Official Euro 2020 thread

[OomStruisbaai]

United goal

[JM2K6]

Great stuff since half time. Two pinpoint crosses, two excellent finishes. Kane can amble all he likes if he's scoring goals

[ScarfaceClaw]

4-0. Ukraine have been shite.

[JM2K6]

England have been utterly dominant. Shame that Kane shot didn't go in, incredible strike.

Henderson scoring is a sign of the end times.

[tc27]

Ukraine right in it at half time..absolute rout now.

Semi and possible final at Wembley...people need to start getting their head around England winning this thing.

[Slick]

4-0. Ukraine have been shite.

Whilst this is great to watch and I hope England make it to the final it is fair to say they haven’t played anyone whose any good as yet

[JM2K6]

4-0. Ukraine have been shite.

Whilst this is great to watch and I hope England make it to the final it is fair to say they haven’t played anyone whose any good as yet

Here we go

[Sandstorm]

4-0. Ukraine have been shite.

Whilst this is great to watch and I hope England make it to the final it is fair to say they haven’t played anyone whose any good as yet

Here we go

Now you know what Bok fans have to put up with in any RWC we win.

[tc27]

4-0. Ukraine have been shite.

Whilst this is great to watch and I hope England make it to the final it is fair to say they haven’t played anyone whose any good as yet

Of course.

But also imagine the moral victory from that Wembley draw..it will be talked about for decades

[JM2K6]

It's odd though - it feels like the definition is "if England beat them, they can't have been any good". So who's better? Germany? Beaten comfortably. Portugal? Lost to Germany, and are out. Belgium? Lost to Italy, and are out. France? Beaten by Switzerland, for crying out loud. Spain? Comedy defensive howlers, and nearly went out to the Swiss.

Italy look the best team. England look as good as anyone else, particularly with that defensive record.

[sturginho]

And we have a former cobbler on the pitch

[Slick]

4-0. Ukraine have been shite.

Whilst this is great to watch and I hope England make it to the final it is fair to say they haven’t played anyone whose any good as yet

Here we go

There’s no other meaning in that! It seems pretty obvious from here

[Kawazaki]

It's odd though - it feels like the definition is "if England beat them, they can't have been any good". So who's better? Germany? Beaten comfortably. Portugal? Lost to Germany, and are out. Belgium? Lost to Italy, and are out. France? Beaten by Switzerland, for crying out loud. Spain? Comedy defensive howlers, and nearly went out to the Swiss.

Italy look the best team. England look as good as anyone else, particularly with that defensive record.

Italy and England look significantly better than anyone else. Hope both make the final, my neighbours are Italians.

[Slick]

4-0. Ukraine have been shite.

Whilst this is great to watch and I hope England make it to the final it is fair to say they haven’t played anyone whose any good as yet

Of course.

But also imagine the moral victory from that Wembley draw..it will be talked about for decades

You’re right to bring that up because if England go on to win this then the draw against the champions at Wembley will see Scotland as moral Euro champions

[Tichtheid]

England have been dominant from the start, the scoreline always takes a while to reflect what is going on.
If a team makes the quarters of the Euros they are a good side, but there is a gulf between the two tonight.

[JM2K6]

I forgot the flattering to deceive Dutch in my list of possible better teams

[Slick]

It's odd though - it feels like the definition is "if England beat them, they can't have been any good". So who's better? Germany? Beaten comfortably. Portugal? Lost to Germany, and are out. Belgium? Lost to Italy, and are out. France? Beaten by Switzerland, for crying out loud. Spain? Comedy defensive howlers, and nearly went out to the Swiss.

Italy look the best team. England look as good as anyone else, particularly with that defensive record.

Look, I don’t want to get into an argument about this because England have looked brilliant tonight and as I say, I want them to do well. But it was an average performance in an average group, a poor Germany and a woeful Ukraine.

They will pump Denmark and come across their only decent opponents in the final. This isn’t something I’ve just thought up, all the chat everywhere has been about their easy passage to the final if they won their group

[Kawazaki]

Whilst this is great to watch and I hope England make it to the final it is fair to say they haven’t played anyone whose any good as yet

Of course.

But also imagine the moral victory from that Wembley draw..it will be talked about for decades

You’re right to bring that up because if England go on to win this then the draw against the champions at Wembley will see Scotland as moral Euro champions

Knowing the Sweaties penchant for sponging, the SNP will claim a grant for it.

[tc27]

Whilst this is great to watch and I hope England make it to the final it is fair to say they haven’t played anyone whose any good as yet

Of course.

But also imagine the moral victory from that Wembley draw..it will be talked about for decades

You’re right to bring that up because if England go on to win this then the draw against the champions at Wembley will see Scotland as moral Euro champions

Exactly

[Kawazaki]

It's odd though - it feels like the definition is "if England beat them, they can't have been any good". So who's better? Germany? Beaten comfortably. Portugal? Lost to Germany, and are out. Belgium? Lost to Italy, and are out. France? Beaten by Switzerland, for crying out loud. Spain? Comedy defensive howlers, and nearly went out to the Swiss.

Italy look the best team. England look as good as anyone else, particularly with that defensive record.

Look, I don’t want to get into an argument about this because England have looked brilliant tonight and as I say, I want them to do well. But it was an average performance in an average group, a poor Germany and a woeful Ukraine.

They will pump Denmark and come across their only decent opponents in the final. This isn’t something I’ve just thought up, all the chat everywhere has been about their easy passage to the final if they won their group

"If they won their group" - which they did. They haven't conceded a goal yet ffs.

England look very very well organised and coached. Not often you can say that about an England team.

[Tichtheid]

Of course.

But also imagine the moral victory from that Wembley draw..it will be talked about for decades

You’re right to bring that up because if England go on to win this then the draw against the champions at Wembley will see Scotland as moral Euro champions

Knowing the Sweaties penchant for sponging, the SNP will claim a grant for it.

You’re a really funny guy.

[Slick]

It's odd though - it feels like the definition is "if England beat them, they can't have been any good". So who's better? Germany? Beaten comfortably. Portugal? Lost to Germany, and are out. Belgium? Lost to Italy, and are out. France? Beaten by Switzerland, for crying out loud. Spain? Comedy defensive howlers, and nearly went out to the Swiss.

Italy look the best team. England look as good as anyone else, particularly with that defensive record.

Look, I don’t want to get into an argument about this because England have looked brilliant tonight and as I say, I want them to do well. But it was an average performance in an average group, a poor Germany and a woeful Ukraine.

They will pump Denmark and come across their only decent opponents in the final. This isn’t something I’ve just thought up, all the chat everywhere has been about their easy passage to the final if they won their group

"If they won their group" - which they did. They haven't conceded a goal yet ffs.

England look very very well organised and coached. Not often you can say that about an England team.

I think some of you need to read your own comments from first few pages of this thread

[JM2K6]

It's odd though - it feels like the definition is "if England beat them, they can't have been any good". So who's better? Germany? Beaten comfortably. Portugal? Lost to Germany, and are out. Belgium? Lost to Italy, and are out. France? Beaten by Switzerland, for crying out loud. Spain? Comedy defensive howlers, and nearly went out to the Swiss.

Italy look the best team. England look as good as anyone else, particularly with that defensive record.

Look, I don’t want to get into an argument about this because England have looked brilliant tonight and as I say, I want them to do well. But it was an average performance in an average group, a poor Germany and a woeful Ukraine.

They will pump Denmark and come across their only decent opponents in the final. This isn’t something I’ve just thought up, all the chat everywhere has been about their easy passage to the final if they won their group

Mate, it's not like rugby - football is a lot more open and teams are a lot closer in ability and have a fair better chance of beating each other. And that goes double for a tournament.

Denmark could well beat England. Portugal and Greece have won this tournament pretty recently.

There was plenty of chat about Germany beating England. Plenty of chat about England losing to Croatia or the Czechs. Plenty of chat about Belgium and France steamrollering everyone. Plenty of chat about the Dutch being so much better than England.

The chat is worthless - just because they're bigger names, doesn't mean they are better teams during the tournament.

If you think that England haven't beaten a decent team yet, why even bother watching the tournament? Germany were good enough to batter Portugal. Czechs were good enough to thrash the Dutch. Croatia pushed Spain to extra time.

Look at the results and all of a sudden you think no one is any good. Instead it's an exciting and unpredictable tournament, and you're doing England and other teams a massive disservice by dismissing them all like that.

[Kawazaki]

Look, I don’t want to get into an argument about this because England have looked brilliant tonight and as I say, I want them to do well. But it was an average performance in an average group, a poor Germany and a woeful Ukraine.

They will pump Denmark and come across their only decent opponents in the final. This isn’t something I’ve just thought up, all the chat everywhere has been about their easy passage to the final if they won their group

"If they won their group" - which they did. They haven't conceded a goal yet ffs.

England look very very well organised and coached. Not often you can say that about an England team.

I think some of you need to read your own comments from first few pages of this thread

Maybe, but that doesn't include me.

[Slick]

It's odd though - it feels like the definition is "if England beat them, they can't have been any good". So who's better? Germany? Beaten comfortably. Portugal? Lost to Germany, and are out. Belgium? Lost to Italy, and are out. France? Beaten by Switzerland, for crying out loud. Spain? Comedy defensive howlers, and nearly went out to the Swiss.

Italy look the best team. England look as good as anyone else, particularly with that defensive record.

Look, I don’t want to get into an argument about this because England have looked brilliant tonight and as I say, I want them to do well. But it was an average performance in an average group, a poor Germany and a woeful Ukraine.

They will pump Denmark and come across their only decent opponents in the final. This isn’t something I’ve just thought up, all the chat everywhere has been about their easy passage to the final if they won their group

Mate, it's not like rugby - football is a lot more open and teams are a lot closer in ability and have a fair better chance of beating each other. And that goes double for a tournament.

Denmark could well beat England. Portugal and Greece have won this tournament pretty recently.

There was plenty of chat about Germany beating England. Plenty of chat about England losing to Croatia or the Czechs. Plenty of chat about Belgium and France steamrollering everyone. Plenty of chat about the Dutch being so much better than England.

The chat is worthless - just because they're bigger names, doesn't mean they are better teams during the tournament.

If you think that England haven't beaten a decent team yet, why even bother watching the tournament? Germany were good enough to batter Portugal. Czechs were good enough to thrash the Dutch. Croatia pushed Spain to extra time.

Look at the results and all of a sudden you think no one is any good. Instead it's an exciting and unpredictable tournament, and you're doing England and other teams a massive disservice by dismissing them all like that.

That’s all very well but your own comments on this thread included describing England as badly coached and wondering why Stirling was on the pitch, so I guess everyone gets an opinion.

There is absolutely nothing inflammatory about saying that England have had an easier passage to this stage whilst the other side of the draw had the usual big hitters playing each other.

[Tichtheid]

Congrats to England, well deserved place in the semis.

[Plim]

I am surprise. England were genuinely good. Shaw, Sancho, Kane - really first class. And no donkey from anyone, apart from one mis-kick from Pickford.

Plenty of time yet for England to crash out though. (I assume the mocker gods rule football as much as they do rugby.)

[Slick]

Congrats to England, well deserved place in the semis.

Completely agree

[Tichtheid]

I am surprise. England were genuinely good. Shaw, Sancho, Kane - really first class. And no donkey from anyone, apart from one mis-kick from Pickford.

Plenty of time yet for England to crash out though. (I assume the mocker gods rule football as much as they do rugby.)

Class avatar photo, mate.

[tc27]

Congrats to England, well deserved place in the semis.

Completely agree

Fair play particularly as the media here is going to be pretty unbearable for the next few days at least.

[JM2K6]

That’s all very well but your own comments on this thread included describing England as badly coached and wondering why Stirling was on the pitch, so I guess everyone gets an opinion.

That's a lie. I can read my own posts, you know: I said Southgate was being very conservative and that England had produced turgid shite pre-tournament and in the first two matches of this tournament. Which is true. I never said they were badly coached, just very safety-first. I also gave credit where it was due after they started playing more progessive football. I ALSO said he should give guys like Grealish and Sancho more game time, and, well...

As for Sterling, well, this is all the criticism I've made of him:

Sterling is so frustrating. Consistently makes great runs and finds space behind the defence. Consistently loses the ball, misplaces passes, and wastes chances. It's ridiculous that Foden was the one who was substituted.

in a match where I thought Foden outplayed him and Sterling was too wasteful with possession. I also said he was excellent against the Czechs and Germany. And again today. Amazingly, my opinion on players and teams is based on how they actually perform on the day!

There is absolutely nothing inflammatory about saying that England have had an easier passage to this stage whilst the other side of the draw had the usual big hitters playing each other.

Like Germany, for example.

Oh.

Doesn't matter if you think they're big hitters - what matters is how teams actually play. A lot of the usual big hitters have been worse than the more unheralded teams.

[Torquemada 1420]

There is absolutely nothing inflammatory about saying that England have had an easier passage to this stage whilst the other side of the draw had the usual big hitters playing each other.

Like Germany, for example.

At the start of tournament, when all my Eng supporting friends were doom mongers, I said Eng had every chance of winning. That's the thing about Eng football fans: a total inability to be objective one way or the other.
1) Aside from Italy's form, no other side looked especially good. Many of the top ranked sides looked aged too.
2) Apart from maybe Holland's group, Eng had the easiest group to qualify from.
3) Eng got all home games bar yesterday's (BTW: I said Eng would win 4 or 5 nil against the might of Ukraine).
4) Eng's path meant they were meeting no-one until the semis at the earliest. Avoiding Belgium, Portugal, France, Spain, Italy. Germany were ranked something like 15 to 20 in the world and so behind all those other sides.
5) This isn't a bad Eng side. It's certainly younger and fitter than most of the other sides and its one supposed weakness, defence, has not been evident so far........ although bar Germany (who were pretty poor with their finishing), their opponents to date have not been up to much.

They still might not win it but they won't get a better hand dealt their way since a German hating, Russian linesman of 1966.

[OomStruisbaai]

Playing any tournament you don't look further then your next game. I supported France, they look like they have win the tournament from the first match.
England hit form at the right time and will be difficult to stop.

[Green light echo]

Do men actually play this so called sport?

Absolutely effeminate, corrupt, narcissistic, knacker of a game.

And you blokes call yourselves Rugby men

Hang your heads in total shame.....

[sorCrer]

Do men actually play this so called sport?

Absolutely effeminate, corrupt, narcissistic, knacker of a game.

And you blokes call yourselves Rugby men

Hang your heads in total shame.....

This is literally the first time I find myself in agreement with you, Sards.

[Green light echo]

Do men actually play this so called sport?

Absolutely effeminate, corrupt, narcissistic, knacker of a game.

And you blokes call yourselves Rugby men

Hang your heads in total shame.....

This is literally the first time I find myself in agreement with you, Sards.

Well there is always a first time.....

Clownshop of a sport though isnt it

[ScarfaceClaw]

At least Jermaine Jenas put that age old question of who is the best, Ronaldo or Messi, to bed last night. That answer is neither. It is Luke Shaw. Or Harry Kane. Or Sterling. The greatest footballers ever to lace up a pair of boots.

[JM2K6]

At least Jermaine Jenas put that age old question of who is the best, Ronaldo or Messi, to bed last night. That answer is neither. It is Luke Shaw. Or Harry Kane. Or Sterling. The greatest footballers ever to lace up a pair of boots.

Your bitterness in this thread is endlessly enjoyable

[ScarfaceClaw]

At least Jermaine Jenas put that age old question of who is the best, Ronaldo or Messi, to bed last night. That answer is neither. It is Luke Shaw. Or Harry Kane. Or Sterling. The greatest footballers ever to lace up a pair of boots.

Your bitterness in this thread is endlessly enjoyable

It is taking some effort. I’m actually having to put some work into it this time.

[Biffer]

The English are all originally from Denmark anyway, aren’t they? Good for them to be playing against the old mother country.