Jump to content
Dinobot

2018 FIFA World Cup

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, feltmonkey said:

@rgraves, with the greatest of respect, you're talking complete horseshit about Kane.

 

He's already scored more in a single tournament than Shearer ever managed, and equalled Lineker's best return. I'm amazed that you've mentioned Lineker being as you seem to think tap-ins and penalties don't count, by the way. Lineker made a career about being in the right position and finishing chances. Kane is a similar kind of player, really.  He's not going to slalom past defenders the way Mbappe does, but he will score more goals over his career, and is a better number nine. He scored twice against Tunisia because of that uncanny ability to know where the ball might drop, and having the speed of thought and action to knock it it. The highest scorer in World Cups is Miroslav Klose, and every one of his goals is a tap-in. They count the same as any other kind of goal.

 

My only concern about Kane is how his movement seemed restricted against Sweden and Croatia. He looked injured, and wasn't making the same kind of runs he usually does. He was having to play as a target man, or lying deep and passing it. Because he's a class player, he made a decent fist of both those roles, but it's not what we want Kane doing at the business end of tournaments. I kind of hope he was injured, as it could be a problem if he fades in tournaments due to some general fitness issue.

 

There's also a lot of criticism of Dele Alli, for not playing as he does for Spurs, but he was playing a very different role. He had to play fairly deep in midfield, alongside Henderson for much of the games. His defensive play was generally good, and his passing fairly tidy.  He's capable of much more, but you have to remember that just because you haven't noticed him doesn't mean he's playing badly. He played an unselfish role, similar to how Sterling was doing. Players playing unselfishly and sacrificing themselves for the team was key to England's run. Dele wasn't at his best, but he was clearly not completely fit for much of the time (and started the Tunisia game really well before he got his knock) so it's hardly fair to single him out for over the top criticism or to make daft statements such as whoever was saying we might as well have been playing with ten men.

 

Most of the criticism is really unfair. England got to the semi final and Kane will most likely win the golden boot, but for some the narrative has to be that England were mediocre and got an easy run (which is massively disrespectful to good Colombia and Sweden sides) and Kane's goals weren't spectacular enough.  We went into this World Cup on the back of two genuinely attrocious tournaments, with an inexperienced team with hardly any stars and several players you'd have reservations about at this level, and so nearly made the final. If either of those chances in the first half on Wednesday had gone in, I don't see Croatia coming back, as good as they were in the second half. There's no need for an asterisk next to England's or Kane's records this summer.

 Excellent post.

 

With regards to Kane's fitness, I don't think he has fully recovered from the injury he got towards the end of last season as he looked really out-of-sorts in the last month for Spurs too.

 

He really needs a decent rest which sadly isn't going to happen for the foreseeable future.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, rgraves said:

...are you actually suggesting that Kane is already at the same level for England as Lineker and Shearer?

 

I think he's got every chance of getting there, he's made a great start, but let's not get carried away. He's got a way to go before he's in the same breath as those two just yet.

 

Alan Shearer: 30 Goals from 63 Appearences

Harry Kane: 19 Goals from 30 Appearences

 

Having scored two-thirds the amount of goals as Shearer in less than half the appearances very much puts him in the same breath.

Just to state the obvious here, to overtake Shearer, Kane needs 11 more goals. He's 24 years old, and barring career-ending injury, or the emergence of a striker that's the greatest forward England has ever produced, he'll be our main striker for a minimum of 6 more years.

 

It's difficult to picture a world in which he doesn't score an average of two goals a year for the National team.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Zael said:

England did get an easy run. They should get a heroes welcome back, you can only beat what's in front of you. But lets not get carried away and call a spade a spade here. 

If only all the good teams had made it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, nakamura said:

If only all the good teams had made it.

 

They did. Just over the other side of the draw. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Pants McSkill said:

 

Alan Shearer: 30 Goals from 63 Appearences

Harry Kane: 19 Goals from 30 Appearences

 

Having scored two-thirds the amount of goals as Shearer in less than half the appearances very much puts him in the same breath.

Just to state the obvious here, to overtake Shearer, Kane needs 11 more goals. He's 24 years old, and barring career-ending injury, or the emergence of a striker that's the greatest forward England has ever produced, he'll be our main striker for a minimum of 6 more years.

 

It's difficult to picture a world in which he doesn't score an average of two goals a year for the National team.

 

You're fixated on goals. Rooney scored goals but he's not fit to be in the same breath as Lineker or Shearer either. Or Kane. Kane is already well past Rooney IMO.

 

And I did say he's on the way did I not. Blimey.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Pants McSkill said:

It's difficult to picture a world in which he doesn't score an average of two goals a year for the National team.

 

The most likely scenario is the one where Connacht secedes from Ireland and Harry decides to represent his Dad's homeland.

 

That's the most likely scenario.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Zael said:

 

They did. Just over the other side of the draw. 

Spain beaten by Russia. Portugal by Uruguay. Argentina held by Iceland and scraped through. Italy didn't even make it, beaten by Sweden. Holland nowhere to be seen. 

Germany managed one point. 

 

The 'good' teams were not as good as Sweden or Croatia. Or Russia. England beat what they had to beat.

Nothing on the other side of the draw was especially amazing. Belgium lucky Japan showed a lack of big game experience then dispatched Brazil. Mexico outfoxed Germany but were absolutely clueless against Brazil. 

France have quietly reached the final. 

It simply hasn't been vintage, but it has been open and entertaining. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 hours ago, rgraves said:

Put it like this, take Kane out and drop Mbappe in, we're better. That's what I mean, Mbappe showed the world he is world class, he stepped up and provided a genuine goal threat.

 

5 hours ago, rgraves said:

 

I expected him to carry a goal threat

 

 

3 minutes ago, rgraves said:

You're fixated on goals

 

So are you. Your claim that he can't be considered in the same breath as Shearer is offered with no quantifier as to what makes Shearer 'a league above', but you have criticised Kan'e 'Goal Threat'.

 

So here's proof that Kan carries statistically a better goal threat than Shearer did, which is surely enough to consider Kane in the same breath and the same league as Shearer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Pants McSkill said:

Your claim that he can't be considered in the same breath as Shearer is offered with no quantifier as to what makes Shearer 'a league above'

 

Midichlorian count.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing the golden boot has shown us this World Cup is that Harry Kane is decent at pens and was fortunate to play against Panama. 

 

There’s no doubt he is a great player, but he can’t be compared to Shearer or Rooney yet. Maybe once he’s actually won a cup or league. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, nakamura said:

Spain beaten by Russia. Portugal by Uruguay. Argentina held by Iceland and scraped through. Italy didn't even make it, beaten by Sweden. Holland nowhere to be seen. 

Germany managed one point. 

 

The 'good' teams were not as good as Sweden or Croatia. Or Russia. England beat what they had to beat.

Nothing on the other side of the draw was especially amazing. Belgium lucky Japan showed a lack of big game experience then dispatched Brazil. Mexico outfoxed Germany but were absolutely clueless against Brazil. 

France have quietly reached the final. 

It simply hasn't been vintage, but it has been open and entertaining. 

 

Respectfully disagree there. I think the good teams of this WC were France, Brazil, Belgium, Uruguay and Croatia all of whom were a lot better than Sweden or Russia. Uruguay handling Russia in the groups shows that pretty well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, the two reasons why England lost were because of Southgates tactics and their reliance on Spurs players who are a team of serial bottlers. 

 

Modric realised this and fucked off from them as soon as he could. And is now in a World Cup final and 4x CL winner. 

 

Potentially Lloris could lift the cup on Sunday, but at least he won some stuff while playing in France. 

  • Downvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kane also didn't prevent England from beating Argentina despite being down to 20 men by elbowing Carlos Roa and forcing the referee to disallow Sol Campbell's goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, the_debaser said:

The only thing the golden boot has shown us this World Cup is that Harry Kane is decent at pens and was fortunate to play against Panama. 

 

There’s no doubt he is a great player, but he can’t be compared to Shearer or Rooney yet. Maybe once he’s actually won a cup or league. 

 

Criticise Kane’s World Cup contribution then state that he’s not in Rooney’s league? Mind can not compute... 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, Kane is a completely different kind of player to Rooney.  I don't understand the need to compare the two.  As was said earlier, Kane is far more like Gary 'tap ins and penalties galore' Lineker.  And that is meant as a compliment - having someone in your team who just knows where the ball will bounce in the box is one hell of an asset.

 

I just find criticism of Harry Kane in this World Cup plain weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, rgraves said:

I'm no world class player (understatement of the year right there), but if I'd been stuck in Harry Kane's England shirt for this World Cup I'd have scored 4-5. I'd have managed the tap-in against Tunisia, I'd have scored say 2 out of the 3 pens, I'd have been just as able to let the ball clip my heels and fly in as well. So that's 4, even if I miss one of the pens. The only one I'm really ruling out is the header - but let's not even make out that was particularly tough, I'm just considering myself shit enough not to have managed it.

 

If you're only slightly worse than Harry Kane, which Premier League club do you play for? This is the post of the thread for me. I'll often scream at the telly, "My Mum could've saved that" but I don't really believe that. Truly one of the maddest posts I've seen on this forum regarding football. 

 

Is anyone going to bother watching the game today? It seems completely pointless and you just know both coaches are going to pick players who haven't had an appearance yet as if they didn't, they'd be a bit mean. It'll be worse than the group stage game.

 

Overall, I was pissed off when we lost but on reflection, that disappointment didn't last long as in all honesty, we got way further than Spain, Argentina, Germany, Ronaldo, Italy (who didn't even qualify), Brazil and that's quite an achievement with a generally young squad of non-household names. The players coming through are all winners too and it augers well for the future. I'm glad Southgate left the old guard at home and had the courage to essentially wipe the slate clean. The alternative would have been Allardyce playing Andy Carrol, Joe Hart and a tried and tested squaf of players who had "experience". Excellent stuff from Southgate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely I'll be watching.

 

I want to see Kane score and secure the Golden Boot (even though it's probably already in the bag) with another 2 harder...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Geraldo Helmnes said:

This article on the BBC makes some interesting observations. 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44808192

 

To pick up on this because it mentions the shots on goal thing. Kane’s double chance with two shots doesn’t count in the official stats because the linesman (wrongly) flagged offside.

 

If it had gone in then VAR would have overturned the flag and the SOG stat increased by two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, tbb said:

We should've started Welbeck. 

 

Welbz on at the 70ish minute mark for Kane wouldn't have been a terrible idea tbh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wondered why Kane was coming so deep later in your game vs Croatia, he was playing deeper even than a number 10 normally would at times. 

 

He is certainly your most important player, my only criticism of him is that seemed to tire very quickly in most of those games. Seems to be knackered after an hour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fry Crayola said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44798333

 

Check the replay at 1 minute - I'm sure it's the post first. 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Plissken said:

No, it touched his foot.

 

 

If only the keeper wasn't there. It would have smashed against Vida's balls, the entire stadium would have erupted in applause and we'd have been in the final.  Football is fine lines for sure. Stones' header off the line and the chances we spurned :( it was Gazza's outstretched leg all over again or that far post header in 86 against Argentina that would normally have flown in. Football can be cruel. This Kane chance also proves my point time and again that sometimes, strikers should just toe punt it instead of trying to kick it properly.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Empathy 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.