Germany vs England

[Rave]

Germany are just too good on the break. The young side has more pace and are outclassing us. Plus we are fooking shit. Simple as that.

[Subficial]

Germany are just too good on the break. The young side has more pace and are outclassing us. Plus we are fooking shit. Simple as that.

[dahlailama]

Ha ha! today was the revange for 1966 as england had win the world cup by a goal who wasn't one. don 't worry about the ref englands. but the english team don 't play some good football. Germany was much more better.

[Rave]

Haha you are such a good sport, your parents clearly brought you up well .... Not!

Lol

[esky]

3 lions on your shirt, 40 years of hurt...

[dahlailama]

by the parents? never ever. that knows every little child!

[UKRuss]

england had win the world by a goal who wasn't one.

My new album.

[leedsquietman]

Congratulations to Germany, they did create more clearcut chances and deserved to win the game, but the disallowed 'goal' and/or hitting the crossbar right at the start of the second half when the score was 2-1 could have been a huge game changer, the momentum would have been with us and Germany's inexperienced side could have paniced. England had to play more open looking for the equalizer in the second half and got done on the break, the 3rd goal coming off our corner.

If you look at the stats, it shows England had more shots, more possession and more corners - games aren't won on stats, but it shows you that the performance was not as dire as against Algeria or the USA, unfortunately, we came up against a quality team with pace on the break and clinical finishers who punished us hard and sliced through our dinosaur midfield and defence like a knife through butter on several occasions.

Argentina will provide Germany a bigger challenge.

[UKRuss]

'I'm a great believer in the fact that if they score a goal, we have to score two to win.'

[Angstrom]

Ha ha! today was the revange for 1966 as england had win the world by a goal who wasn't one.

Eh? makes no sense.
the score for that 1966 match was still 3-2 if the ball didn't go over. So, either way England won it.
Call it a 3-2 win if it makes so much difference to you.

Just as we will call this game 3-1, as it makes the same difference.
None

[UKRuss]

You mean 4-2, surely.

[Angstrom]

You mean 4-2, surely.

no,
if the ball didn't go over (German view) it would be 3-2 England win
if the ball did go over (English view) it would be 4-2 England win

Either way, England won that match and it's pretty weird to claim they didn't.

King Ethelred was in power at the time, and the team arrived on Pterodactlys

[Poster]

yeah yeah.. whateva.. the Dutch are about the begwin their match!

[alex.the.forge]

middle of the night here. I thought about staying up for it, then I thought "no it will be the same miserable disappointing bollocks where it looks good for a bit then some bastard - either an own goal or a fuckup with the ref will ruin it all and I'll be sitting there at 3am thinking why did I stay up for this general shittiness?"

maybe that's just a miserable pessemistic outlook, but to me it just seems like a practical allocation of time resources, and as it happens I was right.

[Angstrom]

maybe that's just a miserable pessemistic outlook, but to me it just seems like a practical allocation of time resources.

Still English through and through eh?
good to see the Aussie spirit hasn't corrupted you