Maximus Decimus

The difference between airplanes is that a failure affects one plane. A failure in the hyperloop and the whole track is down. I think it'll be one of those things that just never happens. Costs will ramp up and they'll realise that there are cheaper and less troubled ways of travelling. I'll admit I don't know much of Musk has done in the past, I know enough to be shocked by his conduct with the diver but I know little of him personally. What I do know of him since he became well known suggests he's all for big ideas that appear more than a little over ambitious. Take his Mars plans as an example, that's another thing that I just don't think will happen.

The modern world is full of these big flashy promos that look like the future but actually make little sense when you scratch the surface. Self-filling waterbottles, roads made out of solar panels and artifical gills to name a few. The problems with hyperloop are unlikely to be overcome to the point where you have to question why bother. For instance they have to work out a way to quickly create a vacuum in a large tube, otherwise it will not be feasible as journeys will be few and far between. If they manage this they have to make the tube incredibly secure. One mistake, one fault in the tube and it will be a catastrophe of epic proportions. This is without considering the effect of a natural disaster or as a target for terrorism. The idea sounds quite cool but as with so many ends up being something that will almost certainly be a non-starter.

Musk has had some success but the veneer has been slipping a little. He's got behind something called the Hyperloop which is another thing that seems like nonsense. He seems to have the utmost faith that progress and science will solve all the answers. This big thinking can be admirable but it's bound to result in some terrible ideas.

While you made this point, I was making the point we were well overdue a decent run even if due to luck. I think we were both right! I liked the parallel of this tournament with 1990 and the disastrous 1988/2016 euro campaigns. With what transpired in 1992 and 1994, I'm hoping that's where the parallel ends!

Hard on Croatia to be behind. I won't feel too sorry for them. Not a great handball decision...

Croatia starting stronger. I suspected before the England game that maybe Croatia preferred playing the bigger teams and had struggled against teams that park the bus. Long way to go yet.

One of the reasons I get so annoyed by the writing off of England's performances is that they have taken steps to write much of what is wrong with English football. I've commented on here that I know one person in high level football and he's been raving about what Southgate was doing since he was in the U21s. We came up short because we didn't have good enough players but at least we looked like a team and they knew how they wanted to play. It was a world away from Iceland 2016. I've thought for a long time that the UK in general doesn't produce a certain type of creative athlete in any sport. Whilst still true, I've changed over the years about how important this is. Andy Murray, England RU and our Olympic team have demonstrated that you can achieve the ultimate success without the best technical ability. You just have to play to your strengths and develop a way to win against the best. Tiki-taka is the most technical and attractive form of football but it isn't the most effective anymore. England can win a major tournament or at least do better than 1990 and now if they continue to improve from here. After all, we could've won this one; if they'd played the tournament 10 times from the semi-finals we probably would have won one. I doubt very much we'll ever be the best technical side in the world but we could become one of the most effective teams. We do regularly beat teams more with more true technical ability than us, it is only wins against big teams when it matter that elude us.

I'll be wanting France to win. A) because they deserve too and B ) because watching Croatia is a bit too raw. Yes they deservedly won but we were inches from being in their place!

For me this suggests that we have problems in our footballing culture as well as wider culture. As many on here know, I teach children and very few nowadays are athletic. I can't comment on other countries but I suspect the proportion is a lot lower when compared to some others. A good example of this is the abject failure of Scotland football over the last 20 years. As much as we like to laugh, they are very similar to us culturally. We are able to overcome their issues mostly by nature of the fact that we have 10 times the population. I was going to post about how little has been written about the remarkable achievement of Croatia. They are smaller than Scotland yet have consistently produced good teams over the last 20 years. This isn't one lucky golden generation (as Belgium are suspected to be) but at least two (1998, 2018) with a team capable of knocking England out in 2008. Imagine if in the last 20 years Scotland or ROI had been in a World Cup semi-final and a World Cup final. Possibly only Uruguay can compare on a population to success ratio.

This is utter nonsense. Almost none of the teams that we play are like semi-pro RL teams. Virtually all of them are full time sides with players playing across Europe. This time we had a relatively easy qualifying campaign but it has no effect on our inability to match the top sides. We were still playing countries that have competed at the Euros and the World Cup. There is a parallel to English RL here. We also lack creativity but to suggest we haven't improved is quite obviously untrue. We are still some way from consistently challenging Aus when it matters but it would equally be madness to suggest that last year's defeat was no improvement on 2008. We came to this tournament with no expectation because we had a young inexperienced squad and we'd lost to Iceland in 2016. People got excited because they saw a very different England than for probably the last 10 years and this had nothing to do with the opposition we played. We may have lacked class in the final 3rd but at least we were able to hold the ball and control games for long periods against decent opposition. I've watched England games where we've been unable to hold the ball against teams like Costa Rica and dominated by Montenegro. Some people are just desperate to put a negative gloss on what was a positive tournament for England. Rather than trying to fit players into a system that doesn't work, Southgate chose a way to play and England stuck to it. I don't think it means we'll suddenly win Euro 2020 or be one of the favourites at the 2022 WC but at least we didn't come home embarrassed and had something to be positive about which hadn't happened since about 2004.

It's not about being realistic, it's about the tone of such posts which are not about talking about reality but are about trying to play down a very real achievement to nothing.

But don't you know we didn't beat anyone really and nothing has changed!!!

I fundamentally disagree with this. No matter how this is viewed it represents a significant improvement. I don't think it is a sea change that will mean we regularly get this far but there was much more to be positive about than previously. Some people are determined to look at the negatives and put a negative skew on things. They point out the sides we've played but completely ignore how we've played against sides like that in the past. We beat Panama 6-1, how did we do against Algeria, Trinidad and Tobago, Costa Rica, Slovakia etc in tournaments past? We used to get passed off the park by tiny nations. Even the draw isn't really a negative. It simply represents a rebalancing compared to recent tournaments where we haven't had one and often played big teams and eventual winners earlier on. It is also completely ignorant of a lot of the work that has gone on behind the scenes to try and address many of the problems inherent in our game. Anyone who thinks this didn't represent a significant improvement on 2008-2016 needs their heads testing.

As a long suffering England fan, I must admit when we scored amid the euphoria there was a tinge of foreboding. I can now count 4 examples of relatively recent knockout games where we've scored a very early goal and then lost. Its almost like rather than settling us we don't quite know how to manage the game and once the equaliser hits we're lost because we've never got into a rhythm.

Pundits and analysts talk a lot of nonsense. If Kane scores from his big first half chance we almost certainly go through. The fact that he didn't had nothing to do with anything that anybody has written or will write today. It wasn't mental toughness or the ability of England to perform in big games or any of that. It was 2 efforts on target that missed that maybe 5 times out of 10 wouldn't have missed. Over the 120 minutes, Croatia had the better of the game and this was evident in the stats. It was a fair result but things could easily have gone differently.

We didn't bottle it, we lost to a better team. There was a reason there was no expectation attached to this squad beforehand. People have very quickly lost perspective. There is a lot of talk about the draw opening up and it being our best chance to make a final. Yes it did and yes it was but it doesn't mean we had a right to get there. The sad reality is that we aren't one of the best 5/6 teams in the world and might never be. To get to a final would have been an incredible once in a lifetime achievement much like it is for Croatia.

The desire for some to talk down this achievement is utterly bizarre. 2 years ago we lost to Iceland after 3 dreadful performances in the group stages. This was a world away from that both on and off the pitch.

Everyone can cancel their barbecues for Sunday then. Can't help but feel people were planning ahead of Croatia. I don't believe in fate but they jinxed it!

But we have to learn to beat the big sides when it matters. There's no reason we can't.

He didn't look lethal in any game. Luckiest golden boot winner ever!

Thought Modric wasn't any great shakes tbh. You're right about that Hazard style player. A couple of 'if onlys' but after half time we were largely outplayed.

If being the best team means anything they should win.

Give over. We made a semi-final against expectations when other better teams went out. Croatia were the better side, no complaints here.

Cos it's served us well against Croatia!

I just can't enjoy games like this. I blame England RL and Widnes. That Tonga game will mean I never ever relax.