Kane's first shot hit the post. His second was deflected up. I'm still not sure that was given offside. I think it went out but the goalie kicked it from the wrong place. The lino flagged after the second shot not the first. He could only be offside for the first one.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
AEB Scramble
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Patrick Thistle View PostKane's first shot hit the post. His second was deflected up. I'm still not sure that was given offside. I think it went out but the goalie kicked it from the wrong place. The lino flagged after the second shot not the first. He could only be offside for the first one.
Comment
-
England couldn't keep any opposition keepers busy because they just do not have those players. Their only chance was short bursts resulting in set pieces. I still think those bursts were quite impressive and made some opposition defenders shit themselves, such as Lovren, but they never faced a quality defence like France which would have kept them out easily whilst Mbappe and company tore them apart at the other end.
England overall were better than the sum of their parts this tournament whereas in the past they have usually been worse. They would not have made the semis without a piss easy draw but they would still have been competitive for the first time since 2006.
This tournament has also shown why the Golden Boot is a pointless concept. Kane will win it because he is a great penalty taker and England were drawn against the worst side. Goals in the knockout rounds are the true test.Last edited by Satchmo Distel; 12-07-2018, 12:03.
Comment
-
The whole thing has been written off though, because apparently Kane was flagged offside when he clearly wasn't. The linesman didn't flag until the whole thing had finished (as I understand from people here who think this is what happened) because this is what they have been told to do in case VAR proves them wrong. So, if Kane had scored, then the goal would have counted (because VAR would have showed that he was very clearly onside), but because VAR wasn't consulted, then he (from a statistical point of view) actually did nothing in those 20 seconds. Subasic made no saves and Kane made no shots. It was all just an extended period of dead ball action.
Now none of these things matter, because it is only statistics and other than the stat about numbers of goals scored, no statistics actually matter. However, when people use statistics to prove some kind of point "England had no shots on targets except Trippier's, this shows that they created no chances and were effectively completely toothless in attack", then the fact that those statistics are bollocks does make a difference, if only to render their point moot. (Obviously after half time, England were completely hopeless and created nothing, but in the first half they were not)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Felicity, I guess so View PostAd hoc’s dead right. The ABE house I was watching in was in full panic mode for 30 mins and had happily settled for 0-1 h-t. Whatever the stats say.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Felicity, I guess so View PostThe aerial shot of Kane, Subasic and the gaping near post in yesterday’s Guardian was endlessly amazing- quite HOW it didn’t go in
Comment
-
Originally posted by SouthdownRebel View PostI saw a slow-mo replay which clearly showed the ball deflect off Subasic's leg on to the post. It then hits his leg again. As ad hoc says, it's a moot point either way really.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Бога Нет View PostI’d genuinely love to see that replay if you can find it and would stand corrected.
Comment
Comment