Jump to content

England vs Australia - KO 7.45


darren1983

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Why would you play Wilshere as the holding mid in a narrow diamond when you've got Drinkwater on the pitch?

I have no idea. Everyone keeps saying how good he is as he has a different skill set, but not as a holding midfielder!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbf I was only half paying attention but didn't notice him other than one good dribble where he won a free kick.

I'd definitely take him as we're short on wingers and we looked far better in a 4-3-3 than in the diamond.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As good as Rashford has been this season I thought he gave the ball away a lot tonight, maybe just a bad game in that regard though as I didn't notice it in the FA Cup final.

I think I would certainly take him over Sturridge, neither are going to start and the worst thing you want is an injury prone sub. He would be happier than Sturridge as a sub & you would feel he could have an impact and convert chances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No way Henderson doesn't go. Does too much unheralded work. Bit dodgy with the ball tonight mind

Just don't know what he adds to the squad, Milner is probably a bigger use to England and he can pass better.

Rashford gave the ball away a lot but, he was trying to make stuff happen deep in the oppositions half.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just don't know what he adds to the squad, Milner is probably a bigger use to England and he can pass better.

Rashford gave the ball away a lot but, he was trying to make stuff happen deep in the oppositions half.

Work rate and off the ball positioning etc is going to be key against better teams

Link to post
Share on other sites

well he does usually leave the ball in the net so..

I know he has to look at options.. but we go 2-0 up playing some great stuff... and he subs off Rashford and Sterling, and we lose momentum.

Would have liked to see that front 3 personally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Drinkwater showing his true standard here.

Constantly breaking up the opposition?

He didn't have a good game on the ball, but defensively he was the best player on the pitch.

Don't know the stats, but I'd be very surprised if he didn't comfortably have the most tackles on the pitch today.

Didn't really get Hodgson playing Wilshere in defensive mid. Him and Drinkwater surely should've swapped position?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't really get Hodgson playing Wilshere in defensive mid. Him and Drinkwater surely should've swapped position?

The idea is that Wilshere plays like a DLP starting the attacks leaving Drinkwater more freedom to push on and pressure the opposition further up the pitch.

Would be fine against teams that aren't playing someone in the hole behind the strikers, he would get space to make the passes but with Australia also playing a narrow diamond it meant he was under pressure every time he got possession.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Love how in this thread people still hate players based on past stuff and let it count in this game :D Sterling prime example. His movement and pace were a contributing factor to both goals, but let's brush that aside and start Townsend over him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad I wasn't the only one confused at the criticism Sterling got for basically assisting both goals, but hey Townsend sidestepped a man and won a freekick on the halfway line so that's gotta count for something right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad I wasn't the only one confused at the criticism Sterling got for basically assisting both goals, but hey Townsend sidestepped a man and won a freekick on the halfway line so that's gotta count for something right?

A bit like Stones, people just don't understand Sterling. Will never be fully appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Townsend looked a threat every time he got the ball ffs, about the only player prepared to get his head down and take a man on.

No idea why Hodgson would recall him to the squad after a great end to the season, and then only give him the last 15 minutes of the second friendly before he has to name his final squad.

No doubt he will miss out when the crunch comes, despite the likes of Sterling and Lallana looking terrible as per usual.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I thought Sterling had one of his better games, especially after they switched formation & played him wider.

In terms of the squad with Delph gone there are two more to drop out.

The GKs & defence is sorted leaving 13 places. I would say four strikers and with Vardy, Kane & Rooney already there barring injury its a straight choice between Rashford or Sturridge for me.

That leaves 9 places for the midfielders and the biggest decision is do you make the split 5 deeper/4 advanced or 4 deeper/5 advanced. The five deeper players are Dier, Drinkwater, Henderson, Wilshere & Milner while the 5 advanced are Sterling, Lallana, Townsend, Alli & Barkley.

If you drop an advanced player I think it would be between Lallana & Barkley for me, maybe Barkley as his position is more limited. If you drop a deeper player it really could be any of the four bar Dier, I would maybe drop Milner but its a tough choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He won't drop Milner, he loves him. Guarantee he'll drop Drinkwater, despite Drinkwater quietly winning the Premier League while Wilshere sat on the sidelines all season and looks like he might get injured every time he goes near an opponent. Then Roy will say that he doesn't pick on reputation.

Also think he will take Rashford and Sturridge unless Sturridge still has no chance of being properly fit in a fortnight's time which doesn't sound like its the case. I think Rashford was always playing for a place as an extra striker, not to come in and replace one of the others. He did OK last night I thought, but we've gone way over the top with the headlines. In the right place for a tap in, then a load of poor touches after that... yet they make him Man of the Match because it plays well with the media. Absurd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, well you've got nobody much in midfield that looks like they can score a goal on current form.

Alli the possible exception - assuming they don't leave him altogether out to accomodate Rooney in his potential new role.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From an Australian perspective Rogic and Mooy did reasonably well. Midfield is definitely our strength, we lack quality up front without Cahill* and although we did well to have the majority of possession we lacked the cutting edge to really threaten. Our striker Maclaren was on his international debut though so the occasion may have overawed him a bit.

Jedinak was typically solid, Smith did pretty well at left-back. I don't know if Liverpool will keep him around but he would do well at a lower-table Prem club. Right-back is a problem area for us and Risdon struggled against the pace and skill of Sterling. Our GK Ryan was a bit off, could've been positioned better for both goals and his distribution wasn't at his usual high standard. Maybe a bit of rust as he has mostly been on the bench for Valencia since they went out of Europe.

England are a solid team under Hodgson and I think the friendly was good for both sides. The papers here are claiming that England may be invited down to play us in another friendly in 2018, as a curtain-raiser for a new stadium that's being built in Perth.

We have two friendlies against Greece back in Australia early next month before the final WCQ stage gets underway in September. I'm encouraged by the style we're playing and hopefully we can build on this hit-out. :thup:

* - Cahill and a few other regular first-teamers play in China and weren't released since it wasn't a FIFA date, they'll play in the Greece friendlies though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea given most of the Australian side hadn't played in a month and we were missing quite a few players including our new striker (and the 2nd and 3rd choice strikers behind him), I'm pretty happy with the performance. Controlled most of the game even though we didn't create a lot against an England side who, despite missing a few starters, really should be performing better than that two weeks out from a major tournament.

Cahill isn't first choice any longer I'd say. Ange is actively trying to work him out of the side.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea given most of the Australian side hadn't played in a month and we were missing quite a few players including our new striker (and the 2nd and 3rd choice strikers behind him), I'm pretty happy with the performance. Controlled most of the game even though we didn't create a lot against an England side who, despite missing a few starters, really should be performing better than that two weeks out from a major tournament.

Cahill isn't first choice any longer I'd say. Ange is actively trying to work him out of the side.

I wouldn't say he's actively working him out, but he's definitely trying other options. One of the great things Ange has done while in charge is build depth in multiple positions, which will serve us well when players like Cahill leave the setup.

While Cahill's general play is not what it once was, none of our other strikers have as yet proven themselves as clinical as he is for Australia. It's good that the younger crop are getting game time though, as they'll improve with international experience.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why take five strikers when our two main formations are a 442 narrow diamond and a 433 where the two wide players are essentially wingers.

Because he will use the strikers out wide. I thought the same as you when I saw the 26, but having seen the friendlies, he wants to use strikers like Vardy and Rashford to make up the shortfall in decent wingers for a 4-3-3. So if he takes five, it's because he's confident two of them can play wide, with one being better than Townsend in his mind

Welbeck's absence is really hurting England. Or at least Hodgson. No other forward can play as well as him both through the middle and out wide.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The three I would drop would be Delph, Wilshere and Sturridge. Delph is just a no-show while the other two are just too much of a gamble due to their fitness. Wilshere is also far too off the pace and needs more game time before being thrown into a major tournament.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...