Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Guest firetotheworks

He is better with both feet mind. Never mind that chip against Bayern.

 

Hmm, no he just uses both feet more. When Messi needs to use his right it's brilliant. He's scored like 15 or 20 odd goals with his right this season alone man.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd argue England are one of the best teams in the world, the ease in which they qualify for tournaments is proof. Trouble is there's massive difference between the top three or four sides and the second group, which England are in.

 

And Messi vs Ronaldo is a weird one. I'd agree Messi wins, but if I could have one of them sign for us it'd be Ronaldo all day long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He is better with both feet mind. Never mind that chip against Bayern.

 

Hmm, no he just uses both feet more. When Messi needs to use his right it's brilliant. He's scored like 15 or 20 odd goals with his right this season alone man.

 

Also there's more to that debate than just shooting, dribbling and passing off either foot counts as well :lol: but regardless it's been done to death and the only one who disagrees is Froggy :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest firetotheworks

I'd argue England are one of the best teams in the world, the ease in which they qualify for tournaments is proof. Trouble is there's massive difference between the top three or four sides and the second group, which England are in.

 

And Messi vs Ronaldo is a weird one. I'd agree Messi wins, but if I could have one of them sign for us it'd be Ronaldo all day long.

 

People seem to say this because Ronaldo's more of an all-rounder  (as in he can do more at a lower quality) that could theoretically work within a team that's not that good, people cite Messi with Argentina as the reason completely ignoring the fact that Ronaldo always under-performs for Portugal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd argue England are one of the best teams in the world, the ease in which they qualify for tournaments is proof. Trouble is there's massive difference between the top three or four sides and the second group, which England are in.

 

And Messi vs Ronaldo is a weird one. I'd agree Messi wins, but if I could have one of them sign for us it'd be Ronaldo all day long.

 

Or England have had absolutely piss easy qualifications groups for the most part (bar 08 when against 2 other capable teams they fucked up) and when they come to play anyone of note (or Costa Rica or Uruguay) they're left woefully exposed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

why? is it because you wouldn't trust messi on a Tuesday night game in Stoke?

 

I think if you were to put them both in shit teams Ronaldo would be miles better. Not so much the Stoke argument because I've seen Messi get booted six feet in the air and he gets up and plays on.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

why? is it because you wouldn't trust messi on a Tuesday night game in Stoke?

 

I think if you were to put them both in shit teams Ronaldo would be miles better. Not so much the Stoke argument because I've seen Messi get booted six feet in the air and he gets up and plays on.

So why then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd argue England are one of the best teams in the world, the ease in which they qualify for tournaments is proof. Trouble is there's massive difference between the top three or four sides and the second group, which England are in.

 

And Messi vs Ronaldo is a weird one. I'd agree Messi wins, but if I could have one of them sign for us it'd be Ronaldo all day long.

 

Or England have had absolutely piss easy qualifications groups for the most part (bar 08 when against 2 other capable teams they fucked up) and when they come to play anyone of note (or Costa Rica or Uruguay) they're left woefully exposed.

 

You've still got to beat what's in front of you and '08 aside England do that. And I'd put Uruguay in the same bracket as England at international level, in the group behind the elite nations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest firetotheworks

England are absolutely shit like. The supposed Golden Generation was nothing on the '96-'98 team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

England are one of the best international teams in the world in that I'd struggle to name 10 'better' nations.

 

They still reek of mediocrity though.

 

You wouldn't name Costa Rica above England but the proof is in the pudding. Since 2010 we have struggled to beat anyone near of note in international competitive football.

 

If there was another world cup next summer England would get to the last 16 at best. Imo England are 20-30 in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

England are one of the best international teams in the world in that I'd struggle to name 10 'better' nations.

 

They still reek of mediocrity though.

 

You wouldn't name Costa Rica above England but the proof is in the pudding. Since 2010 we have struggled to beat anyone near of note in international competitive football.

 

If there was another world cup next summer England would get to the last 16 at best. Imo England are 20-30 in the world.

 

They had a brilliant World Cup admittedly but I refuse to accept Costa Rica are a better team than England. If they played each other 10 times, England would win more often than not.

 

Switzerland are probably in the imaginary top 20 in my skull and we dispatched them with ease on their own turf.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...