BTW yianni Greece are guaranteed to qualify already, we just don't know whether it'll be 1st or 2nd.

It was Beckhams pass to Owen for the first goal. And his pass to Gary Neville which set up Gerrard for the second goal was bloody hard to do, it was a great ball.

Ok fine he's managed to play 3 good balls while standing still, holy shit he's completely anonymous for 90%+ of the game and barely moves forward when he does get the ball, which basically cripples any chance the team has of building forward momentum.

*Receives ball*
*Looks up*
*Pings hopeful pass*

*Receives ball*
*Looks up*
*Turns around*
*Runs backwards since he can't use his left foot*

The only time Cole looked in danger was when he was outjumped,but he's not going to win many headers anyway.Considering there was a man over he did the right thing to pressurise Frei (i think it was him) seeing as the centre backs were nowhere.

Beckham hasn't made a huge contribution but he played a part in 2 goals today and got the assist for Lampards against France.Pretty good for fuck all,i would say.

The team is going to go fairly negative after a goal,i think its just going to happen under Sven.Owen's done what was wanted,providing a target of some sort if the ball is just cleared downfield,it's just his finishing because he fluffed a decent chance in what Bobby Robson described as his "favoured position" coming in on his right foot.Maybe he should look at and copy what Rooney's doing,like they could interchange in who drops off to collect a pass,what with Rooney having 2 great games and Owen having the pace to worry defenders through running at them.

Gallas :mad: :'(

I know there was some debate over whether Henry should have been World player of the year ahead of Zidane,but ZZ would have gotten my vote.That was brilliant and no, hardly anyone else would try that and see it work in a match.

If Greece lose and Portugal and Spain draw then they don't.Unlikely that Greece will lose but had to be said.:$

Penalty to Croatia.:(

scored by Rapaic,1-1 under 3 minutes into the second half.

Silvestre sucks WOOOOOOO. Not a clear penalty.

WHAT A GOAL 2-1

fuck me, 2-1 Croatia.

Good finish by Prso but Desailly's poor defending strikes again.

I've been saying for over a year that Desailly is past it, and I think we would have won or at least drawn if he was centre back.

Him missing that ball for the second goal shows how shit he has become.

Come on Croatia!!! :D

I'm not sure who I wanna win, if Croatia win its harder for us to qualify.

I bet it ends 2-2.

TREZEGUET

2-2

HAVE SOME

Handball, suicidal back pss. :nono:

Molnar you stupid bastard!

Yeah,what a miss.:eek:

RBF told me he's having some passport problems so he may not be at Pompey next year,which they might not mind after that finish.:$

Great game though, probably game of the tournament so far, or at least one of the best.

First half was piss poor. Second half was a different game.

The level of the first half was improved by that Zidane flick alone.

England vs. Switzerland was a terrible, boring match.

England really do not know how to keep ahold of the football, or how to string a few passes together.

Zidane and Vieira are fucking immense.

Henry and Trezeguet are two lazy cunts. Big Ron is probably saying a few choice words about them right about now.

Desailly ought to make the right decision and retire, before the boss has to humiliate him by dropping him. He's shit now, he should have a bit of dignity and take the hint.

Croatia are great. I fancy them to give England a big scare.

I checked this on the Euro 2004 website, and its not the case.

If Portugal and Russia win, Greece can still go out on Goal Difference or Goals Scored.

If Russia were to win 2-0 and Portugal 1-0, Spain and Portugal would be through. Similarly, if Russia won 1-0 and Spain/Portugal finished 3-2 to Portugal, Spain would be through.

Its unlikely though.

I was under the impression that since Greece beat Portugal that gives them the advantage if they're tied on points

Yes, but if Portugal win and Greece lose, Portugal will have more points than them.

I'm not sure which order the methods are in, if its goal difference then it would be Spain and Portugal,then i thought it was goals scored and then results against, but that seems wrong.:-\

Ranieri dropped him for a while once he came back from injury, but Melchiot is shit, so he had to start playing Gallas at right back and Desailly in the centre. For over a year I've been saying Desailly should retire.

I have said all along that I'm worried we won't qualify from our group, I can see the Czech's and France going through.

It's results against, then goal difference.

If Portugal beat Spain, and Greece lose to Russia, Portugal will have 6 points and will top the group.

Spain and Greece will both be on 4 points, and since they drew, they will be seperated by goal difference. In that case, if Greece get beaten by more than one goal, and Spain lose by just one, Spain go through on goal difference.

Since I've been gone a bit, I'll sum up everything quickly - only two teams have stood out for me so far, France and Sweden. France for being behind in a hard fought match and turning it around like they did and Sweden for being in an equally hard fought match but still absolutely stuffing the opposition, two qualities that championship winning teams have often shown. Then again, Frances slip today wasn't their best performance. And remind me again who it was who praised the Swedes as being vastly underrated a few weeks back? Asides from those two, Germany and Holland were hard to seperate so I shan't knock them.

France looked lackluster and seriously suspect. No team has stood out so far as world beaters and as strangely positive as this sounds (at least for me anyway) I really think England are in with a good chance.

Spain, but for their lapse against Greece, look good as well. Their natural wide-players good be a real threat. The position they're now in against Portugal has left is difficult for them though.

The only question mark over the Swedes for the past decade has been scoring goals. If they can manage it, they are good enough to beat anyone.

They've shown that Larsson and Ibrahimovic are on form and playing well together, and Ljungberg is looking fresh after a poor couple of seasons with Arsenal. It's easy to forget just how good Ljungberg is, because he's not been showing it lately.

Spain look good too.

People are being stupid about this competition, because they forget that it isn't the World Cup, it doesn't have teams like China and Costa Rica, whipping boys. All of the sides can at least play good, organised football, even if they lack talent. That is why we aren't seeing a clear front runner.

But France have looked strong. They just need Henry and Trezeguet to start working.

Italy traditionally start slowly, and grow into tournaments. Cassano is a more than able replacement for Totti, but they need to think about replacing Del Piero if he isn't going to bother his arse. I can't believe Gattuso and Pirlo cannot displace Perrotta and Zanetti, two fairly average players.

England have a team good enough to go far, but their football is disappointing. They can't control the tempo of games, and can't keep possession. They need to start doing that. Sven is tactically inept, to be honest.

Usually somebody stands out early on that are notable. Euro 2000 - Portugal, Holland and France. Euro 96 - Germany, England and Croatia. Euro 92 - well, maybe there are exceptions to the rule, though Sweden and maybe Holland were the early forerunners. Right now, nobody looks clear cut unless the Swedes, the Dutch or the Germans end up winning it.

England were turd in their first two matches at Euro 96. They were shite against the Swiss, and very poor against Scotland. I remember distinctly that England were second best until Jamie Redknapp came on, in one of his few appearances where he lived up to his potential. Wasn't until their third match they showed any class, against a fractious Dutch side.

In fact, they were crap against Spain in the quarters, too. Some very poor refereeing kept them in. Two perfectly good goals for Spain disallowed.

Euro 96 was a pretty dull competition, in truth. A lot of negative play.

My point is, anyway, that people are reacting too much to the fact that teams are not steamrolling the opposition. There are no mugs in this tournament.

It's not that nobody is steamrolling, it's that not many teams have lived up to their potential and not shown the qualities you'd expect from the tournament winners bar the four I've listed. For the record, England dominated against the Swiss in 96, their main fault was not turning their play into gilt edged chances. The Scotland game wasn't great but hardly "very poor". And against Spain, the match was crap but over caution does not equal crap, unless you're a neutral.

Its hard to say about front runners until every team has played at least two game, Germany and Italy have both only played one so far, give verdicts on who will win it after at least two games for each team.

No, I remember quite well, England were poor in their first two games. Euro 96 was a triumph of hype over substance, for England. The game against the Dutch glossed over a very average tournament for England.

I didn't say the Spain match was crap, I said Spain were screwed out of victory, which they were. Two perfectly good goals disallowed, and Spain were the better side. Basically, they weren't allowed to turn their dominance into a victory by poor refereeing.