So unlike the previous years it looks like most people are sceptical about England's hopes of reaching far in the World Cup...I think that it's a very solid team though.

It does look like England could pass the group stage, but then again even Costa Rica could put up a fight against England in the past.

The squad is really balanced, attack is strong with Vardy and Kane having 25+ goals per season there is also Rashford and Sterling all good talents.
Midfield that can back them up is also pretty good maybe not as good as some other countries have but Wilshare,Hendersen,Alli,Chanberlain,Dier are solid.
The defense is maybe the weakest part of the team but it's not that bad at all, Walker, Stones are part of the best defense in the league...

How far can England go?

No player with leadership mentalities.

@Gonzi It funny cause he wasn't that great for Bournermouth but did actually a somewhat decent job at Arsenal this season. But yeah, not a game changer most of the time. Loyal servant at best. :(

@srk_rox Yeah, its becoming an huge problem with a lot of squad in the world nowaday.

When Englands been expected to go far, they've been disappointing... this time people know that they tend to fail so the expectations are a bit lower... so they might actually instead go far if they can stay under the radar.

@Pelle Heh, no worry, some journalist will somehow find a way to overhype them but yeah, I agree they will have better chance if it wasn't the case.

They might have a chance now. Martinez has just left Nainggolan out of his squad and made some seriously odd selections.

@DChoff It is a weird squad that he named, can't believe he didn't bring Naingolan. :(

Emobot7

Very strange squad. Some really odd inclusions.

@DChoff Indeed, quite a bunch of player I simple don't know about. At least, other than Naingolan, there isn't a lot of absent.

why so much imperfection in squad selection? axel witsel gets in but naingolan is out. come on, belgium already try putting 2 trees in dm position which is not really satisfactory in the past 2 competition.

I'm actually surprised to hear that Januzaj made it into the squad. Baby face came a long way since his poor run at Sunderland

@iHEART I don't know, he seem to have been ok at Sociedad but nothing special. Scored 4 goal and made 6 assist in 34 appearance, 13 of those were as a sub however. Thats ain't bad but it doesn't look to me like he will see a lot of game time in the world cup. :(

@Emo, ah that makes sense. Would be a big confidence booster to still be in the squad either way. He really needed this back at United, and it's a good thing Martinez has made this choice.

@iHEART Fair enough, maybe Martinez is actually a fan and is hopping to boost the lad confidence. Or maybe he didn't anyone else better to call. :P

Well, I mean, they've beaten Germany, Spain and France in games over the last couple of years, so does that count?

@lodatz no it does not, absolutely not unless it’s an official game, a qualifier or an official competition.
I don’t remember last big nation England won in an international competition. And in addition to 2014-2010 and slightly 2006 ( they were not bad that season by they had in form Lampard-beckham-gerard we are talking about Sterling-lingard-Vardy today ), in addition to world cups you can also add Euros where they are flopping regularly...

No argument would strengthen their position in last competitions, they beated France one day after Bataclan terrorists acts beating a B-team arguably C-teal considering Ben Arfa and co participating...
Well against Germany, Germany never fields A-team in friendlies and make like 10 subs a game with the number of youngsters they have. And I don’t remember Spain loss, I remember a 2-2 hardly taken against a Spanish side in control but England doesn’t stand 1% chance against Spain in WC, they won’t touch the ball much ( Pedro and Cesc not even part of WC reserve just to show you their 23 list quality )

England will go through group stage because it’s the easiest group Tunisia and Panama aren’t expected to show resistance. But their quarter final ticket is highly depending on draw even if I think there is no beatable quarterfinalist for them.

Before England had individuals and lacked chemistry, last years post Lampard-Gerard Era they had none of them and mental weakness in addition in key moments. Any organized team even Iceland can have a chance.

Why Colombia is better ? More technical, more tactical, better chemistry, known and respected leaders guiding the squad, south American resilience and grinta... that’s enough.

Although, their Spurs players are the best ones, Walker-Rose-Trippier-Kane-Alli are their best players. None of them won big or has this sort of international event experience.

Reason why it’s safe to not raté England really high as a neutral there is no conspiracy against them in here. It’s actually a team many countries would want to draw in Knockout rounds...

I tend to agree, England really need to shake off the monkey on their back with regard to flopping at major tournaments. They have some decent players, but for some reason they struggle to play as a cohesive unit.

Getting to the Knockout's "should" be a given, but proceeding beyond that is a tough call.

@tiki:

no it does not, absolutely not unless it’s an official game, a qualifier or an official competition.

My point was that anything you can say about England, you can also say about Belgium and Colombia, both of whom were being touted as automatically better than England.

I don’t remember last big nation England won in an international competition

I can list off all the times when we took big nations to penalty shoot-outs, including when we had players sent off. It's kind of our "thing". Also? I don't remember the last time Colombia or Belgium beat a big nation, either. In fact, it's only in the last tournament that either team were memorable at all, and both times because it was so rare to see them at a big tournament.

But, of course, they're both better than England, and far more likely to win. Because: reasons.

in addition to world cups you can also add Euros where they are flopping regularly...

Again, aside from the Iceland result, this really isn't true. Taking the finalists to a penalty shoot-out is not a 'flop'. Only one team can win at a time.

they beated France one day after Bataclan terrorists acts beating a B-team arguably

Oh please. Our team featured Clyne, Gibbs, Shelvey and Bertrand. We still won 2-0.

England will go through group stage because it’s the easiest group

Every group is the easiest group, and it makes a nice chance from having the hardest group, which we usually do.

Before England had individuals and lacked chemistry, last years post Lampard-Gerard Era they had none of them and mental weakness in addition in key moments.

Well, you say that, and yet we've had the chemistry and mental toughness to beat France and Germany, and draw with Spain. We also won our qualifying group without losing a single game.

And now? We have plenty of great individuals, as well as chemistry. Kane, Sterling, Alli, Rose, Walker, Dier, Stones etc. On paper, that's far more impressive than, say, Colombia. As for Belgium, well, their squad looks fantastic (after all, the players all play in the Premier League), but they've never won anything and the last World Cup QF was their deepest run in history.

But, of course, both are better than England, and are more likely to win. Because? Reasons.

Why Colombia is better ? More technical, more tactical, better chemistry, known and respected leaders guiding the squad, south American resilience and grinta... that’s enough.

That's also based on nothing more than lazy stereotypes. Colombia are celebrating qualifying for the World Cup for only the 2nd time since 1998. There's literally nothing for you to base this idea that they are better technically, tactically or "well known" compared to a team made up of players who all finished in the Top 3 of the most competitive league in the world.

Reason why it’s safe to not raté England really high as a neutral there is no conspiracy against them in here.

It's not a conspiracy, it's just your standard, lazy bias against England.

As for within FIFA? Dude, if you can't see how often England have been screwed over, then there's no explaining it to you. FIFA are a garbage organization.

It’s actually a team many countries would want to draw in Knockout rounds...

I guess we'll see. Probably we'll take another eventual finalist to a penalty shoot-out, after having our best player sent off. Again.

I am afraid England does not have a brighter chance in this world cup.

Oh please. Our team featured Clyne, Gibbs, Shelvey and Bertrand. We still won 2-0.

Lol, players were more anxious about their families and friends in Paris than that game, none watched in here and some players had their relatives shot like Griezmann so yes that game was pointless... he shouldn’t have been played and he was only to not let terrorists win, players were mentally shocked.

As I said, they didn’t win any top side in an official game, and sorry for that they are nowhere near France-Germany and Spain in term of level, no matter what argument you will provide specially friendly ones...
Anyway I know you feel obliged to defend anything related to English football, defending English late compains In international tournaments is an impossible task for anyone. I’m not sure you believe they would stand a chance against Spain or Brazil do you ? For Belgium i’ve Never said they are favorites but look to their list of 23 and compare it with England’s. On paper they’re stronger but they suffer same mental issues and they also need to climb levels slowly...
Colombia for me and it’s only my opinion, is stronger not on paper, on organization and flair.
England is more likely to get fooled or to concede a pk or a stupid red card while It’s the opposite for Colombia, collective intelligence is something in DNA nations and I admit England bad luck but there is a huge part of responsibility from English players... Beckham and Rooney sent offs were 100% justified just like ZIdane one in 1998 and 2006.

Lol, players were more anxious about their families and friends in Paris than that game

Instead of being extra motivated to win? That seems like a strange claim, to be honest.

As I said, they didn’t win any top side in an official game

That's because they haven't played one in a while. They did, however, win their qualifying group without losing a single game, and managed to get nice friendly wins over France, Germany and a draw with Spain.

These things don't go away just because you don't want to take them into consideration.

and sorry for that they are nowhere near France-Germany and Spain in term of level,

No-one said that they are. That doesn't change the fact that they've still managed to be competitive with those teams, and I also did mention that England just won, like 3 international trophies in the last 12 months at youth level. So, the times they are a-changing.

Maybe some people should update their opinions to match.

I’m not sure you believe they would stand a chance against Spain or Brazil do you ?

Why not? No-one believed France stood a chance against Germany in the Euros, until they ended up beating them Yes, I do think Eng;and stand a chance against Spain, and certainly Brazil, and that's because we have a very strong squad on paper, who have already proven they can hang with the big teams in friendlies.

If you don't believe they would stand a chance, then you're just being silly. Football isn't decided by reputation, as Brazil found out against Germany.

For Belgium i’ve Never said they are favorites but look to their list of 23 and compare it with England’s.

Pretty similar, actually. Especially since practically all of Belgium's first XI play in England, alongside the England team. I think the only reason you rate Belgium more highly is because they are not England.

Colombia for me and it’s only my opinion, is stronger not on paper, on organization and flair.

But why? What about Colombian football makes you say this? Is it just because they're from South America?

England is more likely to get fooled or to concede a pk or a stupid red card

What you mean is: someone is much more likely to cheat against England and get away with it because we just don't tend to prepare for such dirty tricks in our football. Or at least, we haven't historically. In the last decade of the PL English football has (sadly) embraced as much diving and conning of the ref as, say, Spanish football.

while It’s the opposite for Colombia

You're saying that Colombian football involves more cheating? Why is that something to admire?

Beckham and Rooney sent offs were 100% justified

This is clearly not true. Beckham barely tapped Simeone, who acted as though he had been shot, and Rooney did virtually nothing wrong besides shove his supposed best-mate from trying to get him sent off. Rooney wasn't even going to get a yellow until Ronaldo came charging in demanding one.

Zidane head-butted someone in the chest. There's quite a difference, there.

Rooney wasn't even going to get a yellow until Ronaldo came charging in demanding one.

Rooney stomped on Carvalho's testicles, stop lying. It's on tape. Only ones who said it's not a red card are the nationalist Brits like you.