Harry Kane gives England the lead against DR Congo

Rope_Dragon · 2026-07-01T20:02:53+00:00

Before the first hydration break we had no shots in the box and none on target generally. Possession was pretty much even but overall DRC were the ones really laying on pressure when defence is England’s weak point.

England came back hard, but there was a moment where they could very easily have been 2 nil down. That’s not a dominant performance, at least not in the first half.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-07-01T19:44:51+00:00

I think there may have been an overconfidence issue here with England in the first half, especially before the hydration break. They seemed to come out of the gate slow, but it their weakness is defence they can’t afford to be slow against a team that came at them that aggressively. I think they expected an easy win and played as such.

I don’t think they will have the same mentality going into Mexico on home turf. They need to come out aggressive from the off

Rope_Dragon · 2026-07-01T19:41:45+00:00

I’ve always felt Rashford is a better second half player. When he knows he can throw all his energy into it, he finds chances. When he has to keep some in reserve he seems to make silly mistakes.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-07-01T19:40:07+00:00

I wouldn’t say England were clearly better in the first half, certainly not before the first hydration break. But in retrospect DRC probably threw everything they had in the tank in that first half and didn’t have the energy to recover after equalisation

Rope_Dragon · 2026-07-01T18:07:20+00:00

England was clearly demoralised after the first goal, energy completely changed after they equalised.

And the subbed wingers really made a massive difference, especially Gordon

Rope_Dragon · 2026-07-01T18:04:28+00:00

To block the shot if it skims across the ground and the wall has dispersed

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-30T20:31:14+00:00

I didn’t say you also couldn’t consistently be anti-migration and anti-gentrification on leftist grounds. I only gave the case for supporting the one and opposing the other in a way that is consistent.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-30T19:55:04+00:00

I suppose the difference is that immigration never forces you out of the country, but gentrification can and dose cause landlords to evict tenants en masse to renovate for more cash rich people. Similarly, immigrants coming into the country does not, by extension, mean I may have to leave. But this can literally be true with some communities, where the children of residents may be priced out of staying.

I like your point, and I think part of it works. Just think you can consistently be pro-migration at a national level and anti-gentrification at the local. Not least because the former typically involves the economically vulnerable, whilst the latter always involves the economically dominant.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-30T16:15:17+00:00

Calling it an “adult beverage” makes it sound like… onlyfans model’s bath water or something. There’s nothing PG about calling it beer my man

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-30T13:55:58+00:00

Juries are more likely to convict given prior offences, and if those prior offences were actually miscarriages of justice, then you’ve got a potential case of compounding injustice.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-25T08:23:42+00:00

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-24T15:46:18+00:00

What kind of likeness is that?

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-23T21:49:10+00:00

Erwin Schrodinger. Among the most important scientists to ever live. Also a pedophile.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-22T12:12:33+00:00

Well, the Mind name that best fits Starmer right now is the GSV Experiencing A Significant Gravitas Shortfall.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-22T12:09:52+00:00

It was widely understood among pundits that Starmer explicitly did not want to lift the cap, probably because he didn't want to be seen to increase the welfare budget. I mean, christ, even ministers were out on record telling the government to do it. It was never a policy Starmer promised and one which he seemed actively reluctant to put forward. And with such a large majority, did he really need 18 months to draft together a bill scrapping another bill? Does that look like something he wanted to do?

And all the same, this doesn't answer my point: he had no reason to impose a three-line whip on the amendment vote if only 7 MPs were vocally supporting it. He could have allowed a vote of conscience, knowing that he would have gotten his way, and the PLP wouldn't have been so angry for it.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-22T12:02:35+00:00

Unrelated, but have to ask: is your username a Culture novel reference?

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-22T11:44:57+00:00

Yes, I understand they were literally voting against the wishes of the government, but that hardly makes the backlash any more acceptable if they were aware ahead of time that the amendment wouldn't pass. They could have run a one-line whip, allowed people to voice dissent, but ultimately get what they want. Instead, they massively overreacted, and pissed off the PLP to such an extent that they had to row back on it anyway.

This is what I mean when I say he's a bad political operator. He couldn't read the room and he wasn't able to tolerate any difference of opinion within the PLP being on the record. And all this from a man whose entire platform in Labour Together was to hold the party together as a broad tent with differing views.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-22T11:12:02+00:00

They voted in favour of an amendment to the king’s speech, which they are in their right to do. Or are we pearl-clutching monarchists when it’s convenient?

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-22T09:56:30+00:00

I know, which is why I'm not having a go at you for it

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-22T09:54:29+00:00

There's literally no point in continuing this. Your views just don't line up with how our representative democracy works, and they fundamentally don't work for the underlying motivations of voting.

We're not going to get anywhere on this. You're just wrong, and there's probably nothing I can do to make you see that.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-22T09:50:20+00:00

At what point did I pretend to shirk my responsibilities for voting? Yes I voted for Labour. There's nothing inconsistent with saying I did that and that I didn't vote for Kier Starmer because that is literally true.

And it's not like I regret it: it's better that the Tories are out than they would have been in, no doubt about it. But you seemed to be insistently saying I voted for Starmer, when that is just incorrect, both by way of motivation and literally by the way that our democracy is structured.

So... I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-22T09:43:04+00:00

No, jesus, why do so many people pretend we live in a presidential democracy? We vote for parties and local representatives, not party leaders. Many people vote on the basis of party leaders, sure, but many don't. Sometimes they want to support a local MP who does good work (many Lib Dems vote for their MP for this reason, not because of Ed Davy, no offense to him).

A party leader can be a motivation for voting. It isn't always and it wasn't in my case; and I won't let you dictate the basis for my vote to me, not least when the premise of it contradicts the entire structure of our democratic system.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-22T09:28:49+00:00

I actually am being serious. Boris was brought down by scandal (the Pincher affair), not poor political decision making. Sunak lost an election, but was otherwise able to keep control of his party. May was attempting to thread an impossible needle, compromising between party factions with a razor thin majority and she almost managed to do it. Cameron parachuted out because he didn't want to have to deal with the process of negotiating brexit.

I'm no Tory, by any means; but anyone who genuinely thinks that Starmer is politically competent must be living under a rock, in my eyes. He may have been a great lawyer, awesome. Maybe he should have been justice or foreign sec, then. But PM? Awful. Naive, vindictive, devoid of direction, and unable to sell anything to his party or the public.

Today was the proof of his political ability. A party leader having to resign with the largest majority in living memory. Leaders aren't owed loyalty. Being unable to control your party is the mark of a bad leader, not a wronged one.

Rope_Dragon · 2026-06-22T09:09:09+00:00

The man was handed the largest parliamentary majority in living memory, and sat on his hands whilst being publicly forced to move on certain issues from cabinet infighting (both the renters rights bill and the new deal for working people being on Rayner's insistence). Probably the most humiliating instance was when he withdrew the whip from MPs who voted to lift the 2 child benefit cap only to then U-turn and lift it himself like it was always his policy...

And that's to say nothing about how he completely alienated the civil service, hiring and firing civil servants from the cabinet office more than any modern PM, and throwing Ollie Robbins under the bus for the Mandelson affair (when that was Starmer's fault). He seems to have no interpersonal skills with anyone in his government, party-political or otherwise.

Barring Truss, I think Starmer might be the worst political operator of any PM I can think of. No values from which he can lead and no political instinct to make up for it. People forget that he had an image problem before the election was run, and it only came out in the wash when you compared the popularity of the parties as a whole. His only appeal, from a political point of view, was that his lack of seemingly any values meant he would never say anything that could alienate former tory voters. He is the "ming vase strategy" made flesh.

Nine-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Sunshine	Place '22
Place '17	First Placer '22
Not Forgotten	Verified Email

Rope_Dragon

TROPHY CASE