Can you admit that Southgate is doing a great job yet?

[Glover_elbow]

England were the better team last night

That's simply not true France took their chances and scored two great goals from open play. England for all their great build up play fluffed their lines. That's not down to chance it's down to France being mentally stronger, more ruthless in my front of goal and being the better side. To suggest otherwise is Partizan nonsense

 

[TeaCider]

That's simply not true France took their chances and scored two great goals from open play. England for all their great build up play fluffed their lines. That's not down to chance it's down to France being mentally stronger, more ruthless in my front of goal and being the better side. To suggest otherwise is Partizan nonsense

Simply is true.

France taking their chances doesn't mean they were the better team.
It's a fact of football that sometimes the team that played better loses.

 

[Glover_elbow]

Simply is true.

Then who's through

 

[TeaCider]

Then who's through

That's not relevant, is it?

I didn't say England are through, I said they were the better team, and they were.

 

[Glover_elbow]

That's not relevant, is it?

It's THE only thing that's relevant

 

[TeaCider]

It's THE only thing that's relevant

In an argument about who played better, the result clearly isn't the only thing that matters.

Football is riddled with matches where teams have won when they played worse than the opposition, it's also riddled with teams that lost where they played better.

 

[Jedi boro]

the result clearly isn't the only thing that matters.

No, In international football tournaments the result is the ONLY thing that matters.

 

[TeaCider]

No, In international football tournaments the result is the ONLY thing that matters.

That wasn't what the argument was...

England played better than France last night, England lost.

The two things aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[Glover_elbow]

That wasn't what the argument was...

England played better than France last night, England lost.

The two things aren't mutually exclusive.

In what way we're England better

 

[SE4 Red]

In what way we're England better

Just say, hypothetically, Maguire's header goes in and Kane scores the 2nd pen but everything else in the game was the same. Would you then say England were the better team?

 

[TeaCider]

In what way we're England better

More chances, looked more threatening, and kept the best player in the world completely quiet.

Constantly hampered by an atrocious referee throughout the whole match too.

They scored a stunning first goal, but it shouldn't have counted as Saka was repeatedly fouled in the build up.

We also should have had another penalty, and the referee somehow needed VAR to tell him to give the most blatant penalty you'll ever see.

France took the lead again against the run of play, though it was a good goal from their point of view.

Kane scores that 2nd penalty and I think England would have went on to win.

All ifs and buts, and it doesn't change the fact we lost, but England played well yesterday.

 

[BoroMart]

Best international squad by a country mile and he has achieved the sum total of **** all with it. Needs to go.

another clown. Brazil and france both have better squads. Another character for the bin

 

[ThatFragranceGuy]

No, In international football tournaments the result is the ONLY thing that matters.

So if England absolutely hammered France and they didn't even get a shot on goal and then maguire scored an own goal, were France the better team because that is all that counts? Bizarre logic.

Yes the main output is who goes through, but you can be the better team and lose, it happens all the time in domestic football, cups, and inter drinks tournaments.

 

[Quicksilvera]

another clown. Brazil and france both have better squads. Another character for the bin

I disagree about Brazil and the current France squad, for me we had the best squad at this World Cup.

 

[Glover_elbow]

More chances, looked more threatening, and kept the best player in the world completely quiet.

Constantly hampered by an atrocious referee throughout the whole match too.

They scored a stunning first goal, but it shouldn't have counted as Saka was repeatedly fouled in the build up.

We also should have had another penalty, and the referee somehow needed VAR to tell him to give the most blatant penalty you'll ever see.

France took the lead again against the run of play, though it was a good goal from their point of view.

Kane scores that 2nd penalty and I think England would have went on to win.

All ifs and buts, and it doesn't change the fact we lost, but England played well yesterday.

How many big chances did England have maybe one in the first half when kane was through and the 2 penalties which were gifted from ridiculous challenges I can't remember any others.

 

[Glover_elbow]

So if England absolutely hammered France and they didn't even get a shot on goal and then maguire scored an own goal, were France the better team because that is all that counts? Bizarre logic.

Yes the main output is who goes through, but you can be the better team and lose, it happens all the time in domestic football, cups, and inter drinks tournaments.

What absolute nonsense. How can you hammer a team without getting a shot on goal. If you can't get a shot on goal then your completely ineffectual.

 

[TeaCider]

How many big chances did England have maybe one in the first half when kane was through and the 2 penalties which were gifted from ridiculous challenges I can't remember any others.

Maguire hit the post, Lloris had to make a number of saves from Kane shots and Bellingham.

We had 7 shots on target, only one was from a penalty.
On top of those 7 was the Maguire chance and the skied penalty.

 

[Glover_elbow]

Maguire hit the post, Lloris had to make a number of saves from Kane shots and Bellingham.

We had 7 shots on target, only one was from a penalty.
On top of those 7 was the Maguire chance and the skied penalty.

England missed more big chances and that's why we lost. But it was a far closer game than most are making out only 1 big chance more. Keane spoke well after the game you need to find a way to win nothing else in matters and France are better at that than England they were more clinical. England will learn from that game especially when Maguire stones and Shaw retire.

 

[Pembroke]

Great is a perception. Great is winning a tournament. Mr Southgate has not. Good enough to beat a Senegal, a Sweden, the Wales. Mr Southgates teams still consistently fall short when challenged by the International teams of stature.

 

[Johnlennon]

another clown. Brazil and france both have better squads. Another character for the bin

Completely disagree. There’s no way players like Fred or Antony from Brazil would get into the England squad. France’s squad is also wafer thin at this tournament due to the amount of injuries to players who otherwise would have been selected, hence why they only made one substitute last night. We had far and away the best squad at the World Cup and all Southgate achieved with it were wins over minnows, a draw against the USA and a loss against France with our only goal coming from a penalty. He has never beaten a good side, and he probably never will. His game management is absolutely woeful as evidenced by the collapses against Croatia and Italy and his substitutions always come far too late, leaving Rashford on the bench last night until the 85th minute when we were chasing a game is absolutely ridiculous.

Nice bloke, well spoken but will never be a successful football manager.