Discussion in 'Soccer' started by Suiteness, Jul 13, 2018.
It's the Belgian theme song for when they score and/or win.
Each country has one.
When did they pick it and why? Have they been using it for years? I'm pretty sure I've heard it in games not featuring Belgium.
There is more optimism than usual for England regarding the future. For most of the players of the current squad their best years are still ahead.
Having said that, it is more than likely that none of them in their lifetime get anywhere near the world cup-final as they did this year.
For a hockey comparison, you can substitute the Toronto Maple Leafs for England and it’s pretty similar.
****ing Gareth Southgate. I knew this would be a loss as soon as I saw that starting line-up. Jones, Delph, Dier, Sterling in the middle instead of the wing again, etc.
More concerning than the line-up though is just how they play in general. They play like the poorly coached German team in this World Cup but they have a better striker and set-pieces. Same problem of not using their speed/countering or having off the ball movement but instead relying on possession football where they push high up the field and have no creativity so it results in an aimless cross.
We saw that the moment they were trailing against Croatia. Nothing but high balls in the box. That being said, that team is still young and has room to grow. I wouldn't be so negative now. That's England's best result since 1990.
Great tournament for Belgium Thought Roberto Martinez did a good job with this team
Well...he did better than everybody expected. Then again expectations were extremely low
There's no way Southgate can justify keep on picking Sterling as a striker in the future. No team can win if one of their forwards has as bad a record as his.
England main downfall at the moment is that they are trying to play in a similar style to what Spurs & Man City are using........ but they don't have an Eriksson, Silva or a DeBruyne to pull the strings.
The balance of the team isn't right for me, asking Ali & Lingard to be half a midfielder each doesn't equal a 2nd midfielder in the team. You cannot get away with having 1 midfielder which is what England tried to do for most of this tournament.
Going forward you only pick 2 of 3 from Ali, Lingard, Sterling and you find somebody else to play central midfield alongside Henderson.
Its ironic considering how much failure England had during their time but what would you give at the moment to be able to put a Scholes, Gerrard or even Lampard alongside Henderson in a midfield two.
I find Alli and Lingard playing the roles they play to be sort of perplexing. It says they are midfielders, but I don't know if they actually do much of what you'd normally expect a midfielder to do. And to be honest, this is a problem that goes back and was one of the reasons Lampard/Gerrard always failed as well.
It feels like in the continental game, if a midfielder gets the ball he looks around and he's thinking "where do I put the ball next" and he will probably play it to another midfielder in his vicinity and so forth. In the English game, it seems like the midfielder's role is to push the ball forward himself or to hit a ball forward next. The concept of football as a chess match does not seem to have taken hold in the English game in spite of all those foreign Premier League managers.
And after this match, our window of opportunity has closed. I just don't see us make it this far in 2020 or 2022 without a huge influx of defensive talent.
Really glad Belgium at least got third, particularly for the 4 lads I remember from the Genk youth teams.
As for England... I don't want to be too critical. The fans should enjoy the run they had. Those involved in the setup need to see that the biggest progress they had at this tournament was winning a penalty shootout and getting that monkey off their back. The thing that would concern me is whether or not Southgate can see significant progress as a manager with so few international games.
Neither one of them are really traditional midfielders. To me the problem is Southgate trying to fit players where they don't actually play. Alli is really closer to a striker than a midfielder, and Lindgard is a winger, not someone who should be playing centrally. They are both more useful players when played in their actual position as compared to forced into a more traditional midfield role. In a more sensible world Kane and Alli would have started up top, with Alli dropping deeper somewhat behind Kane, and Sterling/Lindgard coming off the wings.
I think I said before the start of the tournament that the biggest loss for England this season was Lallana, who was the best and most elegant midfielder on the squad. Not having him was huge, and I think leaving him out was a sign of Southgate's tactical naiveté.
Belgium was the best country in this world cup, one mediocre match, combined with that utter garbage France tactic
and their most likely gold changed to bronze, congrats getting bronze nevertheless.
Losing Kompany is going to hurt a lot. But the Euros are still open for him I think.
Belgium was outplayed, outshot, outchanced by both Brazil and France.
Lallana was left out because he only started 3 games all season, wasn't fit enough. Lingard can play centrally, like he did for United most of the season. But it was further forward than he did for England. Agree about Alli but then there's no pace through the middle.
Belgium may still be a tough nut to crack in the euros in two years time but after that this golden generation will be past its prime and Belgium may fall back to mediocrity.
Separate names with a comma.