Pruitt wrote: Or is it that we overrate their players because the premier League is so good (largely due to foreign born players)?
Could also be that EPL teams over value English players, paying transfer fees 4 times higher than an equivalent player of a different nationality.
Just realized, this Brexit thing could wreak havoc on the EPL if European players don't get the work permit privileges they currently do. Are players from the continent going to have to get special approval like players from outside Europe? And with all of the money EPL teams are taking in, do British players get even higher overvalued wages?
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
Pruitt wrote: Or is it that we overrate their players because the premier League is so good (largely due to foreign born players)?
Could also be that EPL teams over value English players, paying transfer fees 4 times higher than an equivalent player of a different nationality.
Just realized, this Brexit thing could wreak havoc on the EPL if European players don't get the work permit privileges they currently do. Are players from the continent going to have to get special approval like players from outside Europe? And with all of the money EPL teams are taking in, do British players get even higher overvalued wages?
Presumably it will be up to the UK parliament and immigration authorities to decide under what conditions they will let foreigners work in their country. I would assume the same rules would apply to foreigners from the EU countries as well as foreigners from the US, but if the UK really does separate from the EU, they can negotiate something that gives EU citizens priority.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
degenerasian wrote:For starters play 4-4-2. England must play this way. Long balls down the wing crosses into the box. Watch tapes of England in the 90s to see. Watch the 90 & 96 semifinal vs Germany. The 96 demolition of Holland. All the big teams have an identity. England have lost theirs.
With that out of the way. The back 4 is fine with Walker and Rose. Kane and Vardy up front. Then figure out the midfield.
You might be right about the style that England should play. Rose and Walker thrive on that style.
But WTF was Rooney doing? Not just his brutal passing, but what gave the English brain trust the idea that he can play the Modric role? He was beyond awful today.
Hours later and this loss still is nearly incomprehensible - mainly because of the fact that if you showed it to someone who understood the rules, but had no knowledge of the teams involved, that person would assume that the blue team was a far better side than the white one.
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
degenerasian wrote:For starters play 4-4-2. England must play this way. Long balls down the wing crosses into the box. Watch tapes of England in the 90s to see. Watch the 90 & 96 semifinal vs Germany. The 96 demolition of Holland. All the big teams have an identity. England have lost theirs.
With that out of the way. The back 4 is fine with Walker and Rose. Kane and Vardy up front. Then figure out the midfield.
You might be right about the style that England should play. Rose and Walker thrive on that style.
But WTF was Rooney doing? Not just his brutal passing, but what gave the English brain trust the idea that he can play the Modric role? He was beyond awful today.
Hours later and this loss still is nearly incomprehensible - mainly because of the fact that if you showed it to someone who understood the rules, but had no knowledge of the teams involved, that person would assume that the blue team was a far better side than the white one.
I'm not going to say England aren't the better team or that they shouldn't win the majority of games if they played a 7 game series but let's not pretend that Iceland are shite. They beat Holland twice in qualifying as well as the Czechs and the Turks. They have some game. And to degen's point. They have a style and they stick to it.
degenerasian wrote:For starters play 4-4-2. England must play this way. Long balls down the wing crosses into the box. Watch tapes of England in the 90s to see. Watch the 90 & 96 semifinal vs Germany. The 96 demolition of Holland. All the big teams have an identity. England have lost theirs.
With that out of the way. The back 4 is fine with Walker and Rose. Kane and Vardy up front. Then figure out the midfield.
You might be right about the style that England should play. Rose and Walker thrive on that style.
But WTF was Rooney doing? Not just his brutal passing, but what gave the English brain trust the idea that he can play the Modric role? He was beyond awful today.
Hours later and this loss still is nearly incomprehensible - mainly because of the fact that if you showed it to someone who understood the rules, but had no knowledge of the teams involved, that person would assume that the blue team was a far better side than the white one.
It was trying to fit square pegs into round holes. In what world is Sturridge a right winger? What was the point in playing him there?
Rooney has been a great ambassador for his country but I do believe his time is done. There was definitely no point in playing him out of position when there are better options. What the fascination with Wilshire and leaving Drinkwater home?
Kung Fu movies are like porn. There's 1 on 1, then 2 on 1, then a group scene..
No clue about what Wilshere was doing on the field.
Hodgson is being crucified in England today.
Sadly the sense of causal prep extended to Hodgson himself, who went off on a boat trip up the Seine with Ray Lewington rather than watch Iceland play in the flesh. Ray, you see, had never seen Paris. Oh, the horror. Perhaps in time Roy’s boat ride will find itself enshrined alongside Steve McClaren’s umbrella, Kevin Keegan’s toilet, Sven’s psychedelic fake-sheikh yacht ride among the anguish-laden friezes of the England managerial death vault.
And that's from the Guardian, usually a more nuanced voice than other English news outlets.
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
degenerasian wrote:Iceland were +850 in 90 minutes yesterday, chedda and I jumped all over it.
They are +850 again against France. Doesn't look as enticing this time
This is why you should never make futures bets if you have the ability to bet on individual games in a knockout tournament. Iceland were (I think) like 50-1 before the knockouts started. If you really, really thought Iceland might win it all, you could have bet $50 to win $2500. Or you could bet $50 to beat England and keep rolling it over*. So after the England game you would have had about $225 or so. Bet that to beat France. Now you've got about $1300 or so already. The odds of beating Germany are going to be about the same, so that's roughly $5,500 or $6,000 or so. And of course you have options to take some or all of the money off the table.
* - NOTE: You'd have to bet "to advance", not the three-way bet odds listed above so they'd be a little lower but not significantly lower. I'm estimating about 5 to 1 instead of 8 to 1 in my calc. The point is there's almost never a chance the "one-time" odds are going to be better than betting each game individually and rolling over the winnings.
ETA: Just checked and Iceland are +450 to advance so my math is about right.
degenerasian wrote:Iceland were +850 in 90 minutes yesterday, chedda and I jumped all over it.
They are +850 again against France. Doesn't look as enticing this time
The Iceland party stops against France. Sad to see them go, but France rolls over them, IMO.
No Rami and no Kante could make things interesting
Kanté is a beast but Cabaye is more than adequate if he plays like the swiss game.
Rami, OTOH, well it May be a good news. I ve yet to meet someone who's bothered by his suspension, because the guy is so infuriating and is only there because of Varane/Mathieu/Sakho .being injured or suspended.
Rooney had been really good up until the Iceland game. Kane has been very poor, Wiltshire should not have made the squad and subbing him for Dier on Sunday was crazy (Wiltshire had been terrible the previous game). Stirling has been out completely out of form.
Here is the thing, Cahill is terrible, worse than awful. He cannot defend and/or read play right in front of him. He is the vice captain and is utter shite... I can't even write about Hart!
Rashford has been a breath of fresh air when he has come on. Against Iceland he got 7 minutes to run at them and they could not contain him.
I would keep Smailling and park him next to John Stones, I would keep the fullbacks, who I think have played well (as have their backups), sit Dier in front of the back four and start from there. Dier is top draw, a real player to build around.
I would like to see England adopt a system similar to the French of 1998. To do that, they would have to decide if they are going to try and turn Rooney into Paul Scholes, They would have to find someone to sit next to Dier (allowing the fullbacks push on) and then give complete freedom to the other 3 players. The English could play this system well.
Or you could just stick to 4-4-2 and go right back to basics...
The issue for me is England do not have an identity and don't play to a system. They believe they are better than teams like Iceland and Wales (which they are), but don't realise that they are nowhere near Germany and Spain. Therefore they should pick a simple system and a base formation and play to it. If they did that, they would do really well because their players are far better than the likes of Iceland and Wales. I know I am generalising, but it does seem as though the majority of the English players are inflexible and very, very uncomfortable outside of their comfort zone.
Enough of this. Italy have been fantastic to watch, they run their arses off, stick to a very solid, simple system and have been far more attacking than usual.
(England)... has won only six knockout matches in tournaments since 1966. The last occasion was 10 years ago against Ecuador. Before that it was Denmark in 2002, Spain (on penalties) at Euro 96, Belgium and Cameroon in 1990 and Paraguay in 1986. England might have invented the game but a look at their record over the last 50 years shows it is an awfully long time since they saw any royalties.
From today's Guardian.
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
In 86 88 90 92 and 96 they lost to the eventual champs barely. 98 that match was a farce. At least they played with a purpose. When they got on fire they were a joy to watch.
Kung Fu movies are like porn. There's 1 on 1, then 2 on 1, then a group scene..
I've really enjoyed watching Italy play. Great organization in the back (maybe because basically the entire defense are from the same team) and their counterattack Has been great fun.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
A_B wrote:I've really enjoyed watching Italy play. Great organization in the back (maybe because basically the entire defense are from the same team) and their counterattack Has been great fun.
Their countering has been surgical. The way they sealed the Belgium and Spain games were things of beauty.
"We're not the smartest people in the world. We go down the straightaway and turn left. That's literally what we do." -- Clint Bowyer
If you didn't see it, Roger Bennett did a good piece on the development of the soccer program in Iceland, the team and the fans. Really disappointed it was only 12 minutes.
I've always been fascinated with Iceland, and watched a great show a few weeks ago. The Wonder List on CNN did an episode about Iceland that really showed the culture and the people well. Most fascinating is their view on marriage and family. 70% of kids are born out of wedlock, despite the average age of women having their first child being 27. They don't have a strong cultural belief in marriage, and when longtime partners split and form new families, the exes for the most part join the new families. It's totally normal for a father to kids with two women, and they stay involved in the daily lives of both sets of kids, along with the mothers' other baby daddies. The kids view it as having additional parents, and it seems to work. Worth checking out the video for the amazing scenery and cinematography as well.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
It's an awesome place. At first brush, Icelanders can seem somewhat taciturn, but after a few minutes (once they realize you're not a typical American jerk) they warm up a great deal and are among the friendliest people I've met anywhere in the world.
Drive around the Ring Road for a little bit or amongst the fjords and lava fields of the southeast and you'll question if you're even on Earth any more.
brian wrote:It's an awesome place. At first brush, Icelanders can seem somewhat taciturn, but after a few minutes (once they realize you're not a typical American jerk) they warm up a great deal and are among the friendliest people I've met anywhere in the world.
Drive around the Ring Road for a little bit or amongst the fjords and lava fields of the southeast and you'll question if you're even on Earth any more.
Brian, you may have shared this previously, but I know you've traveled there and know people there. Do you have a family connection, or just something that interested you?
(Answering for Brian) Flights there are cheap, and Icelandair allows for a multiday stop on your way to mainland Europe. I haven't gone myself, but quite a few friends have. Everyone I know who has been raves about it.
Until everything is less insane, I'm mixing weed with wine.
brian wrote:It's an awesome place. At first brush, Icelanders can seem somewhat taciturn, but after a few minutes (once they realize you're not a typical American jerk) they warm up a great deal and are among the friendliest people I've met anywhere in the world.
Drive around the Ring Road for a little bit or amongst the fjords and lava fields of the southeast and you'll question if you're even on Earth any more.
Brian, you may have shared this previously, but I know you've traveled there and know people there. Do you have a family connection, or just something that interested you?
Just something that interested me. I think it's probably the most fascinating place in the world. Start with the scenery, which is otherworldly and then when you factor in how interesting their culture is, for some of the reasons previously mentioned and dozens of other reasons. Like Icelanders are the most genetically "pure" people on the planet. Their genes are studied by geneticists because for centuries they were so isolated it was extremely rare for an Icelander to procreate with a non-Icelander. Because of that and because the country is so small and sparsely populated, almost everyone in the country is related to everyone else by only two or three degrees.
I was gonna go this year but the lodging and car rental doesn't really pencil out for a solo traveler. Definitely getting over there in the next couple of years though.
Iceland certainly made the correct response to the global financial crisis in 2008. Only nation to do so. (People surrounded the parliament demanding no bailouts, told the UK banks and government to fuck themselves, put bankers in jail for their crimes. After a severe but brief recession, recovered quickly and completely.)
Who knows? Maybe, you were kidnapped, tied up, taken away and held for ransom.
Those days are gone forever
Over a long time ago
Oh yeah…
howard wrote:Iceland certainly made the correct response to the global financial crisis in 2008. Only nation to do so. (People surrounded the parliament demanding no bailouts, told the UK banks and government to fuck themselves, put bankers in jail for their crimes. After a severe but brief recession, recovered quickly and completely.)
I agree, but that's a little easier when you're talking about a country with the population of Baton Rouge.
A proportionally larger crowd could've surrounded the Capitol in DC, with similar effect. Size doesn't matter in this respect; only will of and character of the people.
Who knows? Maybe, you were kidnapped, tied up, taken away and held for ransom.
Those days are gone forever
Over a long time ago
Oh yeah…
