| England Thread 🏴 19:29 - Oct 17 with 258857 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
About time we had one I think? |  | | |  |
| England Thread 🏴 on 17:42 - Jul 2 with 3163 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| England Thread 🏴 on 17:34 - Jul 2 by KensalT |
You can only prepare for high altitude by actually being there.
We've only gat a few days to prepare against a team that has been living up there.
The AI take is that you need a minimum of 1-2 weeks:
"For professional athletes, the time it takes to adjust depends on the goal. Acclimatization for immediate competition takes 1 to 2 weeks. Long-term physiological changes (like building new red blood cells to carry more oxygen) take at least 3 to 4 weeks.
Professional sports have two main strategies for altitude:
1. The Short-Term Fix (Compete Now)
Goal: Avoid acute mountain sickness and regain baseline aerobic capacity.
Timeline: 1 to 2 weeks.
Why: In the first 24 to 72 hours, athletes actually feel the worst. The body loses water weight and heart rate spikes. After about 7 to 14 days, breathing and blood pH balance, bringing athletic performance close to sea-level norms.
2. The Long-Term Benefit (Build Endurance)
Goal: Increase red blood cell count for a permanent boost in performance.
Timeline: 3 to 4 weeks.
Why: The hormone erythropoietin (EPO) tells the body to create more red blood cells to catch the thinner oxygen. This takes nearly a month to mature
https://www.google.com/search? |
Assuming they flew straight there on Wednesday night, that's three days so it won't be from zero at least.
I have to say, I spent two weeks in Leh, stupidly didn't take any of the altitude advice, and thought I was going to die the first two nights I stayed. I was a fit young pup in my 20s then too. | | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 18:04 - Jul 2 with 3062 views | PhilmyRs |
| England Thread 🏴 on 17:42 - Jul 2 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Assuming they flew straight there on Wednesday night, that's three days so it won't be from zero at least.
I have to say, I spent two weeks in Leh, stupidly didn't take any of the altitude advice, and thought I was going to die the first two nights I stayed. I was a fit young pup in my 20s then too. |
3-7 days is the worst you can do. You either spend 2 or 3 weeks getting ready and acclimatise or you do a short 1-2 days and get out before the full impact hits. Not sure of the science behind it but that's the recommendation. From what I understand England Team are flying in 2 days before kick-off. |  | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 18:26 - Jul 2 with 2981 views | LazyFan |
| England Thread 🏴 on 17:34 - Jul 2 by KensalT |
You can only prepare for high altitude by actually being there.
We've only gat a few days to prepare against a team that has been living up there.
The AI take is that you need a minimum of 1-2 weeks:
"For professional athletes, the time it takes to adjust depends on the goal. Acclimatization for immediate competition takes 1 to 2 weeks. Long-term physiological changes (like building new red blood cells to carry more oxygen) take at least 3 to 4 weeks.
Professional sports have two main strategies for altitude:
1. The Short-Term Fix (Compete Now)
Goal: Avoid acute mountain sickness and regain baseline aerobic capacity.
Timeline: 1 to 2 weeks.
Why: In the first 24 to 72 hours, athletes actually feel the worst. The body loses water weight and heart rate spikes. After about 7 to 14 days, breathing and blood pH balance, bringing athletic performance close to sea-level norms.
2. The Long-Term Benefit (Build Endurance)
Goal: Increase red blood cell count for a permanent boost in performance.
Timeline: 3 to 4 weeks.
Why: The hormone erythropoietin (EPO) tells the body to create more red blood cells to catch the thinner oxygen. This takes nearly a month to mature
https://www.google.com/search? |
This is why QPR should do preseason in these sort of places and for 5 weeks.
We can also find out in the squad who really is fit and who is gaming it.
Then, when the squad comes back to the UK, we should be raring to go.
Also, a lot of these places after the plane flights are quite cheap and far away from any WAG nonsense. |  |
| |
| England Thread 🏴 on 18:27 - Jul 2 with 2974 views | daveB |
| England Thread 🏴 on 18:04 - Jul 2 by PhilmyRs |
3-7 days is the worst you can do. You either spend 2 or 3 weeks getting ready and acclimatise or you do a short 1-2 days and get out before the full impact hits. Not sure of the science behind it but that's the recommendation. From what I understand England Team are flying in 2 days before kick-off. |
They have to fly in 2 days before, thats a FIFA directive |  | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 18:31 - Jul 2 with 2963 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| England Thread 🏴 on 18:26 - Jul 2 by LazyFan |
This is why QPR should do preseason in these sort of places and for 5 weeks.
We can also find out in the squad who really is fit and who is gaming it.
Then, when the squad comes back to the UK, we should be raring to go.
Also, a lot of these places after the plane flights are quite cheap and far away from any WAG nonsense. |
I've often thought this, and apparently a lot of athletes do, but apparently the benefits are short lived so it might work if you have a marathon or a couple of Tour De France stages but not Preston two months later sadly. [Post edited 2 Jul 18:47]
| | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 18:36 - Jul 2 with 2956 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| England Thread 🏴 on 18:27 - Jul 2 by daveB |
They have to fly in 2 days before, thats a FIFA directive |
Unless the U.S. don't like you. |  |
| |
| England Thread 🏴 on 19:09 - Jul 2 with 2880 views | kensalriser |
| England Thread 🏴 on 15:40 - Jul 2 by KensalT |
It's not difficult for Mexico.
They love playing there.
2 defeats in 89 matches.
Never lost a World Cup match there!
https://www.espn.co.uk/footbal
What is Mexico's record at the Estadio Azteca?
Mexico have played 89 matches at the Azteca and won 70 of those, drawing 17 and losing only two.
When it comes to the World Cup, they have a similarly impressive record, winning seven matches, drawing three and never losing.
In that time, they have kept eight clean sheets and, with the World Cup held in Mexico in both 1970 and 1986, they were knocked out both times in different stadiums.
Should England beat Mexico here, they would be the first team ever to do so at the World Cup.
When did Mexico last lose at the Azteca?
You would have to go all the way back to Sep. 10 2013 for the last time Mexico lost at the Azteca.
That day they fell 2-0 to 2026 World Cup co-hosts the United States, with Edward Johnson and Landon Donovan scoring the goals.
In that time, there have been three World Cup tournaments and we are midway through the fourth since Mexico last tasted defeat at the Azteca. |
Mind your sources.
Wikipedia says the US game was played in Columbus. Mexico did however lose at the Azteca 1-2 to the mighty Honduras on the 6th September 2013.
Before this World Cup they'd only played half a dozen games at the Azteca this decade and nearly all the opposition they've played there ever has hardly been top drawer.
I'm just a bit bored of how this narrative has assumed near-mythical status. Mexico aren't a top team, if England fail to win it will be nothing to do with what happened in the past, it'll be because they didn't play well enough. [Post edited 2 Jul 19:10]
|  |
| |
| England Thread 🏴 on 19:26 - Jul 2 with 2851 views | Dorse |
| England Thread 🏴 on 18:36 - Jul 2 by BrianMcCarthy |
Unless the U.S. don't like you. |
They hate me for some reason. I mean, you piss in one reflecting pool... |  |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| England Thread 🏴 on 19:47 - Jul 2 with 2772 views | rbee |
| England Thread 🏴 on 15:47 - Jul 2 by KensalT |
The altitude thing isn't just a psychological edge. It's a real physical advantage.
Players tire quicker if they're not used to it, and the ball moves around quicker than they are probably used to.
I'm not giving up on England's chances but Mexico has a big advantage and England don't have time to prepare for it. |
I would be tempted to try and keep the score at 0-0 and then bring on Harry & Co at half time to try to win it [Post edited 2 Jul 19:57]
|  | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 20:00 - Jul 2 with 2726 views | GroveR |
| England Thread 🏴 on 19:47 - Jul 2 by rbee |
I would be tempted to try and keep the score at 0-0 and then bring on Harry & Co at half time to try to win it [Post edited 2 Jul 19:57]
|
Rest the first team for the Brazil game? I like it. |  | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 20:09 - Jul 2 with 2713 views | KensalT |
| England Thread 🏴 on 19:09 - Jul 2 by kensalriser |
Mind your sources.
Wikipedia says the US game was played in Columbus. Mexico did however lose at the Azteca 1-2 to the mighty Honduras on the 6th September 2013.
Before this World Cup they'd only played half a dozen games at the Azteca this decade and nearly all the opposition they've played there ever has hardly been top drawer.
I'm just a bit bored of how this narrative has assumed near-mythical status. Mexico aren't a top team, if England fail to win it will be nothing to do with what happened in the past, it'll be because they didn't play well enough. [Post edited 2 Jul 19:10]
|
There does seem to be some confusion in the sauces.
You are right that Honduras did win at the Azteca in 2013.
The ESPN article said that USA, USA, USA were the last team to win there (in 2013) but a little digging shows that not to be true. (As you said!)
Further digging shows that Mexico also lost a WC qualifier at the Azteca to Costa Rica in 2001.
They also seem to have lost friendlies there, but the last time that happened was 1981.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
So as far as I'm aware it's two home defeats since 1981. Which isn't bad. Certainly a better home record than ours :-(
You are absolutely right that Mexico are nothing special. I don't think anyone has said that they are. If the game was played anywhere else we would expect England to win.
But it's not being played anywhere else and the altitude is a big leveller.
I believe England can win, although I do worry how much we will have left in the tank to play again a few days later.
But one problem at a time, eh! [Post edited 2 Jul 20:17]
|  | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 20:11 - Jul 2 with 2705 views | KensalT |
| England Thread 🏴 on 19:26 - Jul 2 by Dorse |
They hate me for some reason. I mean, you piss in one reflecting pool... |
If that's the colour of your piss you need to see either a doctor or a tree surgeon! | | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 21:56 - Jul 2 with 2566 views | R_from_afar |
| England Thread 🏴 on 15:03 - Jul 2 by Dorse |
It's not exactly Moonbase Alpha, is it? |
Are you *sure* the Azteca isn't built on top of a huge mound of nuclear waste?  |  |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| England Thread 🏴 on 22:23 - Jul 2 with 2458 views | R_from_afar |
| England Thread 🏴 on 17:42 - Jul 2 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Assuming they flew straight there on Wednesday night, that's three days so it won't be from zero at least.
I have to say, I spent two weeks in Leh, stupidly didn't take any of the altitude advice, and thought I was going to die the first two nights I stayed. I was a fit young pup in my 20s then too. |
Checking the medical advice on this, I see that the NHS states that altitude sickness is usually only an issue at a height of more than 2,500 metres.
So as long as Tuchel doesn't pick anyone who's over 300 metres tall...  | |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| England Thread 🏴 on 06:26 - Jul 3 with 2295 views | SydneyRs |
| England Thread 🏴 on 18:04 - Jul 2 by PhilmyRs |
3-7 days is the worst you can do. You either spend 2 or 3 weeks getting ready and acclimatise or you do a short 1-2 days and get out before the full impact hits. Not sure of the science behind it but that's the recommendation. From what I understand England Team are flying in 2 days before kick-off. |
Jill Scott on the stick to football podcast reckons there's no way the FA wouldn't have prepared the players for playing at altitude. I guess having been inside the England set up herself would give her some idea about this. | | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 06:59 - Jul 3 with 2269 views | GroveR |
| England Thread 🏴 on 18:27 - Jul 2 by daveB |
They have to fly in 2 days before, thats a FIFA directive |
Are you telling me there's a bunch of unelected Johnny Foreigners sitting in Zurich giving us directives? We should leave and take back control of our beautiful game. | | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 07:36 - Jul 3 with 2238 views | nix |
| England Thread 🏴 on 19:31 - Jul 1 by Wilkinswatercarrier |
It's not just the players he didn't select. Mainoo, not featured, despite the CM looking woeful. 2-0 up against Panama and he brings on Henderson!
Watching England today reminded me of QPR under Warburton. Pretty good going forward, but open as anything at the back.
Imagine us against the French. It'd be Agincourt in reverse. |
It is a bit like that we’ve been making some mistakes at the back that surely they shouldn’t be making at Premiership level let alone international level. Konsa being drawn so far across for the DRC goal was surely a howler, leaving Spence to cover half the pitch with a right winger who couldn’t be arsed to track back. Stones made a bit of a dog’s dinner in his first match making one cock up and generally not looking match fit.
In some ways it does look like watching some of the lesser aspects of QPR at times, although obviously with much better players. The defence haven’t played enough matches together so they’re not playing as a unit. It took him so long to decide his best team and we don’t seem to have used the friendlies to play his best team even then, he was forever tinkering. We keep doing the QPR playing out from the back thing which even they don’t seem very good at and has nearly got us into trouble a few times and certainly doesn’t look very comfortable.
We aren’t making the most of the times when we’re in transition because either the wingers hold the ball up and stop or they overrun it and try and shoot - Rashford being a particularly poor example of this but Bellingham (I know not a winger but still) not squaring to Ebs just before our second goal against DRC was criminal. When you have Kane as your CF you should be looking to pass rather than overrunning it and shooting from a stupid angle. Gordon hasn’t always made the most of his opportunities but did well for the second DRC goal.
Because we’re not committed to breaking forward quickly we end up playing around the opponent’s penalty area and only rarely running at their goal at pace which defenders hate more than anything.
Do we also think the standard of the Prem actually counts against you. So if you’re in France or or Spain or Germany you may be playing against difficult opposition a few times a year but sometimes against dross. Whereas in the EPL you can be beaten by almost anyone so managers are flogging their best players throughout the season and maybe they are a bit knackered or too many are carrying knocks. |  | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 14:38 - Jul 3 with 2018 views | CLAREMAN1995 |
| England Thread 🏴 on 07:36 - Jul 3 by nix |
It is a bit like that we’ve been making some mistakes at the back that surely they shouldn’t be making at Premiership level let alone international level. Konsa being drawn so far across for the DRC goal was surely a howler, leaving Spence to cover half the pitch with a right winger who couldn’t be arsed to track back. Stones made a bit of a dog’s dinner in his first match making one cock up and generally not looking match fit.
In some ways it does look like watching some of the lesser aspects of QPR at times, although obviously with much better players. The defence haven’t played enough matches together so they’re not playing as a unit. It took him so long to decide his best team and we don’t seem to have used the friendlies to play his best team even then, he was forever tinkering. We keep doing the QPR playing out from the back thing which even they don’t seem very good at and has nearly got us into trouble a few times and certainly doesn’t look very comfortable.
We aren’t making the most of the times when we’re in transition because either the wingers hold the ball up and stop or they overrun it and try and shoot - Rashford being a particularly poor example of this but Bellingham (I know not a winger but still) not squaring to Ebs just before our second goal against DRC was criminal. When you have Kane as your CF you should be looking to pass rather than overrunning it and shooting from a stupid angle. Gordon hasn’t always made the most of his opportunities but did well for the second DRC goal.
Because we’re not committed to breaking forward quickly we end up playing around the opponent’s penalty area and only rarely running at their goal at pace which defenders hate more than anything.
Do we also think the standard of the Prem actually counts against you. So if you’re in France or or Spain or Germany you may be playing against difficult opposition a few times a year but sometimes against dross. Whereas in the EPL you can be beaten by almost anyone so managers are flogging their best players throughout the season and maybe they are a bit knackered or too many are carrying knocks. |
Very detailed and interesting post there Nicole but this game simply comes down to the first half IMO
Mexico came out flying against their ole enemies Ecuador scored first and pretty soon after scored the second killer goal then whole second half defended without muck trouble .
DR Congo scored first but could not get the second when they had England down then bizzarly tried to hold out for extra time or PKs and predictably got eliminated .
England have to survive until half time taking the fans out of it then use that incredible bench to get that goal that can win them the game.
Mexico have a couple of threats but no dept and riding emotion only lasts until you fall behind .
Mexico 0 England 1 ( Saka hacked down Harry penalty despatched as usual) [Post edited 3 Jul 22:31]
|  | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 17:29 - Jul 3 with 1929 views | TwoHalves |
Mexico v England KO time post now deleted due to duplication elsewhere. As you were. [Post edited 3 Jul 21:43]
| | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 23:12 - Jul 3 with 1798 views | nix |
| England Thread 🏴 on 14:38 - Jul 3 by CLAREMAN1995 |
Very detailed and interesting post there Nicole but this game simply comes down to the first half IMO
Mexico came out flying against their ole enemies Ecuador scored first and pretty soon after scored the second killer goal then whole second half defended without muck trouble .
DR Congo scored first but could not get the second when they had England down then bizzarly tried to hold out for extra time or PKs and predictably got eliminated .
England have to survive until half time taking the fans out of it then use that incredible bench to get that goal that can win them the game.
Mexico have a couple of threats but no dept and riding emotion only lasts until you fall behind .
Mexico 0 England 1 ( Saka hacked down Harry penalty despatched as usual) [Post edited 3 Jul 22:31]
|
Who would you start with? It’s a tough one because if you decide to try and hold out in the first half and win it in the second you can be out of it by the time the second half comes. Apologies for stating the obvious but it’s just not that easy to score in WC knockout stages. Apart from the Lineker and Kane phenomena the next highest England scorers in WC finals are Hurst with five and then Charlton, Rashford and Owen with four each all of which were scored over two tournaments.
Between 1966 and now we’ve never won a match in the World Cup after conceding first until beating DRC, so it’s not a common or easy thing. I dunno. It’s an interesting discussion and I’m intrigued by what will happen. | | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 00:03 - Jul 4 with 1705 views | loftupper |
| England Thread 🏴 on 23:12 - Jul 3 by nix |
Who would you start with? It’s a tough one because if you decide to try and hold out in the first half and win it in the second you can be out of it by the time the second half comes. Apologies for stating the obvious but it’s just not that easy to score in WC knockout stages. Apart from the Lineker and Kane phenomena the next highest England scorers in WC finals are Hurst with five and then Charlton, Rashford and Owen with four each all of which were scored over two tournaments.
Between 1966 and now we’ve never won a match in the World Cup after conceding first until beating DRC, so it’s not a common or easy thing. I dunno. It’s an interesting discussion and I’m intrigued by what will happen. |
Kane and Bellingham both capable of dragging this England side into quarters in a similar albeit lesser manner to Messi for Argentina.
That defense is shocking though, is Pickford really the best we can do? that left hand side is not functioning at the moment. Maybe Rice playing through pain could fill in but Belliingham dropping back would be a serious card risk. | | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 03:52 - Jul 4 with 1623 views | LazyFan |
| England Thread 🏴 on 18:31 - Jul 2 by BazzaInTheLoft |
I've often thought this, and apparently a lot of athletes do, but apparently the benefits are short lived so it might work if you have a marathon or a couple of Tour De France stages but not Preston two months later sadly. [Post edited 2 Jul 18:47]
|
But we have to do pre-season anyway, so we might as well do it where we can gain an advantage over anyone, even if it's short-lived. | |
| |
| England Thread 🏴 on 05:41 - Jul 4 with 1565 views | johnhoop |
Papers now saying this morning that the England game time isn’t going to be moved after all and it’s back at the original time in the middle of the night.
B-gger. Will just have to go back to the original plan of recording it and doing a “Bob and Terry” in the morning and avoiding any possible news sources till I switch it on. | | | |
| England Thread 🏴 on 08:22 - Jul 4 with 1440 views | TwoHalves |
| England Thread 🏴 on 05:41 - Jul 4 by johnhoop |
Papers now saying this morning that the England game time isn’t going to be moved after all and it’s back at the original time in the middle of the night.
B-gger. Will just have to go back to the original plan of recording it and doing a “Bob and Terry” in the morning and avoiding any possible news sources till I switch it on. |
No spoilers, please. Still waiting to find out what happened in that ‘Bob and Terry’ game. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.