WC 2018 | Round of 16 | England Vs Colombia

England can win. Columbia is very jekyl and hyde... extreme ups and downs in a game. England just have to score in one of those down moments and hold on during the others.

I honestly think Columbia isn't very organized. Senegal just couldn't expose it because they weren't that organized themselves.

The funny part about all this is that Columbia hoofs it like crazy loooooool. They're the proper EPL side in this matchup.

@sportsczy wrote:England can win. Columbia is very jekyl and hyde... extreme ups and downs in a game. England just have to score in one of those down moments and hold on during the others.

I honestly think Columbia isn't very organized. Senegal just couldn't expose it because they weren't that organized themselves.

The funny part about all this is that Columbia hoofs it like crazy loooooool. They're the proper EPL side in this matchup.

I haven't been very impressed with them tbh, i often wonder with how people talk about them if i'm watching something else

Senegal would have scared me way more, i was having visions of Mane running past Stones multiple times.

lets be honest here england have no chance of winning it but we are as good as columbia sweden and the swiss. i want us to go far because it will bring back the interest in the england team plus it will be great expiriance for southgate and the players. imo southgate is the right manager for england and im more than happy to see him stay in the job at least to the next world cup.

Colombia has a lot of talent, more talent than England, but they are a little undisciplined. They will lose a ball in midfield because the midfielder wants to do something exceptional, and screws up. I still think Colombia will eliminate England anyway.

5 votes against the brexit boys.
I am disgusted. Who are these people.

My boi James gonna sell Stones and Pickford a dream before shattering English hearts.

Colombia's performance against Poland was probably one  of the best performances by a team at this World Cup thus far.

James was outstanding in that game.

Objectively, there's no way you can say Colombia are a better team without James.  

But if England focus all their attention on James than looking to exploit their weaknesses going into the game, then it could spell trouble for them. I've been noticing how pundits are saying England should go through because Colombia miss James but without him, they're still an excellent team. They're going to take their typical aggressive approach and come hard at England. Don't be deceived by the Senegal game.

Without James , I'd say it's 55-45 to England

With James , I'd say it's 55-45 to Colombia

Don't get that tbh.

They were incredibly meh at best in 2 of their 3 games but we judge them in the game against the worst team in the group

They were miles better than Japan even with 10 men tbh. Even as a GLAsia faithful, I'd say Japan were the worst team in the group, they just got lucky in the opening game.

One thing is sure, this game is going to be gazillion times more interesting than Uruguay vs Portugal
I think it is up for grabs, a small mistake might decide this game.

@Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Don't get that tbh.

They were incredibly meh at best in 2 of their 3 games but we judge them in the game against the worst team in the group

What criteria can we use to judge england then? England faced Panama and Tunisia lol. Then the last game was played against a belgium where the coach stated "the priority is not to win."

@futbol_bill wrote:Actually all of the SA teams except Argentina look good. I’m just wonder when ‘SA teams don’t do well in Europe’ kicks in.

Kinda how "EU teams don't do well in SA" until Germany won last time?

@FalcaoPunch wrote:

@Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Don't get that tbh.

They were incredibly meh at best in 2 of their 3 games but we judge them in the game against the worst team in the group

What criteria can we use to judge england then? England faced Panama and Tunisia lol. Then the last game was played against a belgium where the coach stated "the priority is not to win."

I'm not the one claiming that we judge England on the only game we played well in though.

There seems to be a massive bias around Colombia on here tbh where everyone ignores everything that's happened except the one game they played against the worst team in the group.

They weren't better than Japan lol, the bias is flowing through for anyone who states that.

Also we weren't meh in our first two games at all, our finishing and bad refereeing was the only reason we didn't score half a dozen against Tunisia.

Besides we are the only country in the world who can score 6 and it be criticised Belgium scored  3 and none before half time and people wank over them.

The haterade is real, like I said they've had one good game and everyone is ignoring the rest because reasons

The bias is obvious but it's to be expected from a place where most people treat England like they *bleep* their sisters.

Unpredictable. That's how I would describe Colombia. They do have such players in their team. Look at Cuadrado for example , one day he can be brilliant and play almost like a prime Robben and next he looks like a headless chicken.
Their match vs. Japan,that early red card led to chaotic display and poor performance in midfield and to some questionable substitutions so they lost against a team they should have easily beaten.
Players like Muriel,Cuadrado and even James & Falcao might be hit and miss nowadays (it's not 2014 James or pre injury Falcao we are talking) but they will be facing a defense of England that I don't really rate.
On a good day Colombia can beat England and I wont be surprised.
England must take these guys seriously and not come overconfident cuz Colombia would love to start like total underdogs.

I'm just thinking of of a world where England play badly in 2 of the 3 games, lucky to qualify and people were like " but they played well against the worst team in the group doe! "

It would never happen so the bias is completely unreal and if you don't realise that you need your brains checked.

I am struggling to see the bias here. What bias? Should I say that England should smash Colombia just so I can appear unbiased ?

You watched one of their games and called them meh. I watched all their games in which they looked good in 2 of their games and unconvincing  in their final game but they still won. Basically how most good teams including England have performed in this World Cup.

Besides most think this will be a 50-50 and with England having an edge should James miss out. I'd say that's a fair opinion to have for any unbiased person watching this World Cup.

Nope I never said we'd smash them or even beat them.

But this idea we should ignore Japan ( let's be real here if they beat us in the same scenario nobody is making the same excuses) and Senegal where they were incredibly lucky because they happened to beat a shite Poland team is absolutely ridiculous.

You are saying that Poland who are clearly shite are representive of real Colombia so we should ignore the bigger sample size against better opposition because it suits you.

That's clear bias which nobody would be affording to England in the same scenario.

Also why do people on this forum assume things as fact all the time ?

I watched two of Colombia's games (Japan and Senegal) where they looked meh at best in both, they didn't look good against Japan at all.

Your standards are incredibly low if you think that was a good performance, like I said put England in the same scenario and there's no way in hell that anyone here thinks it's a good performance.

Once again showing clear favouritism if not out right bias.