No Henderson in the provisional squad 

That Mbappe is shit, couldn't hit a cows arse with a banjo. 🤫

Kante is a mad man

2 hours ago, radcliffe white said:

Folk moaned about our performance but we won, Belgium had bags of chances but got jack shit

at this stage it’s about getting out the groups 

French making hard work of beating Austria, they'll never progress playing like that

French players obviously too preoccupied with talking abiut politics instead of concentrating on foitball.

Having surgery on his nose mbappe

3 hours ago, desperado said:

Did anybody hear one of Bellingham’s interviews in the last 24 hours where he talked about how much he enjoyed playing with TAA?

He really commended his performance  and talked about how the 3 complemented each other. He went on to breakdown the qualities and how he looks forward to playing more with him. 

I don’t think I’ve heard one professional (ex-pro) give TAA a poor review, the only negatives I’ve heard are from fans.

He's a superb player who respects everybody else's contribution, including all the backroom staff, his interviews are brilliant and he comes over as someone who's been brought up perfectly.  To be possibly the best player in the team and not let mis-judged passes and mistakes affect your performances is a gift, he's got the lot.  I hope he has a very long playing career, he can be a real jewel for England.

40 minutes ago, Breightmet Boy said:

He's a superb player who respects everybody else's contribution, including all the backroom staff, his interviews are brilliant and he comes over as someone who's been brought up perfectly.  To be possibly the best player in the team and not let mis-judged passes and mistakes affect your performances is a gift, he's got the lot.  I hope he has a very long playing career, he can be a real jewel for England.

He does seem to have a growing petulant streak that might land him an unnecessary yellow card though 

How much does this mean to you??

I guess it's an age thing, but 96, 98 my peak public year's, great years,  great music, opposition leaders could identify birds as them ones with tits and no dongs 

And here we are, arguing about if Phil fodens left nut has pubes on it. Fack me, greatest ever attacking line up in any of our generations for England 

Sit back and enjoy it we might actually win it . If we don't oh well, Shrewsbury away

5 hours ago, gonzo said:

Meant to be clear and obvious.

If you need a bloody snickometer it's not clear and obvious.

Nobody even noticed and Nobody would've complained after.

The ball literally glanced his finger after he was shoved into an unnatural position. He made no conscious effort to control the ball with his hand.

It's utter bullshit.

"Clear and obvious" - isn't that one of the recent interpretation of the VAR rules? When I was young, "deliberate" handball was an offence (i.e as interpreted as being deliberate by the ref) but "accidental" handball was judged on whether or not the offending team gained an advantage from it - and that's probably the best criterion in my view.

But "clear and obvious" has obviously been dropped as the American lady carefully explained - it was just another desperate attempt to try to sort out the rules and now the rule has changed yet again.

So it comes down to this: The player undoubtedly broke the rule as the current rules stand and therefore it's handball.

So what is the problem? The rules or VAR?

Undoubtedly it's the rules - because VAR is no more than evidence. How that evidence is interpreted is problematic - although the automated offside VAR is brilliant and an obvious next step in VAR's ongoing evolution.

Bottom line is that the rules need changing and VAR needs to be more automated, not less, and if we go down that road eventually we'll end up with a near flawless system that will stop cheating. And I've never liked cheating or poor refereeing since we got relegated because of the goal that wasn't against Everton.

The next generation VAR will be brilliant - but only if the powers that be go back to basics with the rules i.e. do they get an advantage from doing it.

There was an incident in the France game tonight when a cross hit a defenders hand and diverted the ball into the safety of the goalie's hands. OK the guy didn't intend to do it so it wasn't given - but if he hadn't handballed it Austria might have scored - and that's wrong IMO because France clearly got an advantage from it.

If you are so upset about refereeing, direct you anger at the ruling bodies - but embrace VAR because eventually it will root out cheating in seconds.

9 hours ago, Jol_BWFC said:

I’m glad someone else gets it.

Pretty sure most of us do. England and France have had the perfect start in my view. Unconvincing maybe but three points, clean sheet and shaken off some of the cobwebs.

Rarely does a team who starts off firing on all cylinders in either the Euros or the WC go on to win it. Slow and steady and build through the competition is the usual successful formula. Puts me off Germany (slightly, they might have hit double figures if they were really trying) and Spain (definitely) but we all know England and France can improve dramatically.

9 hours ago, Wanderlust said:

Wow.

The number three ranked team in the world simply weren't good enough to overcome Slovakia and some bad luck.

So you're the one who places store in the ranking system? I wondered who it was. 

They have been rating Belgium for years now. What have they done/won?

I am sure the vast majority on here would not have rated them as 'one of our main rivals'. Not the end of the world for them if they are as good as you seem to think. The 1974 World Cup winners lost 1-0 to East Germany on the way to success.

9 hours ago, Zico said:

Yes but the Belgians aren't and never have been the 3rd best team in the world 

Ranks are wank 

Spot on.

7 hours ago, frank_spencer said:

French making hard work of beating Austria, they'll never progress playing like that

Falling into the trap. Don't.

6 hours ago, DazBob said:

French players obviously too preoccupied with talking abiut politics instead of concentrating on foitball.

Your grey matter suddenly sparks into life. Startling.

Thought Austria played well. Though we’ve not finished rnd 1 yet, looks like most teams mean business maybe apart from Scotland and Ukraine. 
 

Meeting moved early this morning so I can back home for some 2 O clock action today.

7 minutes ago, tomski said:

Thought Austria played well. Though we’ve not finished rnd 1 yet, looks like most teams mean business maybe apart from Scotland and Ukraine. 
 

Meeting moved early this morning so I can back home for some 2 O clock action today.

5pm & 8pm today. 

No 2pm ko...

7 minutes ago, jeep said:

5pm & 8pm today. 

No 2pm ko...

Ffs.

 

cheers. I think😂

6 hours ago, Wanderlust said:

"Clear and obvious" - isn't that one of the recent interpretation of the VAR rules? When I was young, "deliberate" handball was an offence (i.e as interpreted as being deliberate by the ref) but "accidental" handball was judged on whether or not the offending team gained an advantage from it - and that's probably the best criterion in my view.

But "clear and obvious" has obviously been dropped as the American lady carefully explained - it was just another desperate attempt to try to sort out the rules and now the rule has changed yet again.

So it comes down to this: The player undoubtedly broke the rule as the current rules stand and therefore it's handball.

So what is the problem? The rules or VAR?

Undoubtedly it's the rules - because VAR is no more than evidence. How that evidence is interpreted is problematic - although the automated offside VAR is brilliant and an obvious next step in VAR's ongoing evolution.

Bottom line is that the rules need changing and VAR needs to be more automated, not less, and if we go down that road eventually we'll end up with a near flawless system that will stop cheating. And I've never liked cheating or poor refereeing since we got relegated because of the goal that wasn't against Everton.

The next generation VAR will be brilliant - but only if the powers that be go back to basics with the rules i.e. do they get an advantage from doing it.

There was an incident in the France game tonight when a cross hit a defenders hand and diverted the ball into the safety of the goalie's hands. OK the guy didn't intend to do it so it wasn't given - but if he hadn't handballed it Austria might have scored - and that's wrong IMO because France clearly got an advantage from it.

If you are so upset about refereeing, direct you anger at the ruling bodies - but embrace VAR because eventually it will root out cheating in seconds.

If VAR doesn't exist that goal would never have been questioned in a million years.

The lad didn't cheat. 

It creates problems that aren't there.

 

51 minutes ago, gonzo said:

If VAR doesn't exist that goal would never have been questioned in a million years.

The lad didn't cheat. 

It creates problems that aren't there.

 

Aye, you cannot call that cheating 

If if goes out for a corner rather than a goal they don't even check it

There was another one later on in the box

Was clearly an accident and not given, but there was far more of a connection and diverting the path of the ball 

 

Regards the BBC studio 

Is having male pundits sat above a glass ceiling an actual metaphor?

Makes you think 

12 hours ago, deeane Koontz said:

Matterfarce waffling about hairstyles again. Every game without fail.

He is so so bad, I cant stand him.

Wild weather here today, fan zones etc cancelled across the region due to storms. At Turkey v Georgia in Dortmund later, brolly packed.

15 hours ago, desperado said:

Not saying you’re wrong, but you’d be going against the 3 pundits I’ve heard talk about England today, Murphy, Lescott and Thomas Frank, who all said they think TAA deserves his place in the next game. They did this while both acknowledging some of the things he needs to improve but pointing out why he’s the best man for that job. 

I think these guys who are paid to watch and analyse football for a living possibly view the selection you propose as too much of a risk for an international team who are vulnerable at the back.

I can’t see Bellingham playing alongside Rice or Foden in midfield  or us using two 8’s or Foden in a 10 in this tournament. 

i've also heard pundits wanting the same team

 

Some fucking bizarre takes about why Foden was so shite. Blaming the system, the fullback and even Bellingham

He's a top quality player it's on him to turn up at internationals and make something happen. Much lesser players have managed to do it lol

 

The easy thing for keyboard managers questioning southgate after serbia is they can never be wrong

Shouldve done this, then this, but not that and then do this, that, the other

We may have lost if he had done those things, but fortunately for them, we will never know

All we know is that England won and all these experts dont work anywhere near the top end of football

Maybe says a lot