think the manager and coaches deserve some criticism.

In particular in the semi-final, we failed to react to Croatia's second-half game plan. One substitution of potential significance and that was a like-for-like position wise - no formation change to address the stretching of our midfield. He said after that they did what they could to stem the tide, but the need for change was as obvious as it comes. I would have put money on Deschamps for example, managing that game to a conclusion.

Southgate took Middlesbro' down using a 3-5-2 (5-3-2) in what was his only serious attempt at club management, and he was just as dogmatic about formation back then by many accounts.

Don't get me wrong, lovely bloke, presents himself well, as professional as they come and clearly takes the players with him. But does he have the tactical acumen to succeed at this level? We will obviously get the chance to see in years to come. I hope he does.
 
A

andyr1963

Guest
Frank_Butcher":3cc74451 said:
Dare I say it, but I think the manager and coaches deserve some criticism.

In particular in the semi-final, we failed to react to Croatia's second-half game plan. One substitution of potential significance and that was a like-for-like position wise - no formation change to address the stretching of our midfield. He said after that they did what they could to stem the tide, but the need for change was as obvious as it comes. I would have put money on Deschamps for example, managing that game to a conclusion.

Southgate took Middlesbro' down using a 3-5-2 (5-3-2) in what was his only serious attempt at club management, and he was just as dogmatic about formation back then by many accounts.

Don't get me wrong, lovely bloke, presents himself well, as professional as they come and clearly takes the players with him. But does he have the tactical acumen to succeed at this level? We will obviously get the chance to see in years to come. I hope he does.

AAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH that word again. :lol:

Pleased with the "England back in contact with the fans" aspect of the World Cup. Southgate's interaction with the press has been fantastic. This probably has more to do with the press / media losing their power of influence with the ability of the players to communicate directly with the fans through social media. Best example the gun tattoo non story being squashed.

As for the on field displays, same old same old, failure to bring home a winning position. Still wondering just what the half time team talk was in the Croatia game, such a sleepy start to the second half. :sad:
 
May 22, 2006
4,415
177
England's performance does deserve some praise. Panama weren't just given a place alongside the big boys in the same way Andorra, San Marino and Scotland are. They qualified on merit. They weren't even the lowest-ranked team in the competition (though how much you can hang on the FIFA world rankings is very much open for debate). Colombia, for whatever reason, decided they would need a tactical change to beat us. Sweden had put out Italy, demolished Mexico and effectively ended Germany's hopes, but we had them more or less in our pockets. Croatia raised eyebrows in the group stage and people have been touting them as dark horses for a while.

We're not the real deal yet, and anyone living under that delusion will soon get a rude awakening when this new UEFA Nations League kicks off in a few months, but it is at least encouraging. Many expected to watch Euro 2016 through the slits between their fingers and they weren't wrong; it's nice to consider the next major championships with a tinge of excitement instead of dread. In that sense, progress has been made.

When Germany reached the 2002 final, the groundwork was already being laid that would change grass-roots football over there. They weren't ignorant of the fact that they'd staggered through qualifying like drunkards, or the fact that their Euro 2000 campaign was a disaster. If there were any lingering doubts that all was not well, Euro 2004 reminded them. We too need to ward off complacency; the performances of our youth teams has been encouraging but the players need more proper game time, otherwise this will go down as another flash in the pan. Another opportunity gone.
 
Sep 6, 2006
16,424
3,963
Frank_Butcher":mluc4qtj said:
Dare I say it, but I think the manager and coaches deserve some criticism.

In particular in the semi-final, we failed to react to Croatia's second-half game plan. One substitution of potential significance and that was a like-for-like position wise - no formation change to address the stretching of our midfield. He said after that they did what they could to stem the tide, but the need for change was as obvious as it comes. I would have put money on Deschamps for example, managing that game to a conclusion.

Southgate took Middlesbro' down using a 3-5-2 (5-3-2) in what was his only serious attempt at club management, and he was just as dogmatic about formation back then by many accounts.

Don't get me wrong, lovely bloke, presents himself well, as professional as they come and clearly takes the players with him. But does he have the tactical acumen to succeed at this level? We will obviously get the chance to see in years to come. I hope he does.


Wasn't that miserable bloke stood next to Southgate supposed to sort the tactics out?