General Chat / Euro 2004

Well, I would just like to say what a great game the England v Iceland was. England looked very powerful upfront, Rooney getting 2, Lampard 1, Vasell 2 and Wayne Bridge getting 1. Amazing friendly, I am now quite confident that if we play like this we will give France a real battle.

Although the defending at that set piece was shocking, and the goal we conceded against Japan was also abysmal. But, Scholes was on top form... personally, I don't think Owen should be playing up front, he had a bad game.

But apparently Rooney's 2nd was quite bad. And nice to see the "2nd string" put in a good performance

But apparently Rooney's 2nd was quite bad

Bad in what way? If you mean Badass then yeah you are right, it was a fine strike. If you mean bad as in not very good then you have that wrong.

Yeh that would be my casual sarcasm creeping through there. Rooney's goal =

Owen is really over rated. Sure hes good, on one of his good days, but a good day for him comes very rarely. Any player can have a good day. I would really like to see someone fill that spot, im a liverpool fan btw, i wouldnt mind seeing owne leave the club.

All hail stevie g though, hes one of englands best, if not one of them, he is the best.

I am now quite confident that if we play like this we will give France a real battle.

Okay...

You really think that by beating Iceland we've proven that we'll give France a good battle? I think Iceland are somewhat worse than France...

England have a shit strikeforce, they have Henry. End.

England have a shit strikeforce, they have Henry. End.

I hate to admit this, but that is 100% true.. well 90%. Owen cant shoot, rooney is good, but i dont see him doing what he did today against the french defence... and henry will run rings around our defence, while zidane sneaks through.

Any1 up for kidknapping henry??

I wasn't impressed, well semi-impressed I suppose. Sure we scored 6 but against a 3 man defence of very ordinary players. Against decent opposition so many of the chances we made would have been cut out like a piece of cake. Assess the goals -

Goal 1 - Lampard: Took a lucky deflection.
Goal 2 - Rooney: Not a bad goal I have to admit but would Gary beat a French defender that easily and will we get the luck of Rooney's shot nutmegging a defender every game? Probably not.
Goal 3 - Rooney: Fine strike, looks like it might have taken a deflection from some views but it would have only been slight, I won't take anything away from him it was a wonder goal but he won't be banging them in like that every game.
Goal 4 - Vassel: Lucky again, Hargreaves shot was blocked onto Vassels leg and it fooled the keeper.
Goal 5 - Vassel: A well worked goal that I was impressed with, I can't see Owen and Rooney linking up like Heskey and Vassel did to make that goal though.
Goal 6 - Bridge: Another well worked goal revolving around a great knockdown from Heskey, also a nice finish from Bridge but again they are both unlikely to start.

Overall our second half performance was a lot better which is worrying considering they are supposed to be our 2nd choice if you will. The best chances of the match, that we would have had regardless of the competition due to Scholes' amazing through balls, fell to Owen and as usual he blundered all of them. Take into account butterfingers James is going back in goal and we are not any better off then after the Japan game. We are still defending pretty poorly (Charager was the best defender today I felt and again he is 2nd choice) and we were against division 1 or below attackers (bar Eidur).

Unless we sharpen up at the back and continue getting lucky bounces, deflections etc. etc. then we will still be hard pushed to go far in Euro 2004. The only bonus I see us taking out of this game is that hopefully some players will be full of confidence going into the opening match, I just hope this doesn’t mean they get ahead of themselves and try to walk all over the French.

Yes I know I am not very Pessimistic about our chances but at least that way I won't be disappointed.

I completely disagree about France being rated so highly. IMO, they are worse than England.

James v. Barthez
Pretty even, if you ask me. Barthez has more experience, but I'd take the 6ft+ of James over the unpredictable frog-leg eater anyday.

Cole v. Lizerazu
Cole easily has it here. Lizerazu is a background player, never really does much. I'd rate Bridge higher than him as well. Both England left backs add much to the team due to their natural left foot down the flanks.

Campbell v. Thuram
Pretty even, perhaps Thuram has the slight edge, but both very similar players of similar abilities.

Terry v. Silvestre
Terry is clearly the better player for me. Plus, he seems to have an extra dimension of passion when he puts on the England shirt.

Neville v. Sagnol
Probably the weakest area in both teams, although Neville displayed how he can be useful today (as well as his defensive frailties...). But Sagnol isn't that much better.

Beckham v. Zidane
I'm sorry, but Zidane is the most overrated player ever. I've never been impressed by him. He peaked ages ago, at France '98. Whereas Beckham is at his peak now, and we couldn't ask for a better captain. Zidane - best European player ever? Whoever voted in that poll was having a laugh.

Lampard v. Makelele
Lampard has consistently been selected in front of him for Chelsea, that says it all. Lampard wins this battle easily.

Gerrard v. Vieira
Normally you'd think Vieira would have the edge here, but Gerrard's on awesome form and has the best international record of any of these players.

Scholes v. Pires
If Scholes puts in passes to Owen like he did today, this will be no contest. Plus, Pires has a pathetic goatie beard.

Owen v. Henry
Ok, Henry wins this one. But Owen is capable of magic - and it's been a while. It's time for him to perform again, and he may well do.

Rooney v. Saha
Rooney, no problem. (btw, Trezeguet is injured). Look at his 30 yarder today. Did Chelsea offer £30 for Saha? Um... nope. Did they for Rooney? oh yes. Makes up for the Henry disadvantage and more, imo.

Clearly, England have the better team. The only other thing I'd say is that the France team play together twice a week at Arsenal, so as a team they're better drilled probably. But we have Sven, and we perform in big games under him (Germany, Argentina). The frogs are going down.

The fact that many of the players you compared with eachother play in not only different positions but take totaly different roles in a game doesn't help. You can't compare Zidane and Beckham on anything more then a very general world scale and Zidane would win every time, the same applys for Scholes and Pires, I'm sorry but Pires has been on fire this season and he is an out and out left winger, Scholes has had a generaly quite season, hasn't scored for 3 years for England and is being played out of position for the team, now way up who's better for their country. Saying Chelsea offered 30mil for Rooney doesn't help his case when you look at their last batch of strikers they signed, he's a great player but Saha and Henry are peaking at the moment and have alot more experience then he has, you can't compare them.

The French team all over the park have more experience, they are the holders of the competion don't forget. They may be hyped up a little extremely sometimes but there is no denying that they are a better team then England and that's coming from an English men. I'd be delighted if we beat them but the odds are against us.

Well, I hate the french so I'm bound to underrate them.

Seriously though, Zidane is overrated - does all the fancy tricks, then if you actually think about it he doesn't beat anyone, just fannies about with the ball and wastes some time, same for Roberto Carlos. Fair point with Henry, Saha's form was at the beginning of the season... I think England have a seriously good chance. Even if we win, we only need to beat a couple of no-hopers to get through, and we could even afford to perhaps draw one of those as well.

I'd be seriously dissapointed if we went out at the group stage.

Those no hopers are no worse then Japan and we all saw how we performed against them. I do think we will make it out of the group stage but we won't make it easy for ourselves, probably needing a win in the last game. Then once we advance we will have probably either Spain or Portugal waiting for us in the next round depending on who wins their group, now tell me how Spain have a worse squad then us .

Okay...

You really think that by beating Iceland we've proven that we'll give France a good battle? I think Iceland are somewhat worse than France...

England have a shit strike force, they have Henry. End.

We didn’t just beat them, a score line of 6-1 is something to be proud of in my eyes, I am not sure how many goals you expect to see in a 90min friendly?! It is obvious that Iceland are worse yes, France are World Cup winners. But we have proven that we can score some good goals, although as Tpm listed some were deflections, we still scored 6 goals and that's the point, scrappy or not scrappy

I mean, of course my odds along with many other England fans are on France, we are the under dogs, but we proved today that we have a strong chance of a battle.

Why aren't you englanders so animate about cricket?

Guys I'm sorry to say this but if you think ZZ is overated then what the hell is Beckham? He can't dribble, run, tackle, header and honestly I feel that his qualities which are long balls, can't be really used playing for England (right mid) and Real Madrid (defensive mid). I just don't get why everyone thinks he's so great, even his free-kicks aren't as special as they used to be.

*stargazer*

Beckham IS over-rated. Hes still good though, along with owen on one of his 'good' days. I think we will put up a good fight with france, although a draw would be good IMO, im not expecting a win. A 5 - 1 blitz would be nice though

I think both players are very good, both very different.

Those no hopers are no worse then Japan and we all saw how we performed against them. I do think we will make it out of the group stage but we won't make it easy for ourselves, probably needing a win in the last game. Then once we advance we will have probably either Spain or Portugal waiting for us in the next round depending on who wins their group, now tell me how Spain have a worse squad then us .

Actually, I do think Spain have a worst squad than us as well. They have major weaknesses, remember they don't have Hierro this time round. And our last 3 matches against Spain, we've won 2 and drawn 1 (one of which was 4-0 to us). Portugal I reckon are about the same as Spain now, I'm honestly shitting myself at the thought of Ronaldo running against Neville, even that Icelandic guy tore him apart. Let's hope they play him down the right where Cole can match, if not better him, for pace.

I think you have to make a distinction between the Japan game and the 2 others England have in the groups. First of all, Japan play a very different style of football that England aren't used to, because they're physically smaller (generally) and pass through the middle much more, which England weren't used to. Secondly, physchologically, Japan really wanted to win - more than England. For them, players like Beckham are idols - he's the biggest celebrity in Japan - and they haven't got any big championships to prepare for and worry about injuries for. England will be a lot more up for the games against Switzerland and Croatia (I think it's Croatia).

England are 3rd favourites for the whole tournament at some bookmakers. We really do have a major chance - if we don't reach the semis, I'll be extremely dissapointed. But then, I've been through that with England many times now, so I can't say I won't be surprised.

As for Beckham, he's a leader as well as a player. When has Zidane ever done anything special? I can only remember one goal he scored from far out and I can't even remember the details of it. Beckham, I could make a massive list. OK, Zidane's french and Beckham's english so I've seen more of the latter, but Zidane can have games where you won't notice he's playing (Champion's League semi final leg 2). Beckham simply does not have those.

First of all, Japan play a very different style of football that England aren't used to, because they're physically smaller (generally) and pass through the middle much more, which England weren't used to. Secondly, physchologically, Japan really wanted to win - more than England. For them, players like Beckham are idols - he's the biggest celebrity in Japan - and they haven't got any big championships to prepare for and worry about injuries for. England will be a lot more up for the games against Switzerland and Croatia (I think it's Croatia).

I agree about the phsycological side of that game, yet england shouldnt get torn apart at the back just because japan play 'different'. France will play different, as will most countries. Yet these other countries are most likely better than japan..

Ive just noticed im arguing that england arent good.. im going to stop now.

talking about soccer right now is salt in an open wound.

But I'm sure the French have a lot more "big names" than the English. Especially if you look past the 11 that are gonna play.

If anyone cares; i really hope the Netherlands get on track well again (jeez, they're 4th on the fifa list and they can't beat Ireland?) and especially some of these 'half injuries' need to go. Seedorf and Robben imo are both key players. Though i think getting beat by Ireland is mainly caused by switching between entire teams. How can you focus when every 20 minutes there are a couple of other players walking on your side? And it's a bit sad that we have three incredible strikers, but none can play together as two strikers up front. I need the coach to realise that though and just pick one. Seems so wasteful though when you have Kluivert, van Nistelrooy, and Makaay. And then we have Seedorf being arrogant and demanding playing as a typical #10. He's much better as a more defensive midfield spreading the ball around and giving those amazing passes. (think AC Milan) He imo has a major attitude problem, and the way he walked off the field yesterday was very strange. Really, he might be amazingly awesome and all, but we've got enough other players that could fill his spot.

Reading some of you all's other comments amazes me. England 3rd favorites at some bookmakers? Lol, who are they shitting. I guess they're solid enough, but don't have the talented players imo. And Spain a worse squad than England? I filled them as the winner in my prediction sheet =P.

and the Beckham vs Zidane thing is really ridiculous. It's a team thing, not a player thing firstly, and if you've been watching any soccer at all you'll have seen such incredible things from Zidane you'd be awestruck. His move where he takes the ball and turns around, etc. etc. I mean, the entire team depends on him, imo the downfall in Korea. If it wasn't a team thing, how can Keane as a star player on the irish beat out players such as Kluivert, Makaay, Seedorf, Davids, Van der Vaart, Robben, Van der Meyde, and Van Nistelrooy? (yes, they all played yesterday.)