How the Mighty Have Fallen

France looked very good, after beating the hosts, Ukraine, in a very decisive manner on the second matchday. And, knowing that they looked better than the English, on the first matchday, too, most people would have probably bet on Blanc's team to win the group.

But Ibrahimovic and his Swedes begged to differ.

In the other match, England was assured of going through with a draw or better. Ukraine needed a win.

All France had to do to advance was not lose by more than one goal. So, they were assured of progressing even with a loss by just one goal, no matter what happened anywhere else!

Sweden, of course, could not finish higher than fourth!

But Sweden really did show up to play for pride, and I guess that's their best incentive.
The best chance of the first half belonged to the Swedes, and came after roughly ten minutes. Toivonen rounded Lloris, after escaping on goal, and sent the ball towards the empty net from an acute angle, but his shot hit the post.

In the other match, Ukraine was pressing England. In the first 15 minutes, or so, Ukraine had 7 goal-scoring opportunities, England had zero.

There were no goals before half-time, in either of the two matches.

And then, 3 minutes after kick-off in the second half, one large defensive error by the Ukrainians, especially goalkeeper Pyatov, allowed the ball to bounce perfectly towards the far post where an unmarked Rooney had only to nudge the ball into the empty net, in characteristic Manchester-United fashion. (Let's admit it, we see quite a few Man.-U. goals like that.)

England was winning the group. And the Ukraine players were seeing their dream slip away.

Roughly ten minutes into the second half, Sweden scored, too. Ibrahimovic was the goalscorer, naturally. And this one was, and probably will be, the goal of the tournament. The Milan striker put the ball past Lloris with a wonderful volley, side-scissor-kick-like, from the edge of the French penalty area.
It wasn't as spectacular as some of the goals Marco van Basten used to score, but it certainly reminded older viewers of those amazing efforts by the Dutch forward.

France was still guaranteed a place in the quarter-finals at this score, though.

Going back to the match in Donetsk, Ukraine should have had their equalizer right after the hour-mark. Ukraine substitute Devic managed to kick the ball strongly enough to make it still go in even after Joe Hart's intervention, but Terry ran after it and saved right on the line.
Or did he?
Replays would show that the ball was actually inside the goal by a (small but reasonable) distance.
The goal was not awarded to Ukraine, though, for reasons unknown. (Maybe it was to compensate England for the refereeing error that helped eliminate them from World Cup 2010, because otherwise it's ridiculous that the entire stadium sees the goal but the referees and it's the referees' dumb decision that stands.)
What we do know is that these organizations, FIFA and UEFA, continue to defend their inability to guarantee 100%-correct refereeing, and continue to protect these inept referees too much.
I, for one, believe the referees who make a bad decision that influence a match that much should be punished by not being able to be a referee again (and make money from such a job) for a very long period of time, such as five years. And that should be for the first offense, mind you. Doing it a second time should be automatic lifetime ban from ever being an official referee again. That would teach them for playing God (or devil) with decisions that could hurt millions of people when they go wrong.

Anyway, though, despite the late introduction of injured Shevchenko, and despite playing better than England, Ukraine could not even get one point in Donetsk.
What a bad stadium and a bad city for Ukraine! Maybe they should have continued to play in the Ukrainian-speaking part of their country.
England, on the other hand, said "thank you very much" and won the group.

Yes, they won the group, because France lost.
But Sweden ended up winning 2-0, not just 1-0.
They had many chances of making it 2-0, but only in minute 90' + 1' did they finally succeed. Larsson was the one who thundered the ball into the French net after Holmen made the French defensive line dizzy with an effort that rebounded off the bar to Larsson.
Thus, the French were humbled.

In these conditions, it's interesting to note that, even if Ukraine had managed to turn around the result to 2-1, from 0-1, in injury time, considering the French loss by two goals, England would have still stayed in the competition. If the scores were 2-1 for Ukraine and 2-0 for Sweden, France would have gone home.

But, with the English win, despite the hard defeat, France still advances. They will have to play Spain now, though.

And England is going to play Italy, on Sunday, in Kyiv.
If they had finished second, hmm, the English would have stayed in Donetsk, for their quarter-final match, too. (But yeah, their team base-camp is in Krakow, so I guess it wouldn't have really helped them that much. And, speaking of team base-camps, another interesting fact is that the French will now play their quarter-final match in Donetsk, and their base-camp just happens to be in... Donetsk! Yes, where they won against Ukraine, their best match of the tournament. Hmm, again, one might say. Could that be a good sign for them?)

Highlights from England - Ukraine 1-0:

England Ukraine by anastasio7

Highlights from Sweden - France 2-0:

Sweden France by anastasio7

Oh, and, by the way, by "the Mighty" (that "Have Fallen"), I do mean the French, of course.
The English themselves admitted to having low expectations.

Group D - Possible Scenarios

Here's what could happen on the final matchday of Group D:

1) England wins & Sweden wins:
England 7p, France 4p, Ukraine 3p, Sweden 3p
(Ukraine would finish third because of the win against Sweden.)

2) England wins & draw in the other match:
England 7p, France 5p, Ukraine 3p, Sweden 1p

3) England wins & France wins
3-1. France wins by a larger margin than England or wins by the same margin as England or wins by a margin of one goal less than England's margin but scores at least two more goals than England in doing so:
France 7p, England 7p, Ukraine 3p, Sweden 0p
(France would win the group thanks to better goal difference and/or more goals scored.)
3-2. England wins by a margin larger by two goals or more than France's margin or wins by a margin larger by one goal than France's margin but France does not score more than the number of goals England scores plus one:
England 7p, France 7p, Ukraine 3p, Sweden 0p
(England would win the group thanks to better goal difference and/or more goals scored and/or higher UEFA national team coefficient.)

4) draw in the first match & Sweden wins:
England 5p, France 4p, Ukraine 4p, Sweden 3p
(France would advance because of the win against Ukraine.)

5) draws in both matches:
France 5p, England 5p, Ukraine 4p, Sweden 1p
(France would win the group thanks to better goal difference.)

6) draw in the first match & France wins:
France 7p, England 5p, Ukraine 4p, Sweden 0p

7) Ukraine wins & Sweden wins
7-1. France loses by a smaller margin than England or loses by the same margin as England or loses by a margin larger by one goal than England's margin but scores at least two more goals than England in doing so:
Ukraine 6p, France 4p, England 4p, Sweden 3p
(France would advance because of better goal difference and/or more goals scored.)
7-2. England loses by a margin smaller by two goals or more than France's margin or loses by a margin smaller by one goal than France's margin but France does not score more than the number of goals England scores plus one:
Ukraine 6p, England 4p, France 4p, Sweden 3p
(England would advance because of better goal difference and/or more goals scored and/or higher UEFA national team coefficient.)

8) Ukraine wins & draw in the other match:
Ukraine 6p, France 5p, England 4p, Sweden 1p

9) Ukraine wins & France wins:
France 7p, Ukraine 6p, England 4p, Sweden 0p

Second Elimination

Sweden is out, too.

But are they even worse than the Irish?

Yes and no.
On the one hand, Sweden cannot even finish in third place anymore. The only team they could still reach, in terms of points gained, has the direct-result tie-breaker over the Swedes. This must really stick in their craw.
(At least, Ireland could theoretically beat Italy and still finish third in their group.)
But, on the other hand, Sweden left the competition much more honourably, playing two great matches, in both of which they led at some point but were unfortunate enough to lose all points in the end.

After England led, at half-time, through Carroll's cool header strike (in minute 24), Sweden did wonderfully to gain the lead. Four minutes after the re-start, Mellberg sort of forced Glen Johnson to put the ball into his own net, and it was again he, ten minutes later, who made it 2-1 for Sweden.

At this point, Roy Hodgson was very inspired to introduce Theo Walcott. The youngster scored just minutes after coming on (64), and helped set up Wellbeck's cheeky winner (78).

The Swedes had 12 minutes plus extra injury time to conjure up an equalizer but fell short. Not even Ibrahimovic could inspire them on this day.

England's looking good, knowing they will have a quarter-final spot assured with a draw in their last match, while Ukraine now must beat the British team to advance (which will not be an easy task, as the Swedish players have already seen).

Highlights:

Швеция 2-3 Англия footyroom.com by Futbol2101

Shevchenko Vs. Ibrahimovic

A lot of people were under the impression that Ukraine was the weakest team in Group D.
I personally thought this was the 'group of death', rather than Group B, because I was under the impression that Denmark could not come close to troubling Germany, Portugal and Netherlands.
But, although Denmark's group might just be, indeed, the group of death, it also seems like the teams in this group are more evenly matched than renowned experts initially thought.

Ukraine still has to play the big guns, of course, but they will go into the match against France on Friday with full confidence.

The hosts were better organized for most of this game, and it would have been unfair if they had lost.

And yet, Serie A top goalscorer Zlatan Ibrahimovic took advantage of an Ukrainian team struggling to re-group after one of their players went down injured, to net the ball home from only 6-7 meters, after a very smart pass. It was minute 52, and at that moment Sweden seemed poised to get the better of the tournament co-hosts.

But then it was Sheva's turn to shine.
The 35-year-old Ukrainian equalized with a header, only 3 minutes later, after a quick move which got rid of his marker in the Swedish penalty area.
Then, in minute 62, a corner from the other side was not met by any Swedish defender at the short post, and Shevchenko again directed it in; no chance for Isaksson.

Surprisingly perhaps, the Dynamo Kyiv striker, who is bound to retire from international football after this tournament, won his duel against the Swedish giant, in a game where nobody else seemed able to score, on either side.

Much to the Swedish fans' dismay, Elmander missed a sitter with only minutes left, alone with Pyatov, and Sweden could not get even a point from this encounter.
They play England next, knowing a loss in that game would eliminate them for sure.

Highlights:

Ukraine v Sweden by shmooot