To ask why the England team (the men) keep falling at the final hurdle, (well virtually at the final hurdle,) at the football World Cup ... and The Euros too?

Netherlands have never won the World Cup and won Euros once, yet they are always considered in the conversation and have been amazing so many times.

Why are England fans always tearing into their own players???

You're missing my point and yet I though I was being very clear. I can and do change the channel' that doesnt change the fact it is covered constantly and excessively on many channels. I hope that helps but happy to explain again if needed.

And 2026!!

And two Euro finals in the last 2 Euros.

That's quite a record! Why are you trying to diminish it?

It’s down to chance. The other team scored more goals.

Oh no, sorry to hear that.

@TheChewdors Scots hear it constantly, I can assure you of that. When the Tartan Army were in Boston, the Insta posts were FULL of hateful comments from England fans.

Yes but they didn't repeatedly smash Liechtenstein over and over

No, they just hammered far inferior sides like Albania over and over across the past four qualifying tournaments, hence the accumulation of ranking points.

There is nothing inconsistent about where they are ranked currently, have been ranked and their actual results.

There is, because you'd expect a team which is genuinely the 4th best on the planet to be able to hold their own with other highly ranked teams, and win almost as frequently as they lose to them, but with England, as soon as they run into another highly ranked team, they lose, every single time.

This is why the ranking is misleading. All it is, is a representation of how many ranking points you have accumulated. It says nothing about your record vs teams in the same bracket, and it isn't attained by reaching certain stages of tournaments, it's points accumulated by the results of the matches you play, hence why you can attain 4th in that table while still losing every single match you play against other highly ranked opponents.

Let's hope so and we experiment with not going defensive !

They did really well I think .Argentina play dirty ,but a the end of the day were a better team! I think we gee everyone up and its as if they are defo going to win! A poor little boy was in floods of tears, and it was upsetting to watch.Maybe say they have a good chance and obv big them up .But dont make it seem like a foregone conclusion as it very rarely is!

They still have to qualify.

Shouldn't be a problem but you never know.

So?

It's not about denying the record, it's just about reiterating two points, namely that FIFA rankings can be, and are sometimes gerrymandered, so you really shouldn't read too much into them in terms of determining which teams are actually the better, because that's rather meaningless until such time they actually play each other.

The second point is about England's ranking of 4 also being rather meaningless because it suggests they are in with the handful of very best sides on the planet, but the fact is they can not, and never have been able to beat the very best sides in Competitive matches, so I genuinely do think 4 is a false picture.

The way tournaments work with Pot draws means that the top sides very rarely meet before the Quarter Finals in any case, so England reaching semis and Euro Finals is still perfectly possible without actually running into another team ranked at the top. In fact, this is pretty much what has happened at the last four tournaments, they've made it to a World Cup semi without running into a top 10 side, and two Euros finals without running into a top 6 side. As soon as those things happened, they lost.

If they were genuinely in amongst the very best, then you'd expect over time that results between those teams would be fairly balanced because they are all capable of defeating each other, but with England they lose every single time without fail as soon as they run into another "top" side, so the only conclusion you can draw is that ranking is false, and the fact they get to Semis etc does not undermine that point, because they've proven that you can do that without having to actually meet a top side to begin with.

Yes but they didn't repeatedly smash Liechtenstein over and over.

They got to the finals of the Euros two tournaments in succession and have reached the semis, quarters and semis in the last 3 world cups.

The seeding has to some degree selected the opposition they play and you can only beat what is in front of you.

Their performance over the past tournaments is consistent with their ranking.

And the idea that Norway as a team are mediocre to me is wrong. They are 19 in the rankings but have moved up 12 places recently and are on the way further up. They have probably the best striker in the world in Haaland and the premiership winning captain, as well as other prem players. They are tough opposition.

Mexico were tough, again 10 in the rankings but heading upwards. The environment (home stadium plus altitude) added to the challenge.

But still they overcame both challenges and got to about where you would expect the 4th best team in the world to get to, the last 4 teams and were put out by (supposedly) the best on ranking.

There is nothing inconsistent about where they are ranked currently, have been ranked and their actual results.

If I were looking for ranking anomalies vs performance I would go for Italy (who didn't qualify despite being 15) and Cape Verde. Not England.

The way the draw lands mean England tend to always get fairly easy teams to initially compete against. Then when they get further they fail because they just aren’t as good as they think they are and the other teams are better.

There are 48 teams in the World Cup.

Even if you accepted all the teams starting were equal, which is not true, calculate your probability of being the one winner, rather than one of the 47 that don't win, or the 46 who don't play in the final.

They were in the final four.

That's not a 'final hurdle' situation, any more than the other 45 (46-1) have 'fallen at the final hurdle'.

Only two teams out of 48 can clear the final hurdle, their chances were low, they did quite well, they lost it on the night. It's not a huge mystery.

They came either 3rd or 4th in the world and they are a small country. Where's the failure? What are you even taking about OP?

Generally because they are top 4/8 team not the top team. They just don’t have the quality. Arguably the French had the most quality so a touch of luck is really important too.

To ask why the England team (the men) keep falling at the final hurdle,

The final hurdle would be getting to the World Cup final and losing.

England has not reached a single World Cup Final in the last 50 years. Their best performances in this period were fourth-place finishes in 1990 and 2018.

If only you had a way of changing the channel.

Well yes but it'll be all over the telly constantly, so hard to avoid tbf.

What do mean circles I move in? What, that only our specific school tournaments were more exciting than women's football? Maybe you're right and our dc were all very talented but it's something I've heard others say from other areas so don't think it's particularly my circle.

We seem to have to go through the facade of it being like mens football but we all know it isn't and no I'm neither sexist nor misogynistic, just realistic.

Stamina. They always seem to have energy for an hour and if they get a one goal often just sit on it and hope to wait for the game to end. England just don’t score in the end of games, they don’t have the stamina, especially in hotter climates.

Ok, but it's the exact same situation for all other teams. England consistently reach the semi-final/final of major tournaments. 4th in the world is correct.

Are you telling me Argentina have had a tough journey to the final and you have no problem with their ranking 🤷‍♀️ they also haven't played well in many of the games (same with Spain) and just about found ways to win. Same applies to England. Not sure why people want to deny their obviously good tournament record

I agree they lost last night to a team who played better. I also loathe the English mentality of criticism - the so-called 'pundits' who seem to enjoy kicking them when they're down. It's such a lottery of who you play and when you play them. If we had played any other team last night - France, Spain etc - it could well have been us in the final.

A few days ago, the English press and fans wanted Kane to be knighted, Bellingham was the new world-class footballer and England were brave Lions.

Now, after one extremely difficult game that didn't go their way - for whatever reason - the press and fans want to know where Kane and Bellingham were and think they are clueless.

And don't get me started on Rooney and his awful criticism of Tuchel as a manager - talking like he has all the answers - I think Rooney's managerial results tell us he doesn't!