England Vs. Germany!
- Thread starter YouCallMeNighthawk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
LOLYOULOSEGIRL said:
It makes much sense. If a disallowed goal makes all the difference, maybe your should also be pissed over your defense that screwed up the first goal, England did not react for a ful 10 minutes which lead Germany to make then a second goal, which would result in England having to an all out attack to tie the match.D_987 said:
Every play counts, not just the one that the ref in the most epic way possible screwed. England did a really poor job in the first 30 minutes, and THEN the ref failed.
England failed in the first half and that cost the match right there.
While England was totally devastated by the first two goals and it was totally their fault, they did equalize, didn't they?oliveira8 said:
I mean, they can't have lost the match there, if everything was fair, it would've been a draw and the match would've started all over again.
Germany were more composed, more disciplined and more talented.
England were 11 spoiled millionaires strolling around thinking about thier clubs and cheating with eachother's girlfriends.
Better team won.
England were 11 spoiled millionaires strolling around thinking about thier clubs and cheating with eachother's girlfriends.
Better team won.
Ever heard about a thing called the 'Premier League'? It's the biggest, most watched and most exciting football league in the world and all of England's players play in it, at the top level. So that's why people expect England to do well because the players have a huge amount of class, quality and experience of playing at the top level.Stabby Joe said:
ROFL ROFL ROFL.oliveira8 said:
Your post is awful. Ok, let's look at the score, with the disallowed goal added, urm, yes it was 2-2? So therefore that did not "cost them the match" in the first half. The referee cost them the match in the first half. There's not denying England had a poor 30 minutes, but when England score 2 legitimate goals in 2 minutes, I do not expect them to be disallowed.
In your logic, I could say, Germany deserved to lose because they had a poor 2 minutes in which they conceded 2 goals. Seriously.
You also say that England needed to go all out attack when they were 2-0 down? Yes, they did, and they scored 2 GOALS. Jeezus, your post in unbelievable.
I do not doubt in anyway Germany were the better team but the match will forever be marred by that decision, and it will be remembered by England fans forever.
Or the 1966 World Cup (where England won) and all the other matches. And Beckenbauer being a shithead before the game.LOLYOULOSEGIRL said:
Also I'm calling it before it happens: Beckenbauer makes a smug comment about how the English suck and the Referee is a genius before a thug from Liverpool pushes his head through a wood chipper.
Yeah, I have to agree with you.MiracleOfSound said:
Still, I think you should understand more than anyone else, you, being Irish, what the tragedy is here. I mean, you could feel anything about the English, but scoring pulling back from 2-2 takes some... well, skills.
Germany won 4-1. It should have been 4-2 because the ball definately went over the line in germany's goal in the first half, but that still wouldn't have mafe a difference.
EDIT: Fuck, ninja'd.
EDIT: Fuck, ninja'd.
Fixed that for yaAndyCobra said:
ProtoChimp said:
One could argue that the de-motivation caused by the disallowed goal contributed to the other goals conceded. Although I admit it probably wouldn't have made much of a difference
Ok; you know why you're wrong; and why this entire post is unbelievable holding both a naive, and slightly ludicrous viewpoint?oliveira8 said:
Because the score would have been 2-2 had the goal been given.
The fact the defence screwed up matter little, because England would have gone in at half-time level; thus the game would have changed completely. It's unbelievable that you're denying this - England wouldn't have had to play all-out attack in the second half because they'd be level...
