Not sure which of my points you're referring to, but I firmly don't believe nuance and randomness exists at a level where it would be enough to get a team through a 7 game tournament to win it.
Not sure which of my points you're referring to, but I firmly don't believe nuance and randomness exists at a level where it would be enough to get a team through a 7 game tournament to win it.
I would, that's 95% of cup competitions.
Not get them through it, but potentially de-rail them at particular moments; but it doesn't because the well-managed teams do things in such a way as to control [for] any bullshit, whether it's building a solid defence or merely coddling a bunch of egos who can largely manage themselves. Meanwhile, England, who are consistently mis-managed, don't. I agree with you, and so does he really if you follow the logic of his argument.
I think you'd get a much more varied set of winners than we do in international tournaments were that the case. There aren't really many shocks on that score and when they do happen (Greece), again, there's a reason for them. In Greece's case they defended incredibly.
Portugal had one shot to Croatia's fifteen in the 117 minutes before they score. What happens if Croatia score? What happens if they lose the penalty shoot out vs Poland? Are you still referencing them as a model tournament side in those cases? What happens if Kane squares it to Sterling and England go 2-0 up against Croatia? What happens if Wayne Rooney doesn't get himself sent off for no reason in 2006? I don't think you can put either of those on the coaching. You can obviously have an impact as an international coach but it's fairly limited when you only get a few weeks a year with them. It's moments that decide these things.
It's an obvious example but you can't tell me that if you play 2004 out 100 times, Greece win it more than once. It's all just dirty dice rolls.
I just can't cope with that level of What-ifery. To me, it's utterly irrelevant. And far more nations than actually ever win anything could cite it.
As for coaches, they all get the same time as each other - it's a level playing field. Gareth Southgate in particular has everything he needs to do a good job. If he doesn't, it's on him, otherwise why is he there?
Before they did I'd have said you could play it 1,000 times and they wouldn't have, but we played it once and they did. And they won it because they were an incredibly well organised side and nobody could get past them. Back to Lewis' point, if it's all just dice rolls why does any country put the effort in they do? This sounds suspiciously like the 'penalties are a lottery' argument, which, of course, they're not.
How does this thinking work for somebody who gambles for a living? What exactly are you looking at when you price up matches if not, amongst other things, things like who has the better manager and track record of not shitting the bed at crucial moments?
I can sort of see the argument that IIRC james has made before about what England did 20 years ago should be no indication to what they'll do today, but when you've been watching them for as long as I have it's hard to sign up to it.
Of course they are. England were never going to win a penalty shootout until they did. Harry Maguire can score five penalties in a row but it has no impact on whether he scores his next one.
And on penalties, perversely we're not actually that bad at them when you look at how many we score, it's just that we nearly always score enough to just lose narrowly. Which suggests a bottle problem in our national psyche.
I think recent world cup winners Italy have an almost as bad shootout record as England. I just don't think the two things are correlated.
There’s not a fan of any team that doesn’t go ‘typical x’ when a bad thing happens. Do you think there’s a fan forum up and down the country that thinks conceding the exact same goal to the opposition wouldn’t be treated with the same ‘typical x, if we had y player or z coach had done this it wouldn’t have happened.’
Tournament football is about having the best players, in their best fitness, in their best form, in the best coaching set up while the entire time hoping the chance the other team inevitably creates hits the post instead of going in. In that order.
I saw Portugal twice I think live at euro 2016 vs Croatia (in the worst match I’ve ever seen) and Poland which run it close.
If they do that tactic again of “don’t attack and hope Ronaldo catches one on the counter” then I might just switch off. Grim.
Spain Croatia was my favourite game from Euro 2016 and that’s what we need here. Hungary have the potential to win a lot of fans. They’ve three pops at pulling off and upset and any points is a turn up.
Hungary are dons, they will upset one of the three. Slight tragedy that Szoboszlai isn't fit but can be overcome.
One thing I always love about tournaments is that the teams who do well always seem to have one talisman player that steps forward and becomes the story of the tournament. Like Modric last WC, Ronaldo whenever it was they won, Zidane when he was headbutting, and that Greek guy whose name ended on "is" when they shat their way to the victory in 2004.
The four I remember from 2004 were Charisteas up front, Dellas at the back, and Zagorakis and my all time fave Karagounis in midfield. No idea what any of them actually did except for the first two notching set piece winners in the final games.
I guess our old mate Stelios must have been there too, and Dabizas, and that grey haired keeper who was in goal for seemingly decades.
So the 15 European Championships have been won by 10 different winners. Probably speaks more to the strength of the continent and nobody's really had a monopoly on it. Spain's been the only side able to retain it.
Tournament winner: France
Dark Horse: Ukraine
Biggest flop: Germany
Golden boot: Lukaku
Breakout star: Ben White, or has he already broken out?
I’ve no idea about most of the teams. I feel as uninformed before a Euros/WC as I can remember.
Tournament winner: Italy
Dark Horse: Poland
Biggest flop: England
Golden boot: Depay
Breakout star: Owen Wijndal
I'm a twit
Tournament winner: England
Dark Horse: Is this really appropriate language in 2021? (aka, no idea)
Biggest flop: France (assuming not winning would be them flopping)
Golden boot: Kane
Breakout star: Foden
lol
I'm a twit
I've just seen that Zaniolo didn't make the final Italian team so I've edited my predictions to change Breakout star to Gravenberch.
Zaniolo's looked very good when I've seen him, but he's broken half the time.
I think Portugal are going to win, which will probably mean Germany being the FLOP, and nobody will be the 'dark horse' unless Portugal win with a bit of unexpected flair. Top scorer. Romelu Lukaku could rack a few up in the group stage, but I have no idea about a breakout star. Joao Felix will need to have a good one, but he cost a hundred million quid so it will hardly be breaking out.