they simply were not good enough!
2007-02-26 08:32:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by the southern dandy 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
In 1970 England were probably the best team, but ran into a team that played better on the day.
In 1974 and 1978 we didn't qualify, partly due to injuries to key players and partly due to poor team selection.
In 1982 we were in transition and did well to get to the quarters.
In 1986 we could have won it (despite being a 1-man team), but the best player in the world got in the way...
In 1990 we were the best team, but lack of technique (Pearce) and lack of bottle (Waddle) let us down at the crucial moment.
Luckily we didn't qualify in 1994, as it would have been embarrassing to go out in the first round with the awful team we had. (Poor selection policy compounded by a small pool of talent).
In 1998 we were in transition again and did as well as could be expected.
In 2002 we should have won the thing, but a lack of tactical flair against 10-man Brazil (plus Seaman showing why he was considered by many to be too old) stopped us.
In 2006 we went in without a plan-B (why on earth play all those friendlies if it isn't to experiment with tactics and personnel?) and the performers required for plan-A played badly. We weren't about to win it, but to play so badly in every game was embarrassing.
So, in conclusion, I'd generally blame the manager for not getting preparation and/or tactics right for our poor performance (74,78,94,02,06). 1990 and 2006 were the only times that the players let the manager down (and in 2006 he let them down too). In 1982 and 1998 we did well with what was available at the time, while in 1970 and 1986 we lost out to a better team on the day. Better manager-selection by the FA would seem to be the key to England winning the World Cup again.
2007-03-02 09:12:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by rosbif 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
This stuff that England doesn't win because there are too many foreigners in the premiership is just racist nonsense, I agree with you. Italy won the world cup and their league has as many foreigners as the premiership. To win a world cup you need talent, luck and self-confidence (unless you're playing at home but that's an exception). That's why Brazil, Argentina, Germany and Italy are above the rest: their self-confidence is greater. And England doesn't play well, they can defend well but when they have to attack they can't do it. I think they're scared of taking the iniciative and if you keep on choosing swedish coaches it's never going to work out for you because all they do is play defensive football.
2007-02-26 18:09:48
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Well, in 1974 and 1978 we didn't win because....we didn't even qualify for the Finals! But...
In 1970..we were a good team but were beaten by a more classy West German side in the quarter finals, after holding the greatest Brazil team of all time to a single goal.Not a disgrace at all.
1982.. went out in the quater final group on goal difference to West Germany, without losing a single match.
1986..blatantly cheated out of certain victory against Argentina in the quater final by the most infamous handball incident of all time, which 85,000 people in the stadium saw clearly ...with the sole exception of the referee.
1990..lost to West Germany (!) on a penalty shoot-out in the semi-final. Again, hardly a disgrace at all.
Its not a great record, but its certainly not THAT bad!
2007-02-26 16:43:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Same reason as now, England can never win the world cup, because you only have to touch a player and they go down.
Get within 5 yards and they dive
They cheat.
Their technique is way ahead of ours.
We can't play our natural game, because they've got the ball most of the time.
We have/had idiots, like Hoddle, Errikson, McLaren as Managers, What chance do we stand?
The players can't be bothered to give 100%, like us supporters do.
2007-02-27 08:18:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
everything we do as a team is critisized so especially when something goes wrong the press and ppl moan so what do u expect if we do crap its cos we have no freedom to move really say mac drop lampard or gerrard and we lose he will get critisized for messing with the team he has tried different formations and a few new players but he doesnt have the time to do it again and again. friendlys ppl saying its bad for the game whats the point well the point is to find out who works together well we need to play tough teams not always world beater but teams who can test us
2007-02-28 09:52:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by spec_007 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
The Premier League and the Championship before that weren't that good without foreigners. England just didn't have a good enough team.
2007-02-26 16:33:28
·
answer #7
·
answered by Adam S 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
Same reason they did'nt win it in ...86, 90, 94, 98, 02 and 06. They were crap!!
They believed the 'Hype'. Went out....and lost!.
Incidentally, they did'nt qualify in 74, 78, 82 and 86..... and they only played in 70 because they had won the cup in 66 and did'nt have to qualify!.
2007-02-26 16:41:35
·
answer #8
·
answered by JohnH(UK) 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
They did not win in 1970 because they ran in Brazil and they did not have the referees cheating for them like they had done in 66. I do not believe they qualified for 74 and 78. In Spain they wer just terrible.
2007-02-26 17:01:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by CARLOS J D 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
1974 and 1978 they didn't even qualify, they qualified as hosts in 1966 and as holders in 1970, their just not anywhere near as good as they think they are
2007-02-26 19:53:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by Rod Stewart 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
SIMPLE!! Because England are NOT the greatest football team in the world!!!
2007-02-26 16:38:00
·
answer #11
·
answered by lucky charm 2
·
0⤊
1⤋