European Championships England v Malta/Macedonia

[SteMerritt]

We face an Italian team that we’re no where near what they had been in previous years

The only thing I'd say in your entire post as a minor counter (apart from the semi of Euro 2020 being in Rome, it wasn't, it was at Wembley v Denmark - we were in Rome the round before) was the Italian side had some bloody good results in that tournament, they knocked out both Belgium and Spain in their run to the final, and won all 3 of their group games.

...but we were bloody disappointing that night as you said.

 

[tonyw]

You’d expect England to beat Columbia, Sweden, Ukraine, Denmark and Senegal. So, when faced with decent sides, he’s lost to all of them except Germany, which shouldn’t be discounted as a good result.

Though between El Tel's side beating Spain on penalties in 1996 and Southgate taking up the job, our list of knockout victories in tournaments consists of:

Denmark (2002) and Ecuador (2006)

Twenty years of international football across ten tournament cycles, including the so-called golden generation, and we won two knockout games - both against sides we should beat.

Southgate may have his flaws, but he's at least brought us back to respectability on the international stage.

Doesn't mean I won't be pissed off, mind, if we lose to the first decent team we play next summer.

 

[tonyw]

Saka instead of Beckham?? SAKA INSTEAD OF BECKHAM?!?

MY. GOD.

Not necessarily saying that Saka is a better player than Beckham - but I don't think Beckham would work as a right-sided forward in a modern-day 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3 or similar.

His game was all about work rate, dead ball brilliance and terrific passing range. He lacked pace and he wasn't great at carrying the ball.

If a player with Beckham's specific skillset was coming through today, I'm almost positive he wouldn't end up on the right side of a front three - think he'd be trained up as a central midfielder in the Luka Modric-vein.

Which I guess shows the futility of this exercise, because I'm trying to cram players from the late 90s/early 00s into a modern day formation. I'd likely have just as much trouble finding an appropriate spot for some of your more modern players (like Bellingham) in a rigid old school 4-4-2.

 

[Mad Dog]

Not necessarily saying that Saka is a better player than Beckham - but I don't think Beckham would work as a right-sided forward in a modern-day 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3 or similar.

His game was all about work rate, dead ball brilliance and terrific passing range. He lacked pace and he wasn't great at carrying the ball.

If a player with Beckham's specific skillset was coming through today, I'm almost positive he wouldn't end up on the right side of a front three - think he'd be trained up as a central midfielder in the Luka Modric-vein.

Which I guess shows the futility of this exercise, because I'm trying to cram players from the late 90s/early 00s into a modern day formation. I'd likely have just as much trouble finding an appropriate spot for some of your more modern players (like Bellingham) in a rigid old school 4-4-2.

Beckham could play centrally or out wide, and bossed it during the most intense and competitive era of the premier league, and played in multiple sides packed with world class talent, and he'd be a stand out player in the lacklustre premiership, and would be a shoe in for England, either centrally or out wide.

Saka? Sakashit more like

 

[bazzer9461]

Beckham could play centrally or out wide, and bossed it during the most intense and competitive era of the premier league, and played in multiple sides packed with world class talent, and he'd be a stand out player in the lacklustre premiership, and would be a shoe in for England, either centrally or out wide.

Saka? Sakashit more like

No way one of Englands best players

 

[tonyw]

Beckham could play centrally or out wide, and bossed it during the most intense and competitive era of the premier league, and played in multiple sides packed with world class talent, and he'd be a stand out player in the lacklustre premiership, and would be a shoe in for England, either centrally or out wide.

Give over - Beckham played in the Premier League when it was basically a higher quality version of the SPL. Noone other than Man U or Arsenal won the PL while he was playing in it, and there was zero chance at the beginning of the season that either of them would fail to finish in the top three, such was their advantage in resources over everyone else.

Complain all you like about Abrahamovic, Sheikh Mansour, Saudi money and the PL TV deal (and I do, often) but the Premier League is vastly more competitive nowadays than it ever was in the late 90s and early 00s when Becks was playing.....

 

[38yearsofpain]

Saka? Sakashit more like

Mad Dog? Rabies more like.
Love the way, time heals and we remember with rose tinted glasses. Beckham was class but he had sub standard apperances playing for England. Wasn't Saka finest day but that whole team was dreadful yesturday and Saturday.

 

[Mojofilter]

Beckham could play centrally or out wide, and bossed it during the most intense and competitive era of the premier league, and played in multiple sides packed with world class talent, and he'd be a stand out player in the lacklustre premiership, and would be a shoe in for England, either centrally or out wide.

Saka? Sakashit more like

The other day he was about the only exciting thing in the final third for most of the game

 

[holdsteady]

Beckham could play centrally or out wide, and bossed it during the most intense and competitive era of the premier league, and played in multiple sides packed with world class talent, and he'd be a stand out player in the lacklustre premiership, and would be a shoe in for England, either centrally or out wide.

Saka? Sakashit more like

I take it you don’t watch much football if you think Saka is s**t.

 

[Mad Dog]

Saka is like so many "top level" young players these day, does the odd brilliant thing here and there that makes them look great, and then they're in the England team, but the rest of the time, they don't do much to impress me I'm afraid.

Give me a young up and coming Owen, Rooney or Beckham any day

 

[Mad Dog]

I take it you don’t watch much football if you think Saka is s**t.

No I don't really think he's s**t, but it was a perfect opportunity to use my brilliant bit of wordplay, and it was good wordplay, and you know it was, admit it!

 

[tonyw]

Saka is like so many "top level" young players these day, does the odd brilliant thing here and there that makes them look great, and then they're in the England team, but the rest of the time, they don't do much to impress me I'm afraid.

Give me a young up and coming Owen, Rooney or Beckham any day

Saka had 14 goals and 11 assists in the Premier League for Arsenal last year. So 25 total goal contributions.

Beckham never managed more than 11 goals or 22 Gs+As in any single season at any point in his career!

 

[Mad Dog]

Give over - Beckham played in the Premier League when it was basically a higher quality version of the SPL. Noone other than Man U or Arsenal won the PL while he was playing in it, and there was zero chance at the beginning of the season that either of them would fail to finish in the top three, such was their advantage in resources over everyone else.

Complain all you like about Abrahamovic, Sheikh Mansour, Saudi money and the PL TV deal (and I do, often) but the Premier League is vastly more competitive nowadays than it ever was in the late 90s and early 00s when Becks was playing.....

The premier league is a borefest compared to what it was like in those days, both on the pitch and in the stands.

And it's not even an English football league anymore, it's a foreign league, that just so happens to be played in England.

 

[38yearsofpain]

No I don't really think he's s**t, but it was a perfect opportunity to use my brilliant bit of wordplay, and it was good wordplay, and you know it was, admit it!

Don't try that line anywhere near The Emirates, or you make have to take it up the Arsenal.

 

[Mad Dog]

Saka had 14 goals and 11 assists in the Premier League for Arsenal last year. So 25 total goal contributions.

Beckham never managed more than 11 goals or 22 Gs+As in any single season at any point in his career!

That's that then, Saka is better than Beckham....stats

 

[bashamwonderland]

Give over - Beckham played in the Premier League when it was basically a higher quality version of the SPL. Noone other than Man U or Arsenal won the PL while he was playing in it, and there was zero chance at the beginning of the season that either of them would fail to finish in the top three, such was their advantage in resources over everyone else.

Complain all you like about Abrahamovic, Sheikh Mansour, Saudi money and the PL TV deal (and I do, often) but the Premier League is vastly more competitive nowadays than it ever was in the late 90s and early 00s when Becks was playing.....

This is mental.

Somewhat more athletic, yes.

Vastly more competitive, absolutely not.

There were 4 different English champions in the 90s, 3 different champions in the 00s and 5 different champions in the 10s. No significant uptick in competition, just a lucky season from Leicester differentiates the 10s from the two previous decades.

We all know how slim the chance of Leicester winning the league was.

 

[38yearsofpain]

The premier league is a borefest compared to what it was like in those days, both on the pitch and in the stands.

And it's not even an English football league anymore, it's a foreign league, that just so happens to be played in England.

Interesting viewpoint, it is the most watched league on the planet that doesn't really indicate a borefest. The game has changed in terms of fitness and tactics in that period and has moved more into mainstream entertainment. Like the other world's leading watched sports.
Back in the 1990's hooliganism and racism were still rife, Today more families and females watch football than ever before, the game is now is firmly placed in the global entertainment industry.
I accept it might not be what die hard football fans remember or want, but the games fan base has changed and with it have the value of clubs. As an example in 1989 Man U accepted a £20m bid from Michael Knighton for the club, the Glazers paid £790m in 2005 whilst it is currently valued at £6bn.
That argues the world at large does not think it is a borefest.

 

[bashamwonderland]

Interesting viewpoint, it is the most watched league on the planet that doesn't really indicate a borefest. The game has changed in terms of fitness and tactics in that period and has moved more into mainstream entertainment. Like the other world's leading watched sports.
Back in the 1990's hooliganism and racism were still rife, Today more families and females watch football than ever before, the game is now is firmly placed in the global entertainment industry.
I accept it might not be what die hard football fans remember or want, but the games fan base has changed and with it have the value of clubs. As an example in 1989 Man U accepted a £20m bid from Michael Knighton for the club, the Glazers paid £790m in 2005 whilst it is currently valued at £6bn.
That argues the world at large does not think it is a borefest.

I suppose the counter to your argument is F1. F1 is now a wildly more lucrative sport than it ever has been in the past, with many more families and women watching than ever before.

You can say with almost 100% certainly, and almost objective authority, that F1 is more boring than it was 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago.

Money and families does not make something interesting.

 

[SteMerritt]

I suppose the counter to your argument is F1. F1 is now a wildly more lucrative sport than it ever has been in the past, with many more families and women watching than ever before.

You can say with almost 100% certainly, and almost objective authority, that F1 is more boring than it was 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago.

Money and families does not make something interesting.

A point that is spectacularly driven (no pun intended) home if you watch the Brawn GP documentary currently on Disney+. That season had wins for 4 different teams, something that hasn't come close to happening recently.

 

[tonyw]

This is mental.

Somewhat more athletic, yes.

Vastly more competitive, absolutely not.

There were 4 different English champions in the 90s, 3 different champions in the 00s and 5 different champions in the 10s. No significant uptick in competition, just a lucky season from Leicester differentiates the 10s from the two previous decades.

We all know how slim the chance of Leicester winning the league was.

The early 90s - when the Premier League hadn't yet started funneling all the money to a select few - was still a fun and crazy time.
Teams like Palace, Norwich, Forest, Wednesday and Villa managed to finish in the top three, and Leeds and Blackburn actually managed to win the thing.

But then it fell into a pattern. Man U and Arsenal both had a twenty year period where they never finished outside of the Top 4; Chelsea had a decade in the Top 4 after Abrahamovic took over. You just never felt that there was any sense of jeopardy for those top clubs - a terrible season usually still meant Champions League football the following year for those three.

Other than Manchester City, who are so wealthy and so well managed (and/or so good at cheating the system) that they seem to be able to sustain excellence, that's not the case today. The combination of more TV money (that is still spread around relatively evenly, all things considered - as long as you have a seat at the top table) and more foreign wealth means that there's more clubs that are in a position to kick and overtake those big clubs when they have a down year.

Obviously I'm not suggesting that it's a socialist utopia where every team competes on an even keel.......but we're a third of the way through the season, and there's five teams within three points of the lead whilst the biggest spenders (on transfers, at least) are languishing mid-table again.......I don't ever remember either of those things happening in Beckham's era.