Quote:
|
Originally Posted by !@#$%!
a warning though. i dont wanna be a party shitter but i’m not feeling england and i’ll explain why.
i like the team. they’re decent up and down and have a natural goalscorer up top. i had some players in my squad previously.
only problem i see is: they’ve had no real trial by fire this world cup. tunisia, then panama, then a discreet tactical loss against belgium— they have not been tested.
other teams have been tested already and survived.
is that good because they’re not tired yet? is that bad because they haven’t performed together under pressue yet?
i don’t know. i haven’t seen them in qualifiers so i dont know how much practice together and how many obstacles they’ve faced.
but anyway i think that’s one element to consider besides the obvious good squad. how much of a team are they as a team?
i think denmark actually was a team today. they don’t have a lot of talent but they had decent cohesion and good. uruguay is a team. france? great players but i am not sure. belgium? we’ll see some day i guess—another untested. sweden? i did not get a chance to see them much but looks like they might be given their record. england? i don’t know but they gotta show up on tuesday or else.
|
Colombia ... probably no James, but even with him, I've seen nothing so far to think they're objectively better than England.
Switzerland, Sweden, Russia ... how many of their 1st 11 would get into England's?
Croatia ... OK they've got Modric but in a single game I'd still take our XI over theirs. I would.
The final's obviously a different matter. Brazil, Uruguay, Belgium, France. They all worry me, but the teams we'd face getting to them don't.