Euro 96' and England

[markowl]

On 07/06/2020 at 12:59, Bez said:

Watch the Spain game.  Just watch it. 
 

Spain score 2 onside goals that are ruled off. 
 

they also win 3 pens but none given. 
 

dominate the game start to finish. 

And still lost on pens 

[panda800]

What  euro 96 games did anyone  go to ?  I went  to all the games at hilsbrough  Spain v Romania at Ellend Road and the final..... one thing i remember  was the tickets where pricey  £45  for the North stand and £60 bench seats for  the final

[owls maniac]

11 hours ago, panda800 said:

What  euro 96 games did anyone  go to ?  I went  to all the games at hilsbrough  Spain v Romania at Ellend Road and the final..... one thing i remember  was the tickets where pricey  £45  for the North stand and £60 bench seats for  the final

Probably explains why many of the grounds weren't full to capacity for the games. That said, in 1996 football in this country was still to shoot off into the stratosphere, and gates were down across the board compared to what we get now in the PL. 

 

By the way, what was the old Wembley like as a ground? I'm too young to have visited, but it looks immense in these Euro 96 games. Real shame they couldn't have preserved the twin towers in the new design.  

[HIGHERSTATE]

1 hour ago, owls maniac said:

Probably explains why many of the grounds weren't full to capacity for the games. That said, in 1996 football in this country was still to shoot off into the stratosphere, and gates were down across the board compared to what we get now in the PL. 

 

By the way, what was the old Wembley like as a ground? I'm too young to have visited, but it looks immense in these Euro 96 games. Real shame they couldn't have preserved the twin towers in the new design.  

I went to the five games at Wembley to watch Wembley and I was less than impressed.  It was old and tired in the 90s.

 

For the League Cup 91 visit I was on the front row, there was still fences and the pitch was raised and all you could see was legs.  For the FA cup final I was on the back row and you couldn't even see the royal box because of the roof so I'd have missed it if we'd have won the cup.  Also the fans behind the net were miles away from the pitch.  Only good thing I can say about it was like a cauldron atmosphere with singing echoing around and breaking out at random areas.  And we totally outsung Arsenal with less than a third fans there with 'Tricky Trevs Barmy Army'  going on for about 15 minutes.  I'm sure the atmosphere for the Euros was special but personally I've always preferred Old Trafford as a stadium. 

[owls maniac]

20 minutes ago, HIGHERSTATE said:

I went to the five games at Wembley to watch Wembley and I was less than impressed.  It was old and tired in the 90s.

 

For the League Cup 91 visit I was on the front row, there was still fences and the pitch was raised and all you could see was legs.  For the FA cup final I was on the back row and you couldn't even see the royal box because of the roof so I'd have missed it if we'd have won the cup.  Also the fans behind the net were miles away from the pitch.  Only good thing I can say about it was like a cauldron atmosphere with singing echoing around and breaking out at random areas.  And we totally outsung Arsenal with less than a third fans there with 'Tricky Trevs Barmy Army'  going on for about 15 minutes.  I'm sure the atmosphere for the Euros was special but personally I've always preferred Old Trafford as a stadium. 

That is really insightful, thanks. Is there an existing stadium that you would say the facilities were on par with? 

 

Interesting what you say about the roof and views of the pitch, and in that respect the current stadium is lightyears in front of it. I think the atmosphere factor is what lets the current one down. The idiots at the FA giving over the middle tier to the prawn sarnie brigade breaks up the atmosphere. That said, it was bouncing when we were there for the play off final. 

 

Inevitably we look back at the old stadium through rose tinted glasses because it played host to some of the greatest moments in our national football heritage. The way that FA cup final games are perceived now means that the new ground is unlikely to have the same aura. 

 

And I agree about Old Trafford. When England were touring the country whilst Wembley was being rebuilt we would often go and watch them at OT. 

Edited June 10, 2020 by owls maniac

[panda800]

3 hours ago, owls maniac said:

Probably explains why many of the grounds weren't full to capacity for the games. That said, in 1996 football in this country was still to shoot off into the stratosphere, and gates were down across the board compared to what we get now in the PL. 

 

By the way, what was the old Wembley like as a ground? I'm too young to have visited, but it looks immense in these Euro 96 games. Real shame they couldn't have preserved the twin towers in the new design.  

The old one was awful  with the  facilities  to match

[HIGHERSTATE]

On 10/06/2020 at 11:18, owls maniac said:

That is really insightful, thanks. Is there an existing stadium that you would say the facilities were on par with? 

 

Interesting what you say about the roof and views of the pitch, and in that respect the current stadium is lightyears in front of it. I think the atmosphere factor is what lets the current one down. The idiots at the FA giving over the middle tier to the prawn sarnie brigade breaks up the atmosphere. That said, it was bouncing when we were there for the play off final. 

 

Inevitably we look back at the old stadium through rose tinted glasses because it played host to some of the greatest moments in our national football heritage. The way that FA cup final games are perceived now means that the new ground is unlikely to have the same aura. 

 

And I agree about Old Trafford. When England were touring the country whilst Wembley was being rebuilt we would often go and watch them at OT. 

I would love to play a play-off final at Old Trafford.  I think the whole Wednesday invade Manchester would be amazing...and it's a hell of a lot easier to get to than Wembley.  Imagine what it would be like if we won.  Not even worth thinking about ;).

[442]

Euros should’ve started today

[Belfast Owl 2]

3 hours ago, 442 said:

Euros should’ve started today

 

You due to head to any of the games?

[442]

1 hour ago, Belfast Owl 2 said:

 

You due to head to any of the games?

 

Should’ve been going to Rome for the quarters. Hoping host cities stay the same and I’ll be out there next year.

[owls maniac]

30 minutes ago, 442 said:

 

Should’ve been going to Rome for the quarters. Hoping host cities stay the same and I’ll be out there next year.

Had a ticket myself for the home game with Croatia and the second round match in Dublin if we topped the group. 

 

Waiting for UEFA to announce the rescheduled fixtures before seeing whether I want a refund or not. 

[fudge27]

The BBC polls are getting stupid. 

 

England's best performance since 66, and the 1-1 with Colombia is on there among others

[canadianowl]

On 06/06/2020 at 12:35, markg said:

Shearer was such a good striker. Always been my all time footballing hero. Watched the games back to see if my mind was playing tricks on me and remembering him as being better than he was but no, he was class.

 

Shearer's numbers speak for themselves. The beautiful thing about football is the tired (North American-centric) argument about "era adjusted" statistics don't translate well with football like other big sports here (NHL especially). I'll go back and watch France '98 videos as it was the first World Cup I ever watched and even though some of the tactics changed the quality of the players are still on par with the superstars of today. I watched a replay of Holland-Brazil in the semis and both squad were absolutely LOADED and their talents would be just as good today with the extra emphasis on nutrition and training techniques. Alan Shearer would absolutely be in that equation. His ability to score is unparalleled to and English striker I've seen in my lifetime. 

 

On 06/06/2020 at 13:18, Arthur Bach said:

 

After Euro 92 and the retirement of Lineker England increasingly relied on David Platt. He was the form player in the squad and often captained the side due to injuries and numerous changes during the Taylor era.

 

Gascoinges perennial injuries meant Platt was often the star playmaker and lead penalty taker. He dragged up the average England side of the early 90's often single-handedly and mixed with Shearers stuttering England career chipped in with crucial goals.

 

The 90's saw a glut of English talent up front that never translated to success. Fowler, Cole, LeTissier, Ferdinand, Wright...

 

Despite those, only Shearer was able to really stamp an international reputation.

 

Which blows my mind how much depth the England squad had in the late 90s-mid 2000s and yet they couldn't muster up anything. England were a joke in Euro 2000 and it boggles my mind how they performed so poorly.

[fudge27]

59 minutes ago, canadianowl said:

 

Shearer's numbers speak for themselves. The beautiful thing about football is the tired (North American-centric) argument about "era adjusted" statistics don't translate well with football like other big sports here (NHL especially). I'll go back and watch France '98 videos as it was the first World Cup I ever watched and even though some of the tactics changed the quality of the players are still on par with the superstars of today. I watched a replay of Holland-Brazil in the semis and both squad were absolutely LOADED and their talents would be just as good today with the extra emphasis on nutrition and training techniques. Alan Shearer would absolutely be in that equation. His ability to score is unparalleled to and English striker I've seen in my lifetime. 

 

 

Which blows my mind how much depth the England squad had in the late 90s-mid 2000s and yet they couldn't muster up anything. England were a joke in Euro 2000 and it boggles my mind how they performed so poorly.

Cos at elite levels it's fine margins. 

 

Players have openly admitted stuff like the man Utd lot didn't socialise with the others, Chelsea and Liverpool weren't keen on each other. 

 

At that level it's more then just talent, the way you work as a team and are motivated gives you that extra couple of % that can make a difference, certainly in a knock out competition 

[canadianowl]

52 minutes ago, fudge27 said:

Cos at elite levels it's fine margins. 

 

Players have openly admitted stuff like the man Utd lot didn't socialise with the others, Chelsea and Liverpool weren't keen on each other. 

 

At that level it's more then just talent, the way you work as a team and are motivated gives you that extra couple of % that can make a difference, certainly in a knock out competition 

 

I remember an interview like that I think it was between Rio Ferdinand and Frank Lampard. After their playing days together at West Ham they basically stopped talking for like a decade because of the rivalry at club level. Crazy to think that considering Germany & Spain's success yet Barca/Real Madrid players still worked together at national level. Seems extremely petty in retrospect.

[Arthur Bach]

12 minutes ago, canadianowl said:

 

I remember an interview like that I think it was between Rio Ferdinand and Frank Lampard. After their playing days together at West Ham they basically stopped talking for like a decade because of the rivalry at club level. Crazy to think that considering Germany & Spain's success yet Barca/Real Madrid players still worked together at national level. Seems extremely petty in retrospect.

 

I think it gave the game more of an edge.

 

So weary of seeing smiles and hugs in the tunnel of most Prem games.

[fudge27]

It's part of what made the PL so good, at the cost to the national team. 

 

Ferguson probably the keyest person instigating it, with others following