• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

The most depressed you've been after a sporting event

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Oh, well meh, Euros, don't care that much about 96.
I can't really blame you for feigning disinterest in the euros. Our track record is so horrible; I think that 2004 and 1996 are the only times we haven't embarrassed ourselves, and 1996 wasn't as great as some will tell you.

I think that in 1990 I was swayed by the 'heroic' failure' line of thought. Obviously deeply disappointed to go out like that, but we'd overachieved by getting that far. Similar to 2018.
Without analysing it too much, 1970 and 1974 were the most painful, and 1988, 2010 & 2016 the most depressing performances. As you said, a lot of the penalty shootouts merge into one, especially once we reach the 21st century. 1998 had a hint of heroic failure after playing much of the match against a good Argentina side with ten men.
 

grecian

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I can't really blame you for feigning disinterest in the euros. Our track record is so horrible; I think that 2004 and 1996 are the only times we haven't embarrassed ourselves, and 1996 wasn't as great as some will tell you.

I think that in 1990 I was swayed by the 'heroic' failure' line of thought. Obviously deeply disappointed to go out like that, but we'd overachieved by getting that far. Similar to 2018.
Without analysing it too much, 1970 and 1974 were the most painful, and 1988, 2010 & 2016 the most depressing performances. As you said, a lot of the penalty shootouts merge into one, especially once we reach the 21st century. 1998 had a hint of heroic failure after playing much of the match against a good Argentina side with ten men.
82 was the first one I really remember, was pretty gutted to go out unbeaten, but we probably shouldn't have been there in the first place, some terrible qualifying matches if I remember rightly.

I dunno, the Euros have never gripped, me possibly because in those formative years we went out in qualies in '84, and they didn't even show the Tournament on the telly, shows how things have moved on. Think there where highlights of the semi-final and Final on Midweek Sport Special or something (semi was a great match actually), then there have been some rubbish winners. Mind you there have been rubbish winners of WC's but they have generally been big name countries.

So yeah, all the World Cup exits, and Euro '96 over that Croatia match.
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
The old Wembley was a national monument with lots of history but needed modernising. But the fact that the pitch is not even in the same location, or even direction, renders the new stadium devoid of any history or anything. Of course it can make its own history but it’s a horrible location. If nothing was going to be retained from the old stadium the new National stadium should have been built somewhere else.

I wasn’t depressed after our 2-0 defeat by Wimbledon in the 2016 Play Off Final. It was more a case of numbness after having about three attacks and no shots in the entire game.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
2001 rugby league GF or the 2006 football WC loss to Italy. Both devastating, the latter probably more so. We get past Italy and it would have been semi finals at worst. smh
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
82 was the first one I really remember, was pretty gutted to go out unbeaten, but we probably shouldn't have been there in the first place, some terrible qualifying matches if I remember rightly.

I dunno, the Euros have never gripped, me possibly because in those formative years we went out in qualies in '84, and they didn't even show the Tournament on the telly, shows how things have moved on. Think there where highlights of the semi-final and Final on Midweek Sport Special or something (semi was a great match actually), then there have been some rubbish winners. Mind you there have been rubbish winners of WC's but they have generally been big name countries.

So yeah, all the World Cup exits, and Euro '96 over that Croatia match.

You do remember rightly about the 1982 WC qualifiers; we managed to lose to Norway and Switzerland when they were only a bit better than the absolute minnows and only secured second place because Switzerland surprised everyone by winning in Romania. So we were lucky to qualify and it was first time since 1970 as we'd failed to qualify for the previous two WCs, so at the time I wasn't completely gutted. Especially as we'd been without Brooking and Keegan for most of the tournament. There was an element of opportunity missed when we realised that if we had made it through the second group phase then we'd have faced France in the semi-finals, and we'd beaten them in the first group phase. And then there would have been Italy in the final, so who knows how that may have gone.

1984 was actually one of the best euros because France and Denmark were so good. And the France/Portugal semi-final was definitely up there with the best games ever. Worth catching on youtube, not least to hear Motson's great commentary when the winning goal went in; genuinely emotional instead of his usual crappy pre-written lines. Maybe easier to enjoy because England weren't there making their usual mess of things.
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
The 1982 World Cup was the first time I'd seen England in the World Cup finals. I have no recollection of Mexico in 1970 except hearing the results on the radio. It was a terrible format with the two group stages. We won all three games in our group and ended up in a second round group with Spain and Germany. France stumbled through our group in second place and ended up in a second round group of Austria and Northern Ireland. The 0-0 draw with Germany was dull but then Germany beating Spain 2-1 meant we had to beat Spain 2-0 to get through and not for a second did I think that was going to happen.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
The 1982 World Cup was the first time I'd seen England in the World Cup finals. I have no recollection of Mexico in 1970 except hearing the results on the radio. It was a terrible format with the two group stages. We won all three games in our group and ended up in a second round group with Spain and Germany. France stumbled through our group in second place and ended up in a second round group of Austria and Northern Ireland. The 0-0 draw with Germany was dull but then Germany beating Spain 2-1 meant we had to beat Spain 2-0 to get through and not for a second did I think that was going to happen.
Yup. The second group stage was not as expected due to West Germany finishing second in theirs after losing to Algeria, and Spain finishing second in theirs due to losing to Northern Ireland. Like you, I never thought we looked like scoring two against Spain, even though Brooking came close when he came on and Keegan's missed sitter felt too late anyway. And yes the format was rubbish, as they should have known following the Argentina/Peru match in 1978.

You're slightly younger than I thought if you didn't watch 1970. The Brazil game was the first England match that I ever saw. The West Germany quarter final was the second.
 
Last edited:

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Is 1982 the format that led to Austria agreeing to lose 1-0?
Yup. West Germany needed to win and Austria could afford to lose 0-1 for both teams to qualify. WG scored after 20 minutes or so and that was the end of the contest.
That was in the first group stage, and was the match that led to the final pair of group matches being played simultaneously.
The second group stage only included 3 teams per group, so simultaneous games weren't possible. This led to Argentina (1978) and England (1982) knowing exactly what they needed to do in the final game to progress on goal difference. And others of course, but it was the Argentina/Peru match in 1978 that left a sour taste.
 
Last edited:

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Yup. West Germany needed to win and Austria could afford to lose 0-1 for both teams to qualify. WG scored after 20 minutes or so and that was the end of the contest.
That was in the first group stage, and was the match that led to the final pair of group matches being played simultaneously.
The second group stage only included 3 teams per group, so simultaneous games weren't possible. This led to Argentina (1978) and England (1982) knowing exactly what they needed to do in the final game to progress on goal difference. And others of course, but it was the Argentina/Peru match in 1978 that left a sour taste.
I think I read or heard somewhere Peru's keeper was Argentinian by birth, which doesn't improve the flavour much either.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Going to be an insufferable pedant here but 78 and 82 didn't have the same format.

The second group stage in 78 still had 4 teams per group, just inexplicably they didn't think to have games kick off simultaneously in the final round of matches.

I don't know which clown though a 3 team group was a good idea in 82 though. Led to a change with 3rd place in 4 out of 6 groups going through in the subsequent three WCs, a format then adopted in the most recent Euros (and without checking, presumably the next Euros too)
 
Last edited:

Spark

Global Moderator
The 2014 AFL Grand Final (Sydney vs Hawthorn) was the pits, not least because the Hawthorn supporters spent the whole day booing Adam Goodes. ****s.

Cricket-wise, 47ao was pretty gnarly, but that wasn't the worst thing to happen to Aus cricket at Cape Town...
 
Last edited:

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Going to be an insufferable pedant here but 78 and 82 didn't have the same format.

The second group stage in 78 still had 4 teams per group, just inexplicably they didn't think to have games kick off simultaneously in the final round of matches.

I don't know which clown though a 3 team group was a good idea in 82 though. Led to a change with 3rd place in 4 out of 6 groups going through in the subsequent three WCs, a format then adopted in the most recent Euros (and without checking, presumably the next Euros too)
It's OK, especially when I'm holding forth like the fount of all knowledge on these matters. I think you and I may have had this discussion before, and for some reason I always forget about Poland in that group with Brazil, Argentina and Peru. Looking at Wiki, it appears that the last two matches (Brazil/Poland and and Argentina/Peru) were supposed to happen simultaneously, but Argentina insisted on their KO time being put back. I suppose being a military dictatorship has its advantages.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
1974 had the second group stage rather than quarters and semis too.
I'd completely forgotten that, despite being old enough to have watched most of the tournament. Apparently results in the second group stage resulted in the final matches effectively being semi-finals, which is how I'd remembered them.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Current format is clearly the best so obviously they are completely trashing it from 2026.
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
The 2014 AFL Grand Final (Sydney vs Hawthorn) was the pits, not least because the Hawthorn supporters spent the whole day booing Adam Goodes. ****s.

Cricket-wise, 47ao was pretty gnarly, but that wasn't the worst thing to happen to Aus cricket at Cape Town...
All of the 14-17 final defeats were dire for differing reasons.

Though I never thought we stood a chance in 2015 that defeat was dire. My parents bought tickets in the North Melbourne section too and their fans behaved like ****s.

2016 - umpiring and a grand final defeat. TBH I probably wouldn't have been mad if we'd lost fair and square, hell I could've dealt with it if we'd won 2014 (Dogs did deserve to win), but **** that was annoying. Especially because unlike 2012 or 14 I was there.....

2017 I went down to Melbourne believing we had a serious shot, saw a ten goal defeat. WTF. Plus side, my dad paid for the Park Hyatt which was nice.

Was lucky I wasn't following league properly by the time 2013 hit, because that was dire. Fortunately the next year made up for it. I was most interested in the sport pre-2010, which wasn't a good time to be a Souths fan.

Cricket wise it's hard to look past Cape Town, yeah. I think the twin 2016 series are also up there. Though I think we're all missing an obvious one - the Hughes incident. (in significant contrast to league I've been really spoiled as a cricket fan, hell even as an Aussie Rules fan there's been plenty of spoils as a Swans fan)

Think some bitterness still holds about 2006 WC too.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Fmd the 2006 WC - even reading morgie posting about it again just immediately makes me equal parts furious and dejected.

We had a genuinely good side that year and they performed well. Goes to extra time with italy a man down we’d have been good value to jag it. Would have been the biggest win for Australian football ever.
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
Going to be an insufferable pedant here but 78 and 82 didn't have the same format.

The second group stage in 78 still had 4 teams per group, just inexplicably they didn't think to have games kick off simultaneously in the final round of matches.

I don't know which clown though a 3 team group was a good idea in 82 though. Led to a change with 3rd place in 4 out of 6 groups going through in the subsequent three WCs, a format then adopted in the most recent Euros (and without checking, presumably the next Euros too)
The problem with 82 was they decided to increase the number of teams from 16 to 24 to guard against strong European countries (for example England/Italy in 78) knocking each other out in the qualifiers. Having done the increase they thought at the time that knocking out 16 teams after the first stage was too many, but 8 was not enough. So they decided to half the number of teams to 12 with the nonsensical four groups of 3.
 

Top