Jump to content

England V Tunisia 1900 BST BBC1


decapitated

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 863
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Well done England, not amazing or good but not poor, just average/decent all round, especially for a first game in a  tournament with a ridiculously young squad who have little tournament/international experience and who know any simple mistake gets a huge amount of pressure lumped on them and can even finish some for good...some in this thread have been a complete tabloid embarrassment tonight...you know who you are...on to the next game and qualification from the group hopefully.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think it has to be reiterated how absolutely woeful Southgate is. No real effort to make a difference during the game with subs until so late, even kept a player on for 35ish minutes who clearly had a knock before HT and did nothing in the 2nd half.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ref was a bit of a special one.

We made it hard for ourselves but probably deserved it on balance. Not sure when VAR comes into play, but some of the wrestling moves from Tunisia at corners really warranted some attention.

Not convinced by Maguire defensively, Sterling didn't do anything of note, but three points is what matters. Great to see Kane net a couple and get the confidence up.

Oh - and I for one LOVED Southgate going mental at 2-1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

 

He clearly got a call, pulls back at the last second

Don't care, he should be smacking that. Not like he didn't have a clear sight at goal.  Just hit it! 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Such a bad second half just slow and pedestrian like but considering we were good in the 1st half and went in level I'll take that, this is a raw team that's developing and a win is all that matters, Tunisia were really poor both halves but defended better second half as that sat deep, wasted time and got the majority of ref decisions too, get in England, fully deserved in fairness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fully the better team, missed numerous chances and England finally paid the price with Tusinia getting the equalizer.

Two penalty's should've been given but England didn't help themselves, thank god for Kane.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Marc Albrighton said:

Loftus Cheek was the sub that won us the game.

Had nothing to do whatsoever with the goal but ok :D

If anyone did either Harry Kane won us the game as he scored the goal(s) or Stones getting both headers from corners however it's a team effort ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Dave Vessey said:

Why do we still have three centre backs?  Terrible management.

I'm no tactics expert but I wondered - from the first minute - why we needed three CBs against Khazri. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

And breathe. I'll give me thoughts a lot later. 

That was a ****ing rollercoaster of emotions.

 

Optimism - confidence - injustice - disappointment - frustration - pessimistism - acceptance - wtf (Rashford dummy) - elation - reflection. 

 

I'm emotionally pooped 😂

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, warlock said:

I'm no tactics expert but I wondered - from the first minute - why we needed three CBs against Khazri. 

Because two of them are John Stones and Kyle Walker, and the other one is Harry Maguire.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Marc Albrighton said:
3 minutes ago, warlock said:

I'm no tactics expert but I wondered - from the first minute - why we needed three CBs against Khazri. 

Hes been pushing this identity since he arrived pretty much hasn't he? He wasn't going to change it in the first game.

Yeah, I get that. But a good manager will play the game - and the team - in front of you, not the textbook.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely nothing wrong with playing 3 at the back, even against a defensive opponent.

Only issue I'd have is that with a pretty capable trio of ball playing defenders, they each should have been a bit more aggressive in attacking movements when they had the opportunity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Weezer said:

Because two of them are John Stones and Kyle Walker, and the other one is Harry Maguire.

You may be right. I thought Stones did Ok, and Walker wasn't bad apart from the dumb penalty. But against a team like that, I think a back four with Stones and Cahill in the middle would have given us an extra man in midfield.

Still, he won, so Gareth is OK with me... so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought England were really good, a little panicky for parts of the second half but to be expected. The winner was fully deserved.

Even if it ended at 1-1 I would have been pretty impressed, just far better than expected. It was like watching a proper football team for the first time in 16 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, warlock said:

You may be right. I thought Stones did Ok, and Walker wasn't bad apart from the dumb penalty. But against a team like that, I think a back four with Stones and Cahill in the middle would have given us an extra man in midfield.

Still, he won, so Gareth is OK with me... so far.

We did have an extra man though, one of the CB's was pushed up into the midfield when in possession, so it was much of a muchness to be honest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wigmore said:

I thought England were really good, a little panicky for parts of the second half but to be expected. The winner was fully deserved.

Even if it ended at 1-1 I would have been pretty impressed, just far better than expected. It was like watching a proper football team for the first time in 16 years.

I agree with this, I thought it was overall decent with some very good moments.  Should beat Panama quite easily after seeing this and I could see Tunisia causing Belgium a problem yet still.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Hodgy said:

Had nothing to do whatsoever with the goal but ok :D

If anyone did either Harry Kane won us the game as he scored the goal(s) or Stones getting both headers from corners however it's a team effort ;)

Helped win the corner that led to the goal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Redshift said:

I think I would rather switch Rashford for Ali than Sterling.

Ali was struggling the entire game. No idea why he wasn't taken off after the big hit early on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, warlock said:

You may be right. I thought Stones did Ok, and Walker wasn't bad apart from the dumb penalty. But against a team like that, I think a back four with Stones and Cahill in the middle would have given us an extra man in midfield.

 Still, he won, so Gareth is OK with me... so far.

Trouble is Southgate has spent his entire tenure so far trying to create an 'identity', he couldn't just change the team shape in the first game because it wasn't working.

Fwiw I think the whole idea of an identity is rubbish, you play to win each game and sometimes different things work against different opponents and you should be able to adapt to that. The English way of creating an 'identity' seems to be to pick a tactic and stick to it rigidly without ever changing or reacting to the current match. That's not having an identity, that's having no Plan B.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Ackter said:

Ali was struggling the entire game. No idea why he wasn't taken off after the big hit early on.

Largely agree, although he looked pretty sharp until the injury. In fact, everyone looked pretty good for the first 15-20 minutes. Obviously Kane with two goals is going to get the plaudits, but I thought Trippier was excellent all game, and on another night Lingard could have scored.

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...