Jump to content

martinji

Members+
  • Content Count

    2,798
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by martinji

  1. 1 minute ago, MIR17 said:

    Of course it's a foul and it's obviously a 100% a penalty by the rules.

    But common sense just says that a penalty seems way too a disproportionate punishment for that kind of thing, But I don't think you can ever really change the rules for it being something else.

    This.  Not sure about Europe, but in English games I'd say from when I started watching football up to sometime around 2010 it was an unwritten rule that you didn't get penalties for a goalie taking out a striker after they got their shot away, or a defender doing the same to a crosser etc.   Similarly small fouls that would be given outside the box were not given inside the box.   

    Now you can take the approach that rules are rules and defenders should simply not foul and have no sympathy if they do.  Personally I prefer the old way.  But as long as the rules are clear and implementation of them are clear then you can't really complain if a penalty is given against you.

  2. 1 hour ago, Confused Clarity said:

    Football is a game of combinations. Spurs see the best of Kane when he and Son play together.

    England either need to switch things up to find a combination that gets the best out of Kane or a combination that doesn't include Kane. Right now it's clear they're not getting what they need from him.

    I agree.  At the moment Kane is dropping deep but we aren't making the runs around him to make that work.  In particular players are not breaking from midfield into the box and so we frequently get the ball at the side of the penalty area in what would be a semi-dangerous position but there is nobody in the box to play it in to because Kane is halfway towards the centre circle.  Kane needs to either revert to being a traditional number 9/drop off less, or Southgate needs to get the team playing around him in a way that works.

    Edit - or as you say, play a different CF 

  3. 2 minutes ago, CMOZZA said:

    Against the Czech's.

     

    I think Tripper has to start at RB. Solid defensively and he offers something going forward as well as set piece options.

    Wouldn't mind seeing Henderson and Bellingham in the middle. Rest Foden and Mount and play Sancho, Grealish & Saka behind DCL. I know Foden and Mount have been two of our better players but no harm in switching it up because what we've been doing hasn't been working other than for 10 or 15 minutes against Croatia.

    this is exactly what I'd do, also bringing in Chilwell on the left and Maguire for Mings.  

  4. This thing with Kane dropping deep is all well and good but all too often we are left with someone getting to the edge of the box and there being literally nobody to cross it into, or maybe one midfielder has just about got there but there are like 4-5 defenders and they are impossible to pick out, so we end up just playing it back and the defence is organised again.

    If you're going to have a centre forward who drops deep you need a much better system for getting other players into the box, or you need Kane to be much faster at getting back up to the top of the field again once he's passed it out wide, which he doesn't seem capable of at the moment.

  5. 8 minutes ago, Haguey said:

    She obviously knows what she's talking about, she's a manager, but not sure I'd have admitted to doing no prep - "can only go on what I'm seeing today"

    Loads of pundits say this sort of thing. Micah Richards for eg is always "joking" that he hasn't read his stat pack. It seems actually knowing something about the team or players you're commenting on is not required

  6. 5 hours ago, Mr Adam said:

    ITV lose by default the minute Pougatch starts talking.

    Not sure why he has to be in a state of alert constantly.

    Lineker's relaxed style wins every day.

    I absolutely cannot stand Pougatch.  Probably my least favourite sports anchor of all time.  

  7. Sterling also assisted the early Foden chance where he hit the post, with a run/turn into space from a throw and then a decent ball through.  I know he can be frustrating at times but I'd look at this as even when not playing at his best he still scored a goal and nearly got an assist.  I do agree saying he was terrific today is OTT but I thought he was overall pretty good and he is a starter for me in most games, while accepting others may be better choices in some matches depending on opposition and tactics. 

  8. I don't mind Sterling being picked.  Even when he's not on form just his pace and movement stretches teams and creates space.  Hopefully he can tire out their defence ready for Grealish to come on.  My fear with Southgate's cautious-ness is that if the game is 0-0 or 1-1 with 20 to go and crying out for Grealish, he'll just shut up shop and settle for a draw that Croatia will also be very happy with.  Hope I'm wrong.

  9. That Peter Crouch podcast doing two a week during the euros,  first one up, on squad numbers.  Crouch talks about how he was given the number 9 shirt for 2010 so thought he was a nailed on starter, then played about 1 minute in the whole tournament (although I just checked and he actually got 17 mins plus 2 x injury times).  Referred to it as numbers-housery :D

  10. On 02/06/2021 at 17:51, Rob1981 said:

    I've droned on about this many times, but worth saying again how ridiculously imbalanced it is once you get through the group stage.

    In the Round of 16, four group winners play a 3rd place team but two group winners have to play a group runner-up.  Which also means two group runners-up have to play a group winner while the other four runners-up only have to play against each other.

    When you hit the quarter finals it gets even worse.  In theory some of the group winners then start hitting each other, but two of them get an easier draw because they play the winner from a R16 tie that only had runners-up in it:

    • Group F winner plays a 3rd place team and then plays the winner out of Group D Runner-Up and Group E Runner-Up
    • Group C winner plays a 3rd place team and then plays the winner out of Group A Runner-Up and Group B Runner-Up

    So these two can get all the way to the semis without having to play another group winner while the other four group winners hit each other a round earlier. 

    Potentially throws up ridiculous differences between rest days as well.  e.g. Group A is the first to finish, but depending on the 3rd place stuff the 3rd placed team in Group A could get paired with the Group F winner who don't finish their group until three days later.  So by the time they play in the R16 the Group A team has had eight days off and the Group F team has only had five.

    That's before you get into all the nonsense about the multiple cities as well where some sides will be travelling loads and others will be staying in western Europe for the duration.

    yeah it's a bit weird how the teams that get the easier ride in the quarters are also teams that got an easier ride in the last 16.  If you have 6 groups you are bound to have some degree of difference in difficulty of paths to the semis but surely it could have been constructed so that the teams that face group runners up in the quarters had to face runners up rather than third placed teams in the last 16.

×
×
  • Create New...