The Official *England's Journey to Brazil 2014* Thread

[Duty281]

First topic message reminder :

"There is a forgotten, nay almost forbidden word, which means more to me than any other. That word is England."
Sir Winston Churchill

Yes, it's nearly that time. Time for England to begin their Qualifying Campaign for the 2014 World Cup in Brazil. Those promising, encouraging, and brave displays witnessed during Euro 2012 will have to be built on as the long road to Brazil starts. Along the way, they will play in London, Podgorica, Kiev, Warsaw, Chisinau and Serravale. The aim is simply to top the group and make it to Brazil with a minimum of fuss.

"Ask any man what nationality he would prefer to be, and ninety nine out of a hundred will tell you that they would prefer to be Englishmen."
Cecil John Rhodes

England have been drawn in Group H with Montengro, Ukraine, Poland, Moldova and San Marino. I don't even need to be insanely optimistic this time round. England will top that group. Moldova and San Marino will be the whipping boys. Montengro, Ukraine and Poland will only prove a challenge in their own ground. Wembley will be deemed a fortress.

"Remember that you are an Englishman, and have consequently won first place in the lottery of life."
Cecil John Rhodes

The fixture list for those Qualifiers is the following:

Moldova v England (7th September 2012)
England v Ukraine (11th September 2012)
England v San Marino (12th October 2012)
Poland v England (16th October 2012)
San Marino v England (22nd March 2013)
Montenegro v England (26th March 2013)
England v Moldova (6th September 2013)
Ukraine v England (10th September 2013)
England v Montenegro (11th October 2013)
England v Poland (15th October 2013)

Lovely, simple, finishing with a Wembley double-header. I predict we'll get 28 out of 30 points, perhaps getting a draw in either Warsaw or Kiev.

"Follow your spirit; and upon this charge,
Cry "God for Harry! England and Saint George"."
William Shakespeare

Of course, while England's fate will be defined by those 10 games, the ever important International Friendly will hone the team against more quality opposition. The friendlies currently scheduled are:

Italy v England (15th August 2012)
Sweden v England (14th November 2012)
England v Scotland (14th August 2013)

So let's get the England train rolling, starting on Wednesday, build up momentum before landing in Brazil in nearly 2 years time. Come on England!

“The English are so filled with their own greatness and have won so many big victories that they have come to believe they cannot lose. In battle they are the most confident nation in the world."
Unknown

[Duty281]

I'd agree about Euro 2016 - 24 teams will lessen the quality, and make qualification more of a formality for most teams. Barring the location, it won't be as good as Euro 2012.

[J.Benson II]

The euros's are historically very tight, as you don't get the ' new zealand's' involved.

Bit harsh on NZ. Given that they were the only unbeaten team in WC 2010  

You could argue that a 16 is a good number and that produces quality- But it has thrown up Greece hasn't it. sometimes a lesser team can actually come through a smaller tourney because you play less games!!

Lets not forget Denmark in 1992 as well.

[mystiroakey]

Denmark was quality back then!!

[Stella]

Denmark was quality back then!!

They failed to qualify though.

[mystiroakey]

Yes they did- worst 2nd spot!

[Stella]

Yes they did- worst 2nd spot!

They only got there thanks to Yugoslavia pulling out.

[mystiroakey]

why did they pull out?

[Stella]

why did they pull out?

the war I think.

[super_realist]

Could be overkill Oakey, Football could well eat itself. I wish it would.

[Duty281]

England v Chile - 15 November
England v Germany - 19 November

Friendlies confirmed for England, both to be played at the home of football.

[mystiroakey]

And that is why we have  SR Bosnia and Herzegovina, SR Croatia, SR Macedonia, SR Montenegro, SR Slovenia, and SR Serbia(from a wiki search!!)

Jeas imagine how good they would have been if they stayed together!!

[J.Benson II]

The Europeon Cup back in 1992 only had 8 teams in it.
The quality therefore within the tournament would have been higher than a tournament with 24 teams but it just proves that its easier to win tournaments when you've got less games to play.
Denmark were not originally supposed to have even been competing.
They missed out in qualification to Yugoslavia but due to war, Yugoslavia had to pull out of the tournament. Denmark, who were second in their qualification group replaced them and went on to win the entire competition.

[super_realist]

There was a Yugoslavia team (with Savo Milosevic) in the 2000 Euro's.
I remember a ding dong game against Spain, think it finished 4-3. Perhaps the best game I have ever seen.

[mystiroakey]

Could be overkill Oakey, Football could well eat itself. I wish it would.

But then you would only have religion and woods to moan about 

[mystiroakey]

The Europeon Cup back in 1992 only had 8 teams in it.
The quality therefore within the tournament would have been higher than a tournament with 24 teams but it just proves that its easier to win tournaments when you've got less games to play.
Denmark were not originally supposed to have even been competing.
They missed out in qualification to Yugoslavia but due to war, Yugoslavia had to pull out of the tournament. Denmark, who were second in their qualification group replaced them and went on to win the entire competition.

True

[J.Benson II]

And that is why we have  SR Bosnia and Herzegovina, SR Croatia, SR Macedonia, SR Montenegro, SR Slovenia, and SR Serbia(from a wiki search!!)

Jeas imagine how good they would have been if they stayed together!!

Yeah, people are getting excited by Belguim but look how strong that team would have been:
Modric, Dzeko, Jovetic, Mandzukic etc all on the same team.

[J.Benson II]

There was a Yugoslavia team (with Savo Milosevic) in the 2000 Euro's.
I remember a ding dong game against Spain, think it finished 4-3. Perhaps the best game I have ever seen.

I remember that game. Incredible finale.
Also remember Holland against Czech Republic in Euro 2004. Another epic match!
Both in the top 5 football matches I've ever seen.

[mystiroakey]

Well you do realise with a 24 team tourney we will have more of these up and coming Eastern bloc nations competing- They have some talent!

[J.Benson II]

Well you do realise with a 24 team tourney we will have more of these up and coming Eastern bloc nations competing- They have some talent!

Yeah, I support the expansion of the Europeon Cup. The more football the better  

It also gives some decent mid-tier Europeon sides a chance to play in a major tournament - which is good thing as some of those sides are capable of springing the odd surprise.

It also helps avoid the problem of having a major side miss out on qualification (like England in 2008) as this harms the overall tournament when a big team with big players are abscent.

[mystiroakey]

good stuff mate!!

[super_realist]

Well you do realise with a 24 team tourney we will have more of these up and coming Eastern bloc nations competing- They have some talent!

Yeah, I support the expansion of the Europeon Cup. The more football the better  

It also gives some decent mid-tier Europeon sides a chance to play in a major tournament - which is good thing as some of those sides are capable of springing the odd surprise.

It also helps avoid the problem of having a major side miss out on qualification (like England in 2008) as this harms the overall tournament when a big team with big players are abscent.

Not really, one team that is there to make up the numbers is replaced by another that is there to make up the numbers. It only harms the fans of the team that miss out.

[J.Benson II]

Well you do realise with a 24 team tourney we will have more of these up and coming Eastern bloc nations competing- They have some talent!

Yeah, I support the expansion of the Europeon Cup. The more football the better  

It also gives some decent mid-tier Europeon sides a chance to play in a major tournament - which is good thing as some of those sides are capable of springing the odd surprise.

It also helps avoid the problem of having a major side miss out on qualification (like England in 2008) as this harms the overall tournament when a big team with big players are abscent.

Not really, one team that is there to make up the numbers is replaced by another that is there to make up the numbers. It only harms the fans of the team that miss out.

I disagree. I'm not Dutch for instance, but I remember being disappointed when they failed to qualify for WC 2002. It meant that a talented team with talented players would be absent from a once in a four year tournament.
Likewise, I can imagine that some other European football fans would have disappointed with England's absence from Euro 2008 as it meant the likes of Rooney and Gerrard would not be present at a major national tournament.
Either way, its a major blow to UEFA and FIFA when the bigger teams fail to qualify. It effects the overall financial revenue that the tournament generates.

[super_realist]

There are certain teams that you would miss, teams that for instance generally challenge, or have challenged regularly for tournaments and who have many good players. For example, Brazil are not playing great right now, but a world cup without them would lack something on the pitch and on the terraces.

Can you really say the same for England? Never challenge, and while they have overhyped and over-rated players who are "big players" on paper (at least over here), none of them have a habit of performing in International tournaments.

Financially I can see it would have an economical impact were England to be absent as they take a lot of fans, but I don't think anyone for a second missed England in 2008 in a footballing sense. Bit like a tennis major without Wawrinka or Gasquet. Perpetual QF players, but would anyone miss them?

I really don't think that the rest of Europe/World see England Football the way that English fans would like them to be seen. England are missed no more than any other 2nd tier country in a footballing sense.

[mystiroakey]

i think england is a team that adds something to the tourney- even if it as as being the villain of the piece.

Its an entertainment game SR.

However yes you are right in a way- The performances that england have dealt out since 96(bar one or possibly 2) haven't been memorable at all and wouldn't be missed..

We could off course say the same about many of frances tournies since their win as well- But if they dont get to the WC I will miss them for sure..

The big nations of football do add to the tourney(the money and the vibe- even if the quality isn't there).

[super_realist]

I nearly mentioned that Oakey actually. I can't remember the tourney, but no one missed France or the French when they got knocked out of a tournament without scoring a single goal and they were a bigger team than England with probably more high profile players. In fact most people died laughing.

I doubt you'd get to the end of a tournament and say, "Wow, what a great tournament, but what it lacked was England's dire football and over-expectant army of bald, fat, sunburnt, tattooed midlanders and that annoying "Great Escape" band."

People remember it for their team and experiences, not what they didn't see or lamenting who wasn't there. Naturally in this country interest dies when a team exits, but not for the rest who remain.

[Stella]

I'm hoping Portugal and France get through. You want the best players on the biggest stage.

[super_realist]

Be worth Portugal not getting there just to see that pap Ronaldo crying his eyes out.

[Stella]

Great player to watch though. Add Sweden to my list.

[mystiroakey]

The thing is I and many others would miss france from a spectator pov. We want to watch them play. we want to see the games .

The same is actually true for england in many countries as well. 

one example below from the US audience

/12/2010	USA-England	ABC/Univision	17.1 million
6/18/2010	USA-Slovenia	ESPN/Univision	7.5 million
6/23/2010	USA-Algeria	ESPN/Univision	8.6 million
Average			11.1 million

[mystiroakey]

I truly dont wanna miss out on ronaldo .

Ad uefa aren't stupid they will make sure portugal and france get the easiest play off games!!(I am not saying thats right but thats what will happen)

[Duty281]

Hope Portugal don't get through. A stain on football with their antics.

[Steffan]

Hope Portugal don't get through. A stain on football with their antics

Shame you hadnt been a stain the night you were conceived

[super_realist]

I think most American's and large ex-pat or plastic heritage might have been interested in that game purely from a colonial point of view and also because most of them couldn't point out Slovenia and Algeria on a map (if they've even heard of them at all)

I like England, and I like the English, but in international football, they are dreadful in tournaments, an also ran, a nearly good enough but not quite, a close but no cigar, a passing thought soon forgotten.

[mystiroakey]

and for reference the same scenario is there for the italians in 2006- even though they have actually truly competed in recent WC's and england havent!! Both however are big nations and attract big viewerships

6/12/2006	USA-Czech Republic	ESPN2/Univision	4.7 million
6/17/2006	USA-Italy	ABC/Univision	9.8 million
6/22/2006	USA-Ghana	ESPN/Univision	5.5 million
Average			6.6 million

[Duty281]

Hope Portugal don't get through. A stain on football with their antics

Shame you hadnt been a stain the night you were conceived

Meh, I'll let you have that one.

How immature though, Stephanie.

[mystiroakey]

they still attract the viewers though SR, they still add to the tourney. The fact that we have been poor is even more of a factor in to what he brand adds!

trust me the same scenario would happen in nations that aren't english speaking, japan for instance- they love the PL, they will watch England- the PL band aids Englands ratings

[super_realist]

There's no denying the commercial cache of certain countries. Beckham probably had an impact in America on those ratings, combined with the MLS becoming more popular.

Still don't think anyone on footballing criteria would have England as a "must have" in a tournament though.
The only reason I could see people missing them is as potential opponents in the Knockout or QF as a soft touch.

[Guest]

For me, Ronaldo not at the WC would be a major shame. The excitement he brings along with the passionate, carnival atmospheres will be quite something. Also going head to head with Messi will be special during the tournament. Yeah, agree Portuguese are cheats, especially with Pepe & co, but I certainly want Ronaldo there.

[mystiroakey]

england a soft touch in the knock outs!!

ermm not quite mate we normally push them to the limit and go out on Pens. We may not have been attractive, but the team is very very hard to beat!

[super_realist]

Yeah that 4-1 defeat to Germany really pushed them all the way.

[mystiroakey]

you pick one yeah??

would you like to try the others as well- or will that ruin your point?

[super_realist]

Well that was the most recent World Cup that came to mind.

Granted England have been tough to beat, but they've not exactly looked like winning either and once you get them to extra time and penalties you might as well all go home.

The point is, and will always be that England's absence from a tournament either through failing to qualify or by going out to the shootout is never met by tears of grief in a footballing sense.

[Duty281]

How many knockout games have England lost since 1990, inside 90 minutes?

2? Out of 13, I think.

Soft touch?

[Steffan]

1994 - Didnt qualify

1998 - Lost to Argentina on penalties

2002 - Lost to Brazil inside 90 minutes

2006 - Lost to Portugal on penalties

2010 - Lost to Germany inside 90 minutes

So thats twice since 1990

[Stella]

90 mins.

[mystiroakey]

add the euros as well dude!!

actually dont I will cry

[super_realist]

Steffan,that's still 50% of games since 98 where they've been beaten in 90 mins. Better odds than Red/Black at the casino and since 1996, if you get England to 90 minutes there has been a 100% result in England going home. That includes Euro's and World Cups.

[Duty281]

I was referring to the EUROs as well, and including the 1990 tournament.

[mystiroakey]

Not really enough data to suggest that SR!

[mystiroakey]

i think we have gone out on pens 5 times since 1990 (so thats in 12 comps)- we didn't qualify twice and we got knocked out in 90 mins twice and didn't get out of the group 3 times

[Sponsored content]