• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Semifinal: England v Denmark (in London, UK)

Magrat Garlick

Magrat Garlick

Rather Mad Witch
Kickoff 7 July, 8pm local/21.00 CET at Wembley

H2H (competitive): England 7, draw 3, Denmark 2
Last meetings were in the Nations League. England last won at the 2002 World Cup.
Euro history: England semifinals 1968 & 1996; Denmark winners 1992, semifinals 1964 & 1984
 
Last edited:
grecian

grecian

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Gawd that Sun front page took about 15% of my enthusiasm away from this match, but still ****ing up for it obviously, just to say that The Scum and Johnson can make anything good worse.
 
grecian

grecian

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Uppercut said:
The England team are a tool of Deep Woke apparently. You can all stop supporting them.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1412354865716731907
Click to expand...
Well that put's the 15% back on to supporting them, another 10 off though for todays's Scum front page. The Sun and Johnson, has there ever been a more simpatico relationship. Poshos pretending to be man of the people, with a thin veil of horrible populist patriotism, whilst secretly not given a shite about them.
 
mr_mister

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Only semi related to the above video, but I was thinking about all this the other day. I feel like the quality at the euros makes it almost a harder tournament than the world cup in a way. Less joke teams making up the numbers (like Australia) and minus the 4 best South American teams of recent times all the teams with a decent shot at going deep at the tournament are always European nations anyway. South Korea in '02 the exception to this rule, but in arguably dubious circumstances

So while it's not quite as meaningful as winning the world cup, from a football fans perspective it's damn close.
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
To me the Euros feels close to a World Cup while it's happening, but I don't think it actually is. Obviously the WC has far more currency in most of the world, but even within Europe, saying you're a European Championships Winner just isn't in the same league as saying you're a World Cup Winner.
 
Teja.

Teja.

Global Moderator
For me, as someone watching from India, the world cup has a much grander atmosphere. Teams which are not the absolute best playing it only adds to that atmosphere. It's like the entire world stops functioning for a few weeks to watch the world cup because it's just too important. I don't think the Euros have anything close to that aura.

There's also inevitably a few upsets from the weaker teams which are the best parts of the world cup.
 
sledger

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
Uppercut said:
To me the Euros feels close to a World Cup while it's happening, but I don't think it actually is. Obviously the WC has far more currency in most of the world, but even within Europe, saying you're a European Championships Winner just isn't in the same league as saying you're a World Cup Winner.
Click to expand...
I wonder where it ranks with both fans and players in relation to the Champions League. I remember reading the results of a survey done by FourFourTwo about twelve years ago, whereby they asked European players from various leagues which they would rather win, the CL or Euros. The results were pretty mixed iirc.

Edit: I mean, I think if you asked me now what I would choose if I had the option of an Arsenal CL win (or even a Prem win actuall) or an England WC/Euros win, I would bite your hand off for the Arsenal option every time. But I think a younger me would have found it much more difficult to choose.
 
Howe_zat

Howe_zat

Audio File
It doesn't have the history, since it was only recently that it started being world cup lite format. I've been reading a lot of stats about how this tournament keeps breaking records, and it's because people imagine it to have similar numbers to the world cup but it doesn't.

For most of my life the world cup has had 32 teams while the Euros has had 16, so getting out of the group was harder at the Euros but winning the thing was easier because Brazil and Argentina didn't play.

Since 2016 the Euros has become fully fledged world cup lite where the groups are just as easy and winning feels about as hard because the last few world cups have been very Euro-heavy in the final stages. So basically the Euros will mimic the world cup in quality whenever Brazil and Argentina aren't quite there, and fall behind when they're good.
 
Howe_zat

Howe_zat

Audio File
sledger said:
I wonder where it ranks with both fans and players in relation to the Champions League. I remember reading the results of a survey done by FourFourTwo about twelve years ago, whereby they asked European players from various leagues which they would rather win, the CL or Euros. The results were pretty mixed iirc.
Click to expand...
Depends what you count as fans, there are obviously tons of casuals like me who are only really interested in the national side.

I think the exclusivity of winning the CL has gone up in recent years though.
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'm a much bigger United fan than an Ireland fan, but I'd definitely take Ireland winning the World Cup.
 
Lillian Thomson

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
The World Cup isn't as weak at the bottom end as it used to be. When there were only 16 teams and the likes of El Salvador, Haiti and Zaire were in it and some of the top European or South American sides weren't it because of the limited numbers of qualifiers from each continent it wasn't anywhere near the best sides in the world at the tournament. Now Europe and South America have a bigger allocation and the African nations are much stronger it's much tougher to win. Even the AFC and CONCACAF representatives are not generally easy to beat. You'll never get the top 32 nations in the world at a World Cup like you potentially can with Europe and the Euros, but it's definitely better than when countries like England were sitting at home having lost to an Italy in the qualifiers in the 70's watching very weak nations losing 9 or 7 nil.
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Howe_zat said:
It doesn't have the history, since it was only recently that it started being world cup lite format. I've been reading a lot of stats about how this tournament keeps breaking records, and it's because people imagine it to have similar numbers to the world cup but it doesn't.

For most of my life the world cup has had 32 teams while the Euros has had 16, so getting out of the group was harder at the Euros but winning the thing was easier because Brazil and Argentina didn't play.

Since 2016 the Euros has become fully fledged world cup lite where the groups are just as easy and winning feels about as hard because the last few world cups have been very Euro-heavy in the final stages. So basically the Euros will mimic the world cup in quality whenever Brazil and Argentina aren't quite there, and fall behind when they're good.
Click to expand...
The WCs that are held outside Europe tend to be less European. 2018 was extremely European and 2006 was the other one with four European semi-finalists. But in 2010 only 3/8 quarter finalists were European with Uruguay, Paraguay, and Ghana all there. In 2014 Costa Rica put out Italy and England then lost on pens to the Dutch. Going back further you had South Korea in the semis, albeit with a large asterisk.

I think the group stages are the best part of these tournaments though, so the Euros can never replicate the WC for me even if all the best teams are European.
 
sledger

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
Yeah, despite the Web/Internet and everything making it much easier to access football from all over the place these days, the WC still has massive appeal as a chance to watch teams/players from parts of the world that generally don't get a lot of coverage in the West (e.g., teams from Africa and Asia). As a huge Japanophile I always make a point of following Japan at these comps, and the African teams are usually entertaining, either for being incredibly dire (e.g., Cameroon in the last few WCs) or for being funny (e.g., Ivory Coast had that keeper called "Barry" a few tournaments ago), or for being actually decent and fun (e.g., Ghana in 2010).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top