England would have put up a better fight than Italy

Chris wrote:Ben was saying to me England would have lost by 1 or 2 but created less chances meaning less fight.

Firstly losing by 1 or 2 is far better than getting smashed 4-0. Secondly strong crystal ball skills.

no it isnt, in a final its the same thing

atleast italy tried to win, england would not have. lets not forget italy played spain earlier in the tournament and drew 1-1.

ViVaRooney wrote:

Chris wrote:Ben was saying to me England would have lost by 1 or 2 but created less chances meaning less fight.

Firstly losing by 1 or 2 is far better than getting smashed 4-0. Secondly strong crystal ball skills.

no it isnt, in a final its the same thing

atleast italy tried to win, england would not have. lets not forget italy played spain earlier in the tournament and drew 1-1.

So trying to stop the other team scoring is not trying to win.. but letting the other team absolutely rip you apart IS trying to win?

Strong logic.

Iker Casillas tried to have the match stopped early to avoid further humiliation of Italy apparently.

Chris wrote:

ViVaRooney wrote:
no it isnt, in a final its the same thing

atleast italy tried to win, england would not have. lets not forget italy played spain earlier in the tournament and drew 1-1.

So trying to stop the other team scoring is not trying to win.. but letting the other team absolutely rip you apart IS trying to win?

Strong logic.

Italy threatened spain, they had chances and many corners which on another day could have led to goals. also the early goal for spain didnt help.

what engalnd would have done is sit back not have a single shot on target and would have lost anyway. a tactic every team used against spain and failed. as i said italy already played spain in the tournament and same tactic worked, they had alot of chances then too, they got the first goal and could have won. the difference in that final was that Spain showed up, if you have any hope of beating Spain then they need to have an off day like they did against portugal

at 0-0 if you have no intention of attacking (which is what england did against italy) then yes it is not trying to win you dumbass

ViVaRooney wrote:

Chris wrote:
So trying to stop the other team scoring is not trying to win.. but letting the other team absolutely rip you apart IS trying to win?

Strong logic.

Italy threatened spain, they had chances and many corners which on another day could have led to goals. also the early goal for spain didnt help.

what engalnd would have done is sit back not have a single shot on target and would have lost anyway. a tactic every team used against spain and failed. as i said italy already played spain in the tournament and same tactic worked, they had alot of chances then too, they got the first goal and could have won. the difference in that final was that Spain showed up, if you have any hope of beating Spain then they need to have an off day like they did against portugal

at 0-0 if you have no intention of attacking (which is what england did against italy) then yes it is not trying to win you dumbass

By playing exactly how Spain wanted them too and getting smashed. Spain didn't turn up in the first game, everyone knows that.

Chris wrote:

Theo Filippo wrote:This thread turned out quite successful well done Chris , might have to make another one like Pirlo is a pedestrian.

People have agreed with me in this thread and to no team in the tornament apart from Ireland put up less of a fight than Italy so it's quite clear i'm correct and you're wrong as usual.

People just like to hate on England. We would have been twice the team defensively against Spain and it doesn't matter that Italy made some "ok" chances because if we even scored off a lucky deflection or set piece thats better than they done.