Did England really fail?

[mim]

Before the finals, almost everyone with whom I discussed England's prospects expected England to
go out in the last 16, or quarter final, depending on how the fxtures panned out.

When I rated the nations, for betting purposes, England was not in my top 8, nor would they be in
the top 8 for many others.

Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Spain, Germany, Holland and Ivory Coast were my top 8.

England, along with Italy, Portugal, Paraguay, Mexico, USA, South Africa and Japan were in my
second tier of rankings.

Ivory Coast had Brazil and Portugal in their group and South Africa had Uruguay and Mexico, so 2 of
my top 16 could not make the knock out stage. Given that, my ratings were pretty accurate.

So, for me, England didn't fail, whereas Italy did. Likewise, France didn't fail. They had absolutely no
chance in this tournament.

South Korea, Ghana and Slovakia are the teams that have performed better than I expected.

Before the World Cup Finals, most of us agreed that England were being overhyped and that the
expectations of the English media were ridiculously high.

Should England now be judged against those same ridiculous expectations?

[Spike Mandela]

No they didn't fail and with a bit of luck on their side could actually have edged it against the Germans( They hit the woodwork twice, had a good goal disallowed and had a few other good chances to score as well).

Howeve much as I disliked the English and their media's ridiculous over hype and expectations I have to say I am rather enjoying their hand wringing and self destruct at their perceived failure.:greengrin

If only theuy could discover humility, if only they could give a bit of respect to their opponents prior to the championship( England Algeria Slovenia Yanks) and if they could be quietly confident instead of over confident perharps their team would express theirselves instead of being weighed down by burden of expectation.

[Future17]

Before the finals, almost everyone with whom I discussed England's prospects expected England to
go out in the last 16, or quarter final, depending on how the fxtures panned out.

When I rated the nations, for betting purposes, England was not in my top 8, nor would they be in
the top 8 for many others.

Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Spain, Germany, Holland and Ivory Coast were my top 8.

England, along with Italy, Portugal, Paraguay, Mexico, USA, South Africa and Japan were in my
second tier of rankings.

Ivory Coast had Brazil and Portugal in their group and South Africa had Uruguay and Mexico, so 2 of
my top 16 could not make the knock out stage. Given that, my ratings were pretty accurate.

So, for me, England didn't fail, whereas Italy did. Likewise, France didn't fail. They had absolutely no
chance in this tournament.

South Korea, Ghana and Slovakia are the teams that have performed better than I expected.

Before the World Cup Finals, most of us agreed that England were being overhyped and that the
expectations of the English media were ridiculously high.

Should England now be judged against those same ridiculous expectations?

It's a very good point, but unfortunately Capello and the England players also believed the hype and spoke about getting to the final or even winning the tournament.

[jakedance]

In terms of performance levels, attitude, tactics and technique they most certainly failed. They were complete gash in all four games.

I never thought they had a chance at winning the tournament but the manner of their exit was unacceptable (for the English anyway).

I'd say they should have been good enough to top their group which would have given them a good chance of making the semi's.

If Hibs had conceded goals like Germany's first people on here would be going radge. To concede a goals like that at this level was unacceptable, regardless of whether England were over-hyped or not.

So aye, definite failure.

[(((Fergus)))]

There's a post on another thread about England having only beating the following teams at the knockout stages: Belgium, Cameroon, Denmark, Paraguay and Ecuador.

The other side of that story is the teams who have knocked England out:

1970: Germany
1974: DNQ (behind Poland)
1978: DNQ (behind Italy)
1982: Germany (England second in second-stage group of three)
1994: DNQ (behind Norway, Netherlands)
1998: Argentina
2002: Brazil
2006: Portugal
2010: Germany

So that's:
Germany x3
Brazil
Argentina
Portugal
DNQ x3

Every time they face quality opposition, the bull**** stops.

This is confirmed byt their performance in the Euros:

1960: did not enter
1964: KO from France in preliminary round (France eventually KO by Hungary)
1968: England qualified based on British Home Championships table, beat Spain in the next round then KO by Yugoslavia in the semis. Yugos beaten by Italy in final
1972: England top group containing Switzerland, Greece and Malta. KO by Germany in second round
1976: DNQ (Czechoslovakia top group - Czechs eventually win the trophy)
1980 (in Italy): KO at group stage behind Belgium and Italy
1984: DNQ (finished 2nd behind Denmark in qual group)
1988 (in West Germany): KO at group stage behind Soviet Union, Netherlands and RoI (bottom of group)
1992 (in Sweden): KO at group stage behind Sweden, Denmark and France (bottom of group)
1996 (now with home advantage again): KO in semi against Germany after beating Spain on penalties in QF
2000 (in NL/B): KO at group stage behind Portugal and Romania
2004 (in Portugal): KO in QF by Portugal
2008 (n CH/A): DNQ

Summary:
Victories in KO stages: Spain x2
Defeats in KO stages: Yugoslavia, Germany x2, Portugal, France
KOs at group stage: 4
DNQs: 3
DNE: 1

Executive summary: they're sheight.

Unless they're actually hosting the tournament, they haven't got a cat in hell's chance

[hibsbollah]

Before the finals, almost everyone with whom I discussed England's prospects expected England to
go out in the last 16, or quarter final, depending on how the fxtures panned out.

When I rated the nations, for betting purposes, England was not in my top 8, nor would they be in
the top 8 for many others.

Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Spain, Germany, Holland and Ivory Coast were my top 8.

England, along with Italy, Portugal, Paraguay, Mexico, USA, South Africa and Japan were in my
second tier of rankings.

Ivory Coast had Brazil and Portugal in their group and South Africa had Uruguay and Mexico, so 2 of
my top 16 could not make the knock out stage. Given that, my ratings were pretty accurate.

So, for me, England didn't fail, whereas Italy did. Likewise, France didn't fail. They had absolutely no
chance in this tournament.

South Korea, Ghana and Slovakia are the teams that have performed better than I expected.

Before the World Cup Finals, most of us agreed that England were being overhyped and that the
expectations of the English media were ridiculously high.

Should England now be judged against those same ridiculous expectations?

You make lots of good points. I didnt meet anyone prior to the tournament either who thought they were a good bet to get past the quarters of last 16. The English public (as opposed to the english media), or at least those that know about football, don't have a self-delusion/arrogance problem IMO.

I'd take issue with a couple of things in your post though. Did you really have Uruguay and Chile in your top 8 prior to the tournament? I'm impressed, because they didnt look that great in qualifying. Almost everyone I spoke to thought Argentina would fall flat on their face as well. What Maradona has achieved in turning his team around hasnt been remarked upon enough. If he wins it as manager it will be truly incredible after that qualifying campaign.

Italy were given no chance by their public prior to the tournament, one of their weakest squads ever, so id class them with France as 'a shock but not really a shock'.

[BoltonHibee]

They got further than I expected them too.

I did not expect them to qualify from their group, so in my eyes they have had a very successful tournament.

[heretoday]

All the bleating and finger pointing is the media having a field day. It's hype in reverse.

Imagine holding two England players "to account" for sharing a joke at the airport!

I honestly don't think the average England fan thought they would get much further than this and after a couple of beers they are enjoying the rest of the tournament and looking forward to the new Premier season.

[BEEJ]

In terms of performance levels, attitude, tactics and technique they most certainly failed. They were complete gash in all four games.

I never thought they had a chance at winning the tournament but the manner of their exit was unacceptable (for the English anyway).

I'd say they should have been good enough to top their group which would have given them a good chance of making the semi's.

If Hibs had conceded goals like Germany's first people on here would be going radge. To concede a goals like that at this level was unacceptable, regardless of whether England were over-hyped or not.

So aye, definite failure.
:agree:

They never performed in their group against opposition whom they should have had the measure of. They were well capable of playing better than they did. And as you say winning their group would have given them a tie against Mexico, which would have been an interesting challenge for them to make the QFs.

So in that respect they certainly failed. It is the manner of their exit that is the most distressing thing for the sensible ones amongst the English; not the fact that they didn't make the WC final.

[hibsbollah]

:agree:

They never performed in their group against opposition whom they should have had the measure of. They were well capable of playing better than they did. And as you say winning their group would have given them a tie against Mexico, which would have been an interesting challenge for them to make the QFs.

So in that respect they certainly failed. It is the manner of their exit that is the most distressing thing for the sensible ones amongst the English; not the fact that they didn't make the WC final.

On balance, I would have fancied Mexico to beat them.

[(((Fergus)))]

All the bleating and finger pointing is the media having a field day. It's hype in reverse.

Imagine holding two England players "to account" for sharing a joke at the airport!

I honestly don't think the average England fan thought they would get much further than this and after a couple of beers they are enjoying the rest of the tournament and looking forward to the new Premier season.

:agree: Both approaches - hype and humiliation - are ways of selling papers/page views. The media will be having their most successful world cup ever

[Hibs On Tour]

Some really, really good points already in this thread [not suggesting I'm going to add to them either :wink:]

England - on balance - I think did fail. Most of their players play for top clubs in one of the best leagues in the world - that takes care of the arguement about having to step up too big a level from their day-to-day games. Players have won the CL, etc and play in front of large crowds week in, week out. Manager has won just about everything at the biggest and best European teams and managed players at the top level throughout.

Before the tournament I actually had them down to meet Argentina in the final. More than a little contentious I grant you as it had both Paraguay meeting and beating Brazil and then England meeting and beating Paraguay. That said, both their group and side of the draw did make that [or meeting Brazil in the semi] a distinct possibility. That's not to say that I in any way viewed them as an outstanding team - not by a long way. Individually, they have nothing to really fear or feel jealous for from any of the other major teams bar perhaps Brazil and Argentina and, if anything, I felt it was their own mental attitude that prevents them achieving what they could expect [Michael Ballack had an interview before the WC started saying the same thing].

Not topping their group would have been a failure in itself but the manner in which they only just managed to scrape through was shocking. Just didn't turn up at all. The fact that they saved their worst performance for Germany and could still have come through this conceivably shows how easily games can turn on their head regardless of form and ratings. Paraguay are a team I predicted would do well this WC and I still don't think Brazil will win it, despite how easy they've sailed through each game until now.

While I don't think not winning it or reaching the final was a failure in itself for England, going out in the round of 16 and more importantly in the manner they did, means that it cannot be counted as anything other than a failure. And now they are going to lump all the blame on Cappello for it rather than admit the players didn't turn up. He's not blameless but like us, somewhere down the line you have to trust a manager and give him time to build something rather than just changing him everything time you don't win something...

[mickki40]

In terms of performance levels, attitude, tactics and technique they most certainly failed. They were complete gash in all four games.

I never thought they had a chance at winning the tournament but the manner of their exit was unacceptable (for the English anyway).

I'd say they should have been good enough to top their group which would have given them a good chance of making the semi's. So aye, definite failure.

If Hibs had conceded goals like Germany's first people on here would be going radge. To concede a goals like that at this level was unacceptable, regardless of whether England were over-hyped or not.
True. England were gash in all the games they played, Rooney never even got out of the starting blocks. I personally as an Englishman had them as QF an no further, they lost me my bet at William Hills. I am sure that the media will keep having an inquest as to what went wrong for the next 2 weeks or even longer, well I can tell you... Gash...simple... as

[Phil MaGlass]

I think they failed but you cant blame them for going into the competition saying they are going to win it. Be positive and have a winning mentallity.
They were ga5h and I for one find it a pity Scotland dont play england regularly, one of their excuses was they need to be playing better opposition to become better, well it hasnt worked and they cant even beat Algeria or US.
They only have one or two real decent players and their league is only so good because it is jam packed with foreign players giving youth no chance to get into the game except at lower levels.

Scottish clubs have cut their cloth accordingly in the past few years after the massive influx of foreign players earning big bucks that couldnt be sustained. We have enough talented youngsters who want to play the game give them the facilities to come through and compete with the best.
Its a pity a country like Scotland couldnt get our game by the scruff of the neck and change it into something of the Dutch/French models from young ages.

[J-C]

All the media pior to the tournament said, they didn't expect them to get any further than the quarters but with a bit of luck could've went further.

If you look back at their qualification campaign and how they eased into the finals, then yes only getting out of the group stages was failure. They don't have really world class players but what they do have is 5-6 very good international players who just didn't show at these finals, what has to be asked is why.

Is pulling on your national strip no longer enough for these overpaid, overhyped superstars, especially when other countries players seem to turn it on every tournament, Brasil, Germany etc.

I have to admit that Capello is the main culprit here, playing an outdated 4-4-2 system and continually playing players out of position. He stated that he'd never choose anyone not in form or carrying an injury, yet picked Upson, James, Green, Heskey and Carrick, all out of form and the injured Barry, King and Ferdinand.

Something was seriously wrong in the friendlies prior to the World Cup, yet Capello carried on regardless. They cried out for a left sided player, but left out Johnson, played Rooney with a partner, when he's been at his best as a lone striker and still persisted with Gerrard on the left to accomodate Lampard.

[Speedy]

You make lots of good points. I didnt meet anyone prior to the tournament either who thought they were a good bet to get past the quarters of last 16. The English public (as opposed to the english media), or at least those that know about football, don't have a self-delusion/arrogance problem IMO.

I'd take issue with a couple of things in your post though. Did you really have Uruguay and Chile in your top 8 prior to the tournament? I'm impressed, because they didnt look that great in qualifying. Almost everyone I spoke to thought Argentina would fall flat on their face as well. What Maradona has achieved in turning his team around hasnt been remarked upon enough. If he wins it as manager it will be truly incredible after that qualifying campaign.

Italy were given no chance by their public prior to the tournament, one of their weakest squads ever, so id class them with France as 'a shock but not really a shock'.

I know this wasn't aimed at me but I thought I'd make a couple of comments. For some reason I thought Uruguay would do well and I had them losing to Germany in the quarters(I had Uruguay and Ghana both winning their groups). I agree to an extent about Argentina, there was a lot of fuss about how bad they were in qualifying so they do deserve some credit for improving but I also think this world cup has highlighted just how strong the South American teams are because they are all still in(apart from Chile, who lost to Brazil).

I didn't think England would do well and I had them to lose to Germany in the last 16(I had the group placings the other way round though). I would have rated the teams as follows: Brazil, Spain, Germany, Netherlands, Argentina, Italy, Portugal then England. So to answer the original question, I think they did fail because they did not achieve what was expected of them. However, their early exit did not surprise me personally.


I think they failed but you cant blame them for going into the competition saying they are going to win it. Be positive and have a winning mentallity.
They were ga5h and I for one find it a pity Scotland dont play england regularly, one of their excuses was they need to be playing better opposition to become better, well it hasnt worked and they cant even beat Algeria or US.
They only have one or two real decent players and their league is only so good because it is jam packed with foreign players giving youth no chance to get into the game except at lower levels.

Scottish clubs have cut their cloth accordingly in the past few years after the massive influx of foreign players earning big bucks that couldnt be sustained. We have enough talented youngsters who want to play the game give them the facilities to come through and compete with the best.
Its a pity a country like Scotland couldnt get our game by the scruff of the neck and change it into something of the Dutch/French models from young ages.

This world cup has highlighted how overhyped the league is as well with all the best players doing very little i.e. Fabregas, Torres, Drogba and Rooney

[lapsedhibee]

This world cup has highlighted how overhyped the league is as well with all the best players doing very little i.e. Fabregas, Torres, Drogba and Rooney
Wee bit early to rule out a Fabregas contribution perhaps, and none of those fully fit at the start of the competition, non? :dunno:

[mim]

Did you really have Uruguay and Chile in your top 8 prior to the tournament? I'm impressed, because they didnt look that great in qualifying. Almost everyone I spoke to thought Argentina would fall flat on their face as well. What Maradona has achieved in turning his team around hasnt been remarked upon enough. If he wins it as manager it will be truly incredible after that qualifying campaign.

Yes, the top 8 I quoted were my top 8 prior to the draw for the finals, so performances in warm up games are discounted. Argentina's squad simply made them certainties to be a real force and the South American teams finishing above them in qualifying were clearly going to be good sides.


Italy were given no chance by their public prior to the tournament, one of their weakest squads ever, so id class them with France as 'a shock but not really a shock'.
I also gave Italy no chance of progressing beyond the last 16, but would certainly have expected them to get out of the group stages, especially given the group they were actually drawn in, so they definitely failed.

[SQHib]

worth a read ....

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2010/0629/1224273557820.html

interesting information about bayerns youth programme

(even a mention for stokesey !)

[Greentinted]

worth a read ....

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2010/0629/1224273557820.html

interesting information about bayerns youth programme

(even a mention for stokesey !)


Excellent article. A hammer that hits several nails head's simultaneously.

[Part/Time Supporter]

It's a very good point, but unfortunately Capello and the England players also believed the hype and spoke about getting to the final or even winning the tournament.

Capello saying he expected to reach the final is up there with Ally McLeod saying he expected to come home with a medal.

This was their Argentina. And there's no Jock Stein next in line either...

[Sumner]

yes.

yes they did.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Yes, they did fail.

Every group has at least 1 team in the last 8, except Englands group, shows you how poorly England did, that they couldn't even top a group of that standard!

[JohnScott]

What a question :bitchy: Of course they failed. They all bloody failed! This is without doubt the WORST World cup I can remember. 4 South American teams in the quarters and no sign of England, France or Italy, three countries with the Worlds "best" leagues. You want to sum up the game today? Portugals Ronaldo gobbing at a cameraman! Arrogant, over-hyped and over-paid.

That's why England failed. No pride whatsover as displayed by the nonchalant way they reacted to their elimination. Pride being the only incentive they have by the way given they are so rich that the only way they could think to display their "national" pride was to publicly donate their appearance fees to charity. No hunger or desire whatsover!

OF COURSE THEY FAILED!

[Woody1985]

Keano telling it how it is!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWShjpiX8lc (Keano on England)