if there is no own goal by the captain of Denmark then they will definitely advance to the final but England luck is really big in that match
I can't imagine how he blamed himself for his unintentional carelessness
Have you seen the own goal, though? It's not like he belted it in from the edge of the area, or it took a huge deflection that wrong-footed the keeper. It's extremely harsh to call it carelessness. Basically the ball was coming to Sterling, a couple of yards out in front of an empty net. The defender could either hit it in himself, or let Sterling do it. It would have been a miracle if he'd managed to stop the ball going in.
But in this instance, what would have happened if the referee hadn't given the penalty?
I don't know. Isn't that the famous butterfly effect?
Well, the answer is given in the post below yours:
It would have been starting to rain with Englishmen in the Danish area
But luck is with the English. They got the own goal and got the rebound. Can Italy survive this luck?
Kane's penalty was weak, and he was certainly lucky that the rebound came to him. Similarly they were lucky to be awarded the penalty. But...
England were unlucky:
1. not to get a penalty earlier,
2. to concede the foul for Denmark's free-kick goal,
3. when Sterling's shot from point-blank range hit Schmeichel's body,
4. the numerous times the ball pinged about in the Denmark area and didn't fall to an English player.
Both teams had chances, but who, really, on the balance of play, had the better chances and was the better team? England deserved to go through.
As for the final though, Italy are better than England and have to be favourites.