Ronaldo

Telling people who they should support in a game where their team isn't playing is pure Ireland.

The UK and US stand tall as the world's brightest headlights of freedom, valour and opportunity. We should be well behind this lot, certainly moreso than awful countries like France, Germany and Argentina which seem to have a lot of support on here for no good reason at all.

Indeed.

Because we come from the UK.

Yes.

Well, I want the US to win. We all should.

Story of our lives. Except he seldom improves us.

Pretending to be hurt pays. Cunts.

Quality, ask a Frenchman about the merits of not pretending to be hurt and acting like a man. Wake up John Candy and ask him for a diet plan while you're at it.

Yes.

Pepe's daft but typical German cheating. Horrible classless cowards.

Score when it really matters, perhaps? Like he did against Argentina in the '06 quarter finals, against England in the 2010 round of 16, and twice more against Argentina in the 2010 quarters? And failed to help his team progress beyond that. The man perennially goes missing against top defences at club and international level. Getting the better of Matt Upson and a young Fabricio Coloccini doesn't change that.

Howay Ron and Portugal.

Score when it really matters, perhaps?

It would undermine the prestige of the tournament if a player who barely scraped 1 in 4 at BM and has had such a mediocre career at top level was highest scorer ever.

Shut up Ian. He's played in 4 tournaments because of Germany's lack of striking options and scuffed/headed a few in before sinking like a big lanky stone at the business end of the tournament. Ronaldo's goals were the difference between QFs and winning the thing. Klose's goals are/were the difference between beating Arabs 5-0 or 6-0.

Not a fan? I am, very good player, but to have him as a the WC's top ever scorer just seems a bit off. Yeah. You can't have such a limited footballer defaulting his way to that accolade, like. How could anyone not German be a fan?

It's an incredibly gay rugby top.

Some may have thought we were buying one of the best strikers in the world, with fairly good reason I guess.

It was the best and brightest England performance at a tournament for a while. It shows how low our stock has fallen though that people are proud of it. Shouldn't forget who you were playing against. Italy have a knack of making you feel you've had the upper hand in the game but somehow lost against the run of play. But nobody feels like that. Italy were just superior in every department as a team. Not how I saw it, and what I've read on here. The majority seems to feel England played better than it has done for years and deserved something from the game. So do I actually, but this is just so typical after having lost to an Italian team. Whatev. I see no reason to be proud of a defence who looked slow and indecisive, a midfield who failed to get any control and a disorganised attack who created (and finished) one good chance all game. We weren't up against great players. There were good performances in doses from Sterling, Sturridge and Barkley when he came on, granted.

It was the best and brightest England performance at a tournament for a while. It shows how low our stock has fallen though that people are proud of it. Shouldn't forget who you were playing against. Italy have a knack of making you feel you've had the upper hand in the game but somehow lost against the run of play. But nobody feels like that. Italy were just superior in every department as a team.

Sturridge. In one. It's arguable at best. Though they traditionally play in different positions and it's misleading to suggest we have more than one better than Rooney. No it isn't arguable in the slightest. Daniel Sturridge did more in one game than Wayne Rooney has in any tournament since 2004. So you're saying it is arguable. Not. You need to look up the definition of the word then, mate. What are you talking about? I said it was arguable at best that Sturridge is better than Rooney. Your position is that it 'isn't arguable', yet you think Sturridge is better. You need to look the word up.

Sturridge. In one. It's arguable at best. Though they traditionally play in different positions and it's misleading to suggest we have more than one better than Rooney. No it isn't arguable in the slightest. Daniel Sturridge did more in one game than Wayne Rooney has in any tournament since 2004. So you're saying it is arguable. Not. You need to look up the definition of the word then, mate.

As individuals we have just as much quality as Italy and had all our players fit unlike them. Yet, as a team, they looked a level above. Anyone 'proud' of that England performance wants their stupid face slapped.

Sturridge. In one. It's arguable at best. Though they traditionally play in different positions and it's misleading to suggest we have more than one better than Rooney. No it isn't arguable in the slightest. Daniel Sturridge did more in one game than Wayne Rooney has in any tournament since 2004. So you're saying it is arguable.