Jump to content

Pukey

Members+
  • Posts

    33,831
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Posts posted by Pukey

  1. 28 minutes ago, Yuko said:

    Shaw, Grealish and Pickford were the only guys who showed up. It was a pretty bad game that a goal would have decided, but the result is what counts. 

    Ukraine game will be tricky, but it could also end up being a field trip. I wonder what the attendance figures will be like since it's in Rome and both teams are non-EU now, covid quarantines etc. Think Italy has a 5 day quarantine regime for non-EU arrivals or something. 

    Think this is very harsh. Defensively the players showed up (outside a mess for the Muller chance) and Sterling, again, caused issues. Frustrating at times again of course, but overall he played well. There's no one I felt had a poor game. Saka faded in second half but was good in the first. Kane not amazing, but much improved and his goal is tougher than he made it look.

  2. 6 minutes ago, Barry Cartman said:

    nah Stones has to go and wipe Havertz out and risk the Red, its the 80th minute of the game, he might even had made a clean tackle but its his indecision that kills him 

    and Walker probably gets back to make the tackle if he doesn't have to shove Stones out of the way :D incredible speed 

    Phillips assumes Stones is going for it as well, so he slows up. Which he shouldn't do of course, but Stones indecision did give us an issue. But hey ho, it happens and we got away with it so don't need to dwell on it too much.

    2 minutes ago, Smallen said:

    Cracking commentary from Mowbray there as well.

    He's a good commentator, shame he's usually paired with god awful pundits.

  3. 15 minutes ago, The Amazing Dale Watkins said:

    This. England fans have such outlandish expectations. Remember when you guys played attractive football but always went out in the knockout stages? I'm watching this current England team and am reminded of Germany teams of the past. You don't have to win tournaments in style. This current level of efficiency and stability is how you win things.

    Not really :D Don't remember long periods of us being a particular attractive side to watch. 

  4. 1 minute ago, Smallen said:

    He’s even better! @Pukeythought he was just a DM ;)

    :D

    Definitely have to give Southgate credit for the way he's using him. I'll always bang on about his transformation under Bielsa, but Southgate has clearly seen his attributes are useful in a different role. Him and Rice as a partnership leaves us looking less threatening offensively but they have shown how good they can be as disrupting other teams. Just need to get the balance right.

  5. 8 minutes ago, InigoPatinkin said:

    Being negative and risk-averse in tournament football is totally fine fwiw. Man Utd scored 7 goals in 7 games in the knockout rounds of the 07-08 Champions League and I've never seen a single person complain about that. 

    England haven't conceded a goal the entire tournament and the only time they looked like conceding today was Sterling falling asleep. It's not thrilling to watch but we've not won anything since 1966, I'll take a pretty comfortable win over a (poor) German side at this stage. 

    Agreed, though I don't see it as "negative" as such. It's certainly risk averse, but it's with a clear plan to try and win the game too. It's not quite sticking 11 men behind the ball and hoping for the best type of negative.

  6. Just now, aggressive minor said:

    Yeah, I’m glad England won, but I can still feel Southgate was I really negative despite the result.

    they’re not mutually exclusive 

    I think "really negative" is harsh. We didn't pack 11 men behind the ball and hope for the best. Cautious, absolutely (you could argue perhaps too cautious) but this absolutely wasn't an overly negative set up. We set up to stop their threats sure, but there was absolutely an idea there to exploit their weaknesses too.

×
×
  • Create New...