Quote:
|
Originally Posted by !@#$%!
well no, obviously they were not the same. early on england was on the attack and colombia was there to defend and destroy their game instead of playing their own, so they played negatively. but i don’t think they were as outrageous as you feel they were. that headbutt was a retaliation for a henderson elbow, for example. our beloved chiellini might have done the same. and henderson neymar’d it some (no somersaults though). this is the game. but i think you felt this way because your team was on the creative side.
well i was originally addressing h8kurdt who said “we made it harder than it needed to be” etc. as if it was england’s choice or prerogative to end up with this result.
my point was that it wasn’t.
respect or not, agree or disagree with tactics or style, colombia could have very well legally beat you on the extra time because by then they had gained the upper hand with a change in tactics. and your defense wasn’t what it had been earlier.
...
and funny thing to add here: i was just watching telemundo’s commentary (i watched the game on fox, which was pro-england) and the telemundo commentators are all up in arms complaining about the bad ref and how that penalty wasn’t really a penalty because it began with a slap from kane and they all fell bla bla bla etc. they even have the ref from the 2006 world cup final saying it’s debatable but he wouldn’t have called it.
ha ha ha ha ha!
see. everyone has their bias.
apparently pékerman was also complaining about the ref in his press conference. im gonna go hear what he said.
but anyway—congrats man, you’ve passed the biggest hurdle so far. enjoy your party!
|
But they didn't so the point is moot. Maybe if they'd actually dplayed less negatively they'd have won but they decided that was the ebat way and they got exactly what they deserved.
Onto Sweden. Gonna be a tough game no matter what anyone thinks. Can we do it? Can't see why not. In my eyes Sterling needs to be dropped for Rashford.