Says Gary Neville in 'Sporting Chapters' which will appear on the Sky Sports website in the coming days.
Would you agree? A bold claim considering the 'nearlys' of '90 and '96.
Jump to content
Posted 25 February 2013 - 02:23 PM
Did he say it in the video? (Can't watch it at the moment) Because the article says he thought the team underachieved in 2004 as opposed to it being a missed opportunity.
Posted 25 February 2013 - 10:18 PM
Posted 25 February 2013 - 10:28 PM
I'd say Euro 96. I reckon we could have beaten Holland, Brazil, and France had we got past Argentina in 98 as well.
Posted 25 February 2013 - 10:43 PM
You can't expect to win any tournament when Darius Vassell is a penalty taker.
Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:37 PM
England only got stronger as that tournament progressed. John Barnes should have been subbed in much earlier. It was 2-0 ten minutes into the second half and Barnes only played the final fifteen minutes. England were much more threatening once he entered.
It has to be euro 1996...if only gazzas legs were 2 inches longer. World Cup wise it has to be the hand of god year...was that 1986? They had a great team that year and it took the genius and cheating of Maradona to beat them.
Edited by SMIGfan, 25 February 2013 - 11:38 PM.
Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:57 PM
Barnes rarely delivered for England in the way that he did for Liverpool - the opposite of David Platt almost!
He had a decent enough World Cup in Mexico though, you're right. Robbo getting injured didn't help the cause, having to bring Steve Hodge in. Barnes, Robbo, Reid and Hoddle across the middle of the park with Beardo and Lineker up front was the line up we would have won the tournament with but it wasn't to be.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users