Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Djstu23

England - Euro 2016 Thread

Recommended Posts

I'll place them in a diamond for arguments sake but I don't suppose it really matters, like I said earlier the attacking players are really adaptable. We have looked decent in quite a few systems under roy, the diamond, 433, 4231 I think the same 11 would fit in all of them.

Hart

Shaw

Cahill

Smalling

Clyne

Henderson

Wilshere

Delph

Sterling

Welbeck

Kane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ah the old international level comment, like international level is somehow superior to domestic standards

You're watching a different game to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My XI would be:

Hart

Clyne

Smailling

Stones

Shaw - I think that he'll definitely be fit. There's talk of him being back in January.

Carrick - Will play as the holding midfielder (he's crap when he's part of a 2 in a 4-2-3-1)

Henderson

Wilshere

Sterling - Will play at the tip of the diamond.

Rooney

Sturridge - If he's fit

The front three can all interchange and drift out wide with gives us good flexibility up front. If Rooney continues to play like cr*p for the first couple of games then he can be dropped.

We'll easily get out of the group stages, anyone saying otherwise needs their head looking at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ah the old international level comment, like international level is somehow superior to domestic standards

It is .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ah the old international level comment, like international level is somehow superior to domestic standards

Exactly, it depends who the opposition is really, can't just say a player isn't international level when at international level you can face the likes of San Marino, Faroe Islands, Scotland etc

Estonia have 10 points despite only 4 goals. Pretty impressive.

Though a 0-0 with San Marino isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone in the entire qualifying section with less goals in their matches combined than Estonia tbh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to laugh at Hoddle last night. Gibbs had the ball and he said something like "it was a good run forward by the young Arsenal boy". Young?! Gibbs is 26!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd go with:

Hart

Clyne

Cahill

Smalling (if he keeps his form up)

Shaw (presuming he's fit)

Delph

Milner

Sturridge

Barkley

Sterling

Kane

Rest of the 23:

Butland and another GK

Jones, Jagielka, Stones, Bertrand

Henderson, Wilshere, Lallana, Oxlade-Chamberlain

Rooney, Walcott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quite surprised at how many people opting for Delph to start.

Quick, loads of energy, decent on the ball, good at kicking people. Exactly what we need in the middle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Milner isn't even the best English running CM at Liverpool. I like him a lot but not as a CM unless surrounded with sufficient technique.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quick, loads of energy, decent on the ball, good at kicking people. Exactly what we need in the middle.

yet he isn't fit to wipe Wilshere's bum.

Why play a poor man's Wilshere, when you can play Wilshere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Milner isn't even the best English running CM at Liverpool. I like him a lot but not as a CM unless surrounded with sufficient technique.

Been better than Henderson there for England though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Been better than Henderson there for England though.

I think that is pretty marginal. Ideally don't play either they aren't that good anyway.

Just make Carrick DM and stick Wilshere next to him and then one other CM and we are pretty much there. Those two are our best midfield players, sadly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hart; Clyne, Smalling, Stones, Shaw; Henderson, Carrick, Barkley; Sterling, Rooney, Welbeck

I'd do that. Rooney is going to play, so those leaving him out - what's the point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd do that. Rooney is going to play, so those leaving him out - what's the point?

When someone asks you what your dream car is, do you only consider those you can afford?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hart; Clyne, Smalling, Stones, Shaw; Henderson, Carrick, Barkley; Sterling, Rooney, Welbeck

I'd do that. Rooney is going to play, so those leaving him out - what's the point?

Why? Because the question was "what's everyone's preferable starting line up for the first game in France?" Not can everyone predict their lineup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when you're thinking about the 23 for the Euros, who would you all take?

The more I think about it, the tougher the question gets, as theres a few tough decisions that will need to be made around the time of the announcement. Injuries may be a factor with a few which will make it easier, but I have around 45 names from recent squads and one or two youngsters who may all be under consideration:

Keepers: Hart, Butland, Heaton, Forster, Foster

Defenders: Clyne, Jones, Smalling, Stones, Jagielka, Cahill, Shaw, Baines, Gibbs, Bertrand, Walker, Chambers, Gomez, Dier, Galloway

Midfielders: Carrick, Henderson, Milner, Barkley, Delph, Wilshere, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Walcott, Sterling, Lallana, Alli, Townsend, Shelvey, Mason, Chalobah, Ward-Prowse, Ibe, Redmond

Strikers: Rooney, Sturridge, Kane, Welbeck, Ings, Vardy, Berahino

From that list, or doing your own, what do you think Roy will go with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quite surprised at how many people opting for Delph to start.

I'm more surprised by the amount of people leaving Welbeck out. Welbeck starts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fwiw, here's mine, not what I want, but what I think it'll be:

Hart, Butland, Forster

Clyne, Jones, Smalling, Stones, Jagielka, Cahill, Shaw, Gibbs

Henderson, Milner, Barkley, Wilshere, Sterling, Walcott, Lallana, Ox

Rooney, Sturridge, Kane, Welbeck

I reckon he'll use age as an excuse to leave out Carrick and a lack of game time for Delph, with Baines not doing enough to get back in when he returns from injury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm more surprised by the amount of people leaving Welbeck out. Welbeck starts

Nobody will see Welbeck ever again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My preferred starting XI is: Hart; Clyne, Stones, Smalling, Shaw (if not any of the other LBs); Carrick; Henderson, Wilshere; Welbeck, Sturridge, Sterling. I think that is a pretty balanced team if not Welbeck then Chamberlain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hart: Clyne, Stones, Smalling, Bertrand: Shelvey, Wilshere, Barkley: Sterling, Rooney, Sturridge. 4-3-3

Basing it on Shaw being out. Carricks legs have seemed to fall off a cliff edge, so even though he's only one that can play that role can't see him lasting a tournament. Shelvey more then good enough to just sit infront of the back four and distribute the passes to more advanced players. Prefer Wilshere over Henderson as he's more capable of winning a game then Henderson. Barkley in because he's unpredictable and can be our Rooney of 2004. Stones over Cahill/Jags because he's the future and the former two just don't give me confidence against better nations. Front 3 because they're the best we have and all capable game winners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The key is having someone who can adequately protect the back four, which means either Carrick or Shelvey has to start. We have no one else capable of doing that role that we can't trust to not leave the defence exposed - the likes of Delph, Milner, Henderson, Wilshere are all running midfielders, there's no point trying to make them be anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Smallen - Sturridge isn't a bad shout for the RW at all.

Hart

Clyne

Stones

Smalling

Shaw/Bertrand

Carrick

Henderson

Wilshere

Barkley

Rooney

Welbeck

OR

Hart

Clyne

Smalling

Stones

Bertrand

Carrick

Henderson

Barkley

Rooney

Walcott

Welbeck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking for people to agree/disagree on this;

Someone on another forum was saying something along these lines that; England have qualified with ease, but as usual they're 'crap' and don't 'set the world alight'. Like an accident waiting to happen. It's down to the manager, they mused, until conceding that with Sven and Capello around they didn't exactly do much better than Hodgson, particularly with the high profile competitive opponents.

I argued that his attitude was typical of the English media / English "sentiment" if there ever was such a thing. People rave for a new manager, so we get one, he does well at the start, maybe plays attractive football, and everyone gushes on a wave of optimism. Then, even though we do well, beating teams that we have to deal with either in a mundane or spectacular fashion, the critics begin their 'we're crap' campaign. Eventually, we will do alright or even very good in a tournament and get eliminated by a decent or world class team - We could have a 90% win record, but this will not be good enough, because the 'performance' or the 'style' is crap.

Everyone will rage, as if San Marino had kicked us out 5-0, and we'll sack the manager/force him to leave and demand a new one, who we will apparently judge by his results... And the cycle repeats.

I thought two solid examples of this, was in his argument; Sven (80% competitive win record, only lost in tournaments to Brazil and Portugal (twice on penalties!)), and Capello (79% win record, only lost to Ukraine (away) and Germany). I understand Capello lost the plot really, and Sven got far too comfortable in the end, but really... Both managers were running with an 80% win record and still the perception was they were 'crap' or 'not good enough' and needed to be shifted on or moved on. For records sake (my google-fu is tired) Del Bosque had an 85% win rate, and he lost to some surprising teams (Switzerland come to mind) - and I just wonder, would England's fans/media be demanding Del Bosque, assuming he won us two world cups and a Euro, be saying we were crap and he needs to leave after that? >_>

I know in the last few years there's been a dissonance between the media (who demand we win everything) and the fans (who are more sensible), I do hope that topics like the one I'm alluding to isn't a sign of the armchair fan falling into the trap of setting ridiculous expectations. Maybe the Scottish managers were right when they said the England job is a poisoned chalice... Personally I'd take an 80% win record anyday. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can't win either way

We qualify with ease and it doesn't matter. I was listening to someone on the Times podcast go on about how we should have experimented away to Slovenia or home to the Swiss seeing as we knew we were going through .. yes, let's play weakened teams in those games, imagine the reaction. It wouldn't be 'well, it was worth experimenting'. Just feel they need to say something negative or patronising. Pundits and media and trickles down to fans like to regurgitate this stuff to make themselves sound intelligent

When the draw was made we generally thought we'd make it reasonably easily as it was top 2 automatic getting in. Swiss were ranked higher than us and I am sure the usual voices were talking of 'difficult' Swiss. If we can find the thread from the draw I bet majority were saying Swiss would finish above us too, it's what we do. Whoever we face suddenly become amazing

Reality was Swiss were decent, if we took 4 points off them and Slovenia we'd likely be winning the group. We killed the group with an impressive 2-0 away win in Switzerland in the opening game. Instead of getting through easily with a couple of well timed performances the group has become the easiest group in the history of groups!

We win every game and there's no test. Last group we didn't lose (IIRC) but had some draws and qualified over Poland near the end. That wasn't a 'test' that was us being poor, you see. Our late qualification means how can we do anything at the tournament! Our easy qualification this time round means how can we do anything at the tournament, there were no tests

High profile friendlies: if we lose them it's the worst thing ever. If we beat Italy or the Dutch then they're meaningless. Whatever the situation the narrative must be England in panic!!!

We all know the reality. Our team isn't as strong as it used to be. Our depth beyond the starting XI or so isn't what it used to be. We need our big players fit and in form (yeah, be nice) and try to get out the group and see what happens

No one is expecting or assuming anything but it won't stop other country fans and moaning England fans coming out with the same rubbish. Taloids will beat their drum quieter than usual but they still need to sell papers

All I ever hope for is that we play well and the players play to their abilities at the tournament itself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The key is having someone who can adequately protect the back four, which means either Carrick or Shelvey has to start. We have no one else capable of doing that role that we can't trust to not leave the defence exposed - the likes of Delph, Milner, Henderson, Wilshere are all running midfielders, there's no point trying to make them be anything else.

Shelvey protecting the back four :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shelvey protecting the back four :confused:

:D bewildered

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looking for people to agree/disagree on this;

Someone on another forum was saying something along these lines that; England have qualified with ease, but as usual they're 'crap' and don't 'set the world alight'. Like an accident waiting to happen. It's down to the manager, they mused, until conceding that with Sven and Capello around they didn't exactly do much better than Hodgson, particularly with the high profile competitive opponents.

I argued that his attitude was typical of the English media / English "sentiment" if there ever was such a thing. People rave for a new manager, so we get one, he does well at the start, maybe plays attractive football, and everyone gushes on a wave of optimism. Then, even though we do well, beating teams that we have to deal with either in a mundane or spectacular fashion, the critics begin their 'we're crap' campaign. Eventually, we will do alright or even very good in a tournament and get eliminated by a decent or world class team - We could have a 90% win record, but this will not be good enough, because the 'performance' or the 'style' is crap.

...

I think this is just the nature of discourse today. Everyone has a platform so you have to deal with anyone using it. This is reinforced by the media etc in whose interest it is to whip up mania about either England or the players themselves, whereas in neither case do either deserve it, and haven't since 1996 really.

Media bollocks -> Internet bollocks -> media spot people spouting bollocks, produce more bollocks -> further Internet bollocks and so on.

There's a lot of bollocks written and you have to put up with it, you aren't going to argue everyone around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it's simple. If Rooney gets injured and misses the tournament, I'll be optimistic we might do quite well. However, if Rooney is fit it means he'll play. If Rooney plays it means we'll be playing a system which doesn't suit most of the team. If we do that, we'll be as poor as ever. I'll probably end up rooting for Iceland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For me it's simple. If Rooney gets injured and misses the tournament, I'll be optimistic we might do quite well. However, if Rooney is fit it means he'll play. If Rooney plays it means we'll be playing a system which doesn't suit most of the team. If we do that, we'll be as poor as ever. I'll probably end up rooting for Iceland.

We played the same system as we would have with Rooney tbh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We played the same system as we would have with Rooney tbh.

But without someone playing in it in the "Rooney role" - ie, free roaming defender.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:D bewildered

You laugh but who else would you suggest?

I fully agree it's not ideal, but we literally have no one else outside of Carrick and he hasn't begun the season in brilliant form. We need someone who can dictate a game whilst being positionally and defensively sound.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You laugh but who else would you suggest?

I fully agree it's not ideal, but we literally have no one else outside of Carrick and he hasn't begun the season in brilliant form. We need someone who can dictate a game whilst being positionally and defensively sound.

Yea cool, but youre not in any way shape or form describing Shelvey. He's a luxury attacking midfielder at best, can't defend and is actually slower than Carrick. He's a fantastic passer and has brilliant technique, but he takes an age to make a decision and any half decent team would run rings around him.

There's not many good English DM's out there, you're right at about that though.

Its got to be Carrick, failing that Wilshere, Hendo, Milner, hell I'll even have Phil Jones protecting the back 4 before even considering Shelvey to play there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea cool, but youre not in any way shape or form describing Shelvey. He's a luxury attacking midfielder at best, can't defend and is actually slower than Carrick. He's a fantastic passer and has brilliant technique, but he takes an age to make a decision and any half decent team would run rings around him.

There's not many good English DM's out there, you're right at about that though.

Its got to be Carrick, failing that Wilshere, Hendo, Milner, hell I'll even have Phil Jones protecting the back 4 before even considering Shelvey to play there.

You'd have Henderson and Milner above Shelvey to sit in front of the back four? Are you mad?

Wilshere I can understand and I'd have him above Shelvey just because he's played well there for England already but I'm not having Henderson and Milner ffs. Next you'll be saying Delph...

(I have purposely not commented on Phil Jones because I assume you were trying to be funny).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...