09-07-2018, 13:40
I don't think we deliberately lost to Belgium. But we didn't mind losing.
Nor do I see a ready solution to two decent teams collecting six points apiece from their first two games and meeting in their final group match ......... unless you manipulate the order in which group games are played. And who decides which two teams are decent anyway, clearly FIFA rankings don't do it.
Bizarrely, had Poland topped their group (as expected) no one would have thought that England manipulating a result would even be a good idea, but as we saw in all their group games the 8th ranked side by FIFA - Poland - were piss-poor. And though everyone praises the Japanese for their performance against Belgium, ironically they also featured in the most manipulated result of the tournament, deliberately playing out a 1-0 defeat against Poland on the instructions of their manager.
We can always point out how fortunately things fell once results appear and hindsight kicks in. But if the Final turns out to be France v Croatia, what conclusions do we draw then? And which circumstances do we choose to have had anything to do with it anyway? Brazil lost to Belgium, okay for 25 minutes Belgium were good, but the own goal was laughable and Brazil really missed even having a goal attempt on hatfuls of occasions. Equally France cruised through, but write Cavani into the Uruguayan team and score out Muslera's inability to deal with a ball that moved a little in the air ........ and who knows? Certainly Sweden turned out to be poor quarter finalists as soon as they had conceded a goal - but up until that point it was exactly as I expected the whole game to go, one team in it but nothing much happening.
The draw looks quite nice for England now, but three of Croatia's midfield would waltz into our team ...... and could decide the result themselves. Equally what if Belgium beat France, but de Bruyne gets injured and Lukaku is sent off in the last five minutes. How fearful would England or Croatia be for the final?
Nor do I see a ready solution to two decent teams collecting six points apiece from their first two games and meeting in their final group match ......... unless you manipulate the order in which group games are played. And who decides which two teams are decent anyway, clearly FIFA rankings don't do it.
Bizarrely, had Poland topped their group (as expected) no one would have thought that England manipulating a result would even be a good idea, but as we saw in all their group games the 8th ranked side by FIFA - Poland - were piss-poor. And though everyone praises the Japanese for their performance against Belgium, ironically they also featured in the most manipulated result of the tournament, deliberately playing out a 1-0 defeat against Poland on the instructions of their manager.
We can always point out how fortunately things fell once results appear and hindsight kicks in. But if the Final turns out to be France v Croatia, what conclusions do we draw then? And which circumstances do we choose to have had anything to do with it anyway? Brazil lost to Belgium, okay for 25 minutes Belgium were good, but the own goal was laughable and Brazil really missed even having a goal attempt on hatfuls of occasions. Equally France cruised through, but write Cavani into the Uruguayan team and score out Muslera's inability to deal with a ball that moved a little in the air ........ and who knows? Certainly Sweden turned out to be poor quarter finalists as soon as they had conceded a goal - but up until that point it was exactly as I expected the whole game to go, one team in it but nothing much happening.
The draw looks quite nice for England now, but three of Croatia's midfield would waltz into our team ...... and could decide the result themselves. Equally what if Belgium beat France, but de Bruyne gets injured and Lukaku is sent off in the last five minutes. How fearful would England or Croatia be for the final?