It seems whenever I bring up England, the general response is what needs to be done, what needs to be changed, what players need to be called up, what players need to be benched etc. Fair enough, post-Germany, England were pretty bad, especially with the whole Euro 2008 qualifying saga. But since Capello took over, have they really been that bad? Let's look at their results: 2-1 over Switzerland 0-1 to France 2-0 over USA 3-0 over Trinidad and Tobago 2-2 with Czech Republic 2-0 over Andorra 4-1 over Croatia So out of 7 games, we've won five and only lost one...to France. Is this really the work of an awful team? I'm not saying England are back to their best or that they're set for a great World Cup 2010 run, but I think it's unfair to still treat England like the joke they were in 2007.
English Football (Soccer) - 4 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
they were never a bad team.........they just under perform. considering the reputation of those players with their respective clubs.
2 :
After Capella came england lost no matches they beat Croatia in oppositions ground and england is the first team to beat Croatia in they ground.
3 :
not since cappello took over they might win the world cup if they don t have to meet brazil, argentina,,,italy germany, and holland the teams taht can beat englnd hihi
4 :
NO
