• 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.

**Official** English Football Season 2023/24

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
As for rubbish substitutions and selections, some of us are old enough to remember Charlton being removed against West Germany in 1970 and Hector being given about 60 seconds against Poland in 1973. Not to mention Revie informing Currie, Worthington and Hudson that they weren't what he was looking for. Anything since then pales in comparison.
 
Last edited:

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Plus that penalty.

Objectively it wasn't an especially good one (straight down the middle, IIRC) but Becks had the cobblers to step up.

Felt like redemption at the time.
A propos of nothing, my daughter did exactly the same in her side's penalty shoot out at the end of their semi final yesterday. Sadly, the keeper was too immobile to move either way and was pleasantly suprised to see the ball coming staright at her. At least my daughter didn't try a Panenka, I suppose. Anyway, you'll be pleased to hear that the rest of her side thought it might be a good idea to put the ball in the corner, so it all ended well.
 

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
As for rubbish substitutions, some of us are old enough to remember Charlton being removed against West Germany in 1970 and Hector being given about 60 seconds against Poland in 1973. Not to mention Revie informing Currie, Worthington and Hudson that they weren't what he was looking for. Anything since then pales in comparison.
Smudger replacing Lineker at Euro 92 as well.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Smudger replacing Lineker at Euro 92 as well.
Yes, that was a shocker. As if Lineker's only partial involvement in the game thus far had any bearing whatsover on who you'd want a half-chance to fall to. I suppose it's the earlier ones that stick with you, and some of us are still scarred by 1970 and 1973.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
As for rubbish substitutions, some of us are old enough to remember Charlton being removed against West Germany in 1970 and Hector being given about 60 seconds against Poland in 1973. Not to mention Revie informing Currie, Worthington and Hudson that they weren't what he was looking for. Anything since then pales in comparison.
I'm just a wee bit too young to recall the Ramsey/Revie eras, but Taylor taking off Lineker for Alan Smith (and I dearly love Smudger), ignoring the tyro Shearer in the process, when we needed to score v yer Swedes in Euro 92 would probably get my vote for arse sub decisions.

Smithy was always a better link man than an out and out scorer.

EDIT: Lol. Or what Sledger said. Great minds, etc.
 

Molehill

Cricketer Of The Year
Smudger replacing Lineker at Euro 92 as well.
To be fair, that was out of the box thinking for Taylor, for whom an inspirational team talk utilised the phrase "come on".

Yes, that was a shocker. As if Lineker's only partial involvement in the game thus far had any bearing whatsover on who you'd want a half-chance to fall to. I suppose it's the earlier ones that stick with you, and some of us are still scarred by 1970 and 1973.
I think I'd add that we had looked completely incapable of creating a half chance anyway, so I think the idea was to start hitting long balls to Smudge. I don't actually think it was as stupid as it seemed.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
To be fair, that was out of the box thinking for Taylor, for whom an inspirational team talk utilised the phrase "come on".



I think I'd add that we had looked completely incapable of creating a half chance anyway, so I think the idea was to start hitting long balls to Smudge. I don't actually think it was as stupid as it seemed.
Bah. Giving Lineker someone to play off would have been a better bet. As it was, his partners up front were the wide players Sinton and Daley.
 

Chin Music

State Vice-Captain
Bah. Giving Lineker someone to play off would have been a better bet. As it was, his partners up front were the wide players Sinton and Daley.
Hence why I very much don't think there's too much of a 'what if' with the England '92 Euro team. There's a lot more to be said about what happened with the 2002/2004 and 2006. For the first, it was how the hell did we not go for it v 10 men, for 2004, that was when we did have it in us to go toe to toe with them. 2006, it is a general why oh why did we play like a 1970s traditional hoof ball team?
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Hence why I very much don't think there's too much of a 'what if' with the England '92 Euro team. There's a lot more to be said about what happened with the 2002/2004 and 2006. For the first, it was how the hell did we not go for it v 10 men, for 2004, that was when we did have it in us to go toe to toe with them. 2006, it is a general why oh why did we play like a 1970s traditional hoof ball team?
Yeah, we were never very likely to win the 1992 Euros even we had seen off Sweden. But Sweden were beatable, even on their own patch. We'd gone one up and, reading about it this morning, I was reminded Daley had missed a good chances to put us two up. And Taylor of all people should have known that Lineker was capable of scoring a vital goal after doing nothing of note as that's exactly what he did in the vital qualifier in Poland a few months previously.

Beyond that, yeah 2002 was immensely frustrating for the reason you outlined. It was almost as if a 2-1 loss to Brazil was more acceptable than risking conceding a third if we did try to attack them. 2004 was tough, and Portugal were on home turf tbf. And I don't really remember much about 2006 beyond Rooney's red card.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I think the turgid last half hour in 2002 had more to do with the heat than it did with Sven’s tactics. The second half fade in summer temperatures is an England trademark that’s happened plenty before and since.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Yeah, we were never very likely to win the 1992 Euros even we had seen off Sweden. But Sweden were beatable, even on their own patch. We'd gone one up and, reading about it this morning, I was reminded Daley had missed a good chances to put us two up. And Taylor of all people should have known that Lineker was capable of scoring a vital goal after doing nothing of note as that's exactly what he did in the vital qualifier in Poland a few months previously.

Beyond that, yeah 2002 was immensely frustrating for the reason you outlined. It was almost as if a 2-1 loss to Brazil was more acceptable than risking conceding a third if we did try to attack them. 2004 was tough, and Portugal were on home turf tbf. And I don't really remember much about 2006 beyond Rooney's red card.
2006 we were inspid the whole time. The whole thing was a shambles. Given Owen’s injuries and Rooney’s foot we weren’t going to win it I guess. Had both of them been fit we could definitely have challenged but announcing Sven’s departure before the tournament, having his successor in the coaching team for it, just everything about it was wrong.

Mind you, 2010 was worse. It all went wrong once the Capello Index was announced
 

Chin Music

State Vice-Captain
Yeah, we were never very likely to win the 1992 Euros even we had seen off Sweden. But Sweden were beatable, even on their own patch. We'd gone one up and, reading about it this morning, I was reminded Daley had missed a good chances to put us two up. And Taylor of all people should have known that Lineker was capable of scoring a vital goal after doing nothing of note as that's exactly what he did in the vital qualifier in Poland a few months previously.

Beyond that, yeah 2002 was immensely frustrating for the reason you outlined. It was almost as if a 2-1 loss to Brazil was more acceptable than risking conceding a third if we did try to attack them. 2004 was tough, and Portugal were on home turf tbf. And I don't really remember much about 2006 beyond Rooney's red card.
Oh they were beatable although I recall that England didn't beat Sweden for about 30 or more years in any sort of match. I think it was only in a friendly in 2011 that we broke that curse and then beat them in Euro 2012, that I remember more for Ibrahimovic strolling past John Terry for fun in a rather erratic game.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Hence why I very much don't think there's too much of a 'what if' with the England '92 Euro team. There's a lot more to be said about what happened with the 2002/2004 and 2006. For the first, it was how the hell did we not go for it v 10 men, for 2004, that was when we did have it in us to go toe to toe with them. 2006, it is a general why oh why did we play like a 1970s traditional hoof ball team?
England's Euro 92 squad is weird as **** when you look at the World Cup squad and the Euro 96 squads, both of which are full of genuine quality.
 

Top