Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Bliss Seeker

It came home. Hope, hope came home

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, JDownie said:

Of course I'd be loving it making the semis but if there are clear problems with the team I'd be questioning why my manager (who still turns me on) isn't trying to address it. Probably the main reason England didn't get to the final as they just didn't create enough. 

Imagine England against this France side. No setpieces and even if you do get one, they just pack the box anyway. 

I'm not trying to detract from England's achievement. I'm just saying that they clearly haven't been a good team to watch unless you're an England fan. And that would bother me if it was my team. I want to see my team playing well. Not a disjointed mess playing for corner kicks. 

What's next, Rory Delap gets a call up because that way Maguire has more aerial balls to challenge? 

There hasn’t been many sides that played well. France outside the period Mbappe blitzed Argentina slow defence have been just as rigid and painfully boring as England, just they have a lot more quality to get that goal in open play before sitting back again. 

Its no secret we lack quality at opening sides in open play, been that way since Capello days. Southgate just implemented a rigid system that the players all knew their jobs and it meant remaining solid, using set plays because that was a strength that needed highlighting (we actually played to our strengths for once at a tournament) and use the pace in transition to try and score from open play. 

Question now moving forward, will be if Southgate moves away from 3 at the back and expands slightly with the clearly talented young attacking players we have emerging and will be more prominent leading towards 2020 and further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all really boils down to two sides of the discussion - do you want the performance or the result?

I doubt anyone in Greece were that bothered when they won Euro 2004 with backs to the wall performances and set piece goals.  Lots of people want both but sometimes it's impossible to get them both

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to talking like we're City and have this huge pool of talent to call upon, we had Henderson in midfield and other options were Dier, LC and Delph. We lost Ox before the tournament and likes of the Barkley haven't come on and Wilshere isn't good enough. We don't have the players in that key area to be opening sides up, so Southgate found a way of playing to the strength of the players we had 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, m_fenton said:

What makes you think he isn't trying to address it?

His insistence on Kane being a sort of deep lying forward. His insistence on Alli playing most of the time, including the opener where he spent almost an hour on the pitch with an injury. His refusal to add more midfielders next to Henderson in an attempt to control open play more. 

Fact is England had glaring problems but they were never really addressed because you were winning games and that's all that mattered. Most of you said it yourself. And I understand that but I don't get why when things do go wrong (losing to Croatia) you all just go "well done lads" instead of analysing what went wrong. 

The signs were there from the very first game. Nothing changed. I don't get it. I don't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For example, if Sancho really breaks out this season, Sterling has another great season playing wide right, and there’s another winger, say Sessegnon plays LW all season and does really well or someone else, does Southgate move to a 4-3-3 to get the best out of the wingers, or stick to a formation that doesn’t use wingers and means players like Sterling have to be more rigid in a set formation playing through middle and means he gets less standing someone face on, one on one in a wide area that full backs hate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Barry Cartman said:

You seem to talking like we're City and have this huge pool of talent to call upon, we had Henderson in midfield and other options were Dier, LC and Delph. We lost Ox before the tournament and likes of the Barkley haven't come on and Wilshere isn't good enough. We don't have the players in that key area to be opening sides up, so Southgate found a way of playing to the strength of the players we had 

 

It's not even about opening sides up. 

England were hitting long passes into Sterling and Kane. Why? Why not take out Lingard and/or Alli to try and bolster the midfield, use the wingbacks and push up the pitch? Why did he have to keep Lingard Alli Sterling and Kane on at all times with Henderson the only recognised midfielder?

And I'm not even exaggerating with "at all times". Rashford for Sterling would happen - a downgrade which usually cost England and made then look even worse. So then he brings on Dier for Henderson because the extra legs are needed. 3rd and 4th subs from a hat draw please. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think everyone’s saying ‘well done lads’ and ignoring anything that went wrong you’re just seeing what you want to see. There’s been plenty of critical analysis while still praising the achievements. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even had Boots in here on Wednesday night trying to guess the subs after Dier and Rashford came on. It was a lottery :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bigwig said:

If you think everyone’s saying ‘well done lads’ and ignoring anything that went wrong you’re just seeing what you want to see. There’s been plenty of critical analysis while still praising the achievements. 

The last 2 pages are literally people ******** on @westy8chimp for daring to criticise their beloved England semi final champions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, pearcey_90 said:

For example, if Sancho really breaks out this season, Sterling has another great season playing wide right, and there’s another winger, say Sessegnon plays LW all season and does really well or someone else, does Southgate move to a 4-3-3 to get the best out of the wingers, or stick to a formation that doesn’t use wingers and means players like Sterling have to be more rigid in a set formation playing through middle and means he gets less standing someone face on, one on one in a wide area that full backs hate.

I think by Euro 2020 we'll be playing 4-3-3 as long as the likes of Rashford, Sancho and Sessegnon progress enough 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JDownie said:

His insistence on Kane being a sort of deep lying forward. His insistence on Alli playing most of the time, including the opener where he spent almost an hour on the pitch with an injury. His refusal to add more midfielders next to Henderson in an attempt to control open play more. 

Fact is England had glaring problems but they were never really addressed because you were winning games and that's all that mattered. Most of you said it yourself. And I understand that but I don't get why when things do go wrong (losing to Croatia) you all just go "well done lads" instead of analysing what went wrong. 

The signs were there from the very first game. Nothing changed. I don't get it. I don't. 

 Nothing probably changed by large because it was a system that was worked on for ages leading towards the tournament. Was no secret that Southgate put all his eggs into the 3 at the back system leading towards the tournament as showed in friendlies, and meant it would be a mainstay throughout the tournament because the players knew their jobs. Can’t just rip it up and change because you don’t have the time in International football to do that.

It’s same for France. Deschamps has a particular style of playing with a target man that others in that system know their roles. When he didn’t play that, they looked bloody awful, so he went back to that system and style and they’ve been better for it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, pearcey_90 said:

 Nothing probably changed by large because it was a system that was worked on for ages leading towards the tournament. Was no secret that Southgate put all his eggs into the 3 at the back system leading towards the tournament as showed in friendlies, and meant it would be a mainstay throughout the tournament because the players knew their jobs. Can’t just rip it up and change because you don’t have the time in International football to do that.

It’s same for France. Deschamps has a particular style of playing with a target man that others in that system know their roles. When he didn’t play that, they looked bloody awful, so he went back to that system and style and they’ve been better for it.

 

I'm not talking about him changing to a 442 after 1 game ffs.

I'm saying why couldn't he just go with Delph over Alli after the first game to see if England could exert furher control over opposition? 

In fact if I recall correctly Alli missed the second game due to injury and then England had probably their best game (albeit also their easiest) when scoring 6. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Barry Cartman said:

You mean westy whos spent the whole tournament wanting the other side to beat England because we're not playing like Brazil, even though the sides we faced play more defensive than us? 

 

That doesn't mean he can't criticise the team. He was raising valid points and being told to gtf because of what you just said. It's so petty :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about it the more bizarre it is. 

1st game - Alli, Sterling, Lingard, Kane all start, England win thanks to very late goal 

2nd game - Alli out England cruise 

3rd game - wholesale changes for fitness purposes 

4th, 5th and 6th games - Alli plays all of them

Why when the best game of the tournament had him on the bench? :D

Edited by JDownie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the last two pages are representative of a 33 page thread as well as the match thread. You’re cherry picking to suit your argument. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JDownie said:

I'm not talking about him changing to a 442 after 1 game ffs.

I'm saying why couldn't he just go with Delph over Alli after the first game to see if England could exert furher control over opposition? 

In fact if I recall correctly Alli missed the second game due to injury and then England had probably their best game (albeit also their easiest) when scoring 6. 

And like 4 of those 5 (if not counting Kane fluke) were from set pieces again, so made no difference to creating more chances in open play. The control would have just been in and around our own half, with a player less to receive ball further forward. 

What hurt us the most in the Croatia game in 2nd half, wasn’t from lacking control in the middle, it was all of a sudden instead of playing forward like we did in first half it was suddenly safety first and back to Pickford within 4 passes to go long and Croatia got the ball. Either was players completely crumbling with nerves, or Southgate telling them to play really safe or mixture of both (likely).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JDownie said:

The more I think about it the more bizarre it is. 

1st game - Alli, Sterling, Lingard, Kane all start, England win thanks to very late goal 

2nd game - Alli out England cruise 

3rd game - wholesale changes for fitness purposes 

4th, 5th and 6th games - Alli plays all of them

Why when the best game of the tournament had him on the bench? :D

Well that’s just crap, because best game of tournament was first 45 v Tunisia with Alli fully fit till towards end of that half. Created so much in open play, more so then Panama :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bigwig said:

So the last two pages are representative of a 33 page thread as well as the match thread. You’re cherry picking to suit your argument. 

Huh? I thought I made it clear that what I'm saying is being prompted by the last couple of pages... :lol:

The whole tournament I think England fans have generally been great. I've also had plenty of great discussions with other England fans about England's downsides, particularly @themadsheep2001 and I frequently discussing the issue of Kane's movement. 

I'm not saying all England fans are refusing to criticise and saying "well done lads". But the last 2 pages are rife with folk bashing Westy and "ABEs", saying we can't criticise England. 

I'm probably a bitter jock ABE now, even though I was backing England all the way and had them to make the SFs :lol:

Edited by JDownie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, pearcey_90 said:

Well that’s just crap, because best game of tournament was first 45 v Tunisia with Alli fully fit till towards end of that half. Created so much in open play, more so then Panama :D 

Fair enough. Why then when it did become clear England doesn't work with those 4 on did it persist? I mean every KO game? One good win against Sweden who played like a Championship side visiting Barcelona doesn't justify sticking with the same line-up that wasn't exactly convincing. 

I just don't know what Southgate saw from that repeatedly selected XI.

Edited by JDownie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at all the decent discussion generated. Isn't that nice? :)

now that I think about it Alli did score from open play so obviously it did work at points. Not that his goal was exactly impressive, although Sterling would have missed it. 

Edited by JDownie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JDownie said:

Huh? I thought I made it clear that what I'm saying is being prompted by the last couple of pages... :lol:

The whole tournament I think England fans have generally been great. I've also had plenty of great discussions with other England fans about England's downsides, particularly @themadsheep2001 and I frequently discussing the issue of Kane. 

I'm not saying all England fans are refusing to criticise and saying "well done lads". But the last 2 pages are rife with folk bashing Westy and "ABEs", saying we can't criticise England. 

I'm probably a bitter jock ABE now, even though I was backing England all the way and had them to make the SFs :lol:

Tbf there's definitely a difference between us and others talking about flaws, and Westy looking to needle people unnecessarily at times. 

That said, our issues stemmed from not changing that midfield into a true midfield against Croatia which meant the back three were always under pressure, which forced young and Trippier back, which allowed Croatia full backs to rampage forward at will. It wasn't a quality issue, it was a tactical one, that could have been averted by dropping out Alli Stathe very least, as tbe leads mobile of him and Lingard, for Delph start of the match, and even at half time, I'd have pulled the pair of them and them for RLC too. This isn't hindsight as I mentioned several times we needed to be more possession based against Croatia 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, JDownie said:

Fair enough. Why then when it did become clear England doesn't work with those 4 on did it persist? I mean every KO game? One good win against Sweden who played like a Championship side visiting Barcelona doesn't justify sticking with the same line-up that wasn't exactly convincing. 

I just don't know what Southgate saw from that repeatedly selected XI.

He saw it get to the semi final, and arguably should have been 2/3 up at HT in that semi final. 

No need to change the system or team before the game. Main thing he needs to learn and improve (still a young manager) is how that 2nd half developed and into extra time. Making the right changes at the right time.

For me, it cried out for Rose early on in 2nd half. Vrsjalko was constantly getting the ball high up the pitch because Young wasn’t threatening him forward, and wasn’t defending well against him. Rose might have been just as isolated out there against him defending, but at least he would have made him start thinking about going backwards and pushing him further back by just his starting position naturally being higher up (as we saw start of ET). 

Edited by pearcey_90

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, JDownie said:

The last 2 pages are literally people ******** on @westy8chimp for daring to criticise their beloved England semi final champions. 

To be fair, I think the main thing with westy was that he was desperate for his own team to lose :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read a stat that Harry Maguire had more touches (20) in the opposition box than any other England player at this year's tournament. Harry Kane's goals were all inside the box ffs, he really couldn't manage more than 14 other touches in the box in 6 games? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, pearcey_90 said:

He saw it get to the semi final, and arguably should have been 2/3 up at HT in that semi final. 

No need to change the system or team before the game. Main thing he needs to learn and improve (still a young manager) is how that 2nd half developed and into extra time. Making the right changes at the right time.

For me, it cried out for Rose early on in 2nd half. Vrsjalko was constantly getting the ball high up the pitch because Young was threatening him forward, and wasn’t defending well against him. Rose might have been just as isolated out there against him defending, but at least he would have made him start thinking about going backwards and pushing him further back by just his starting position naturally being higher up (as we saw start of ET). 

Anyone could have told you what would happen against a free playing rakitic and Modric. Rose for young would have changed nothing because it was the midfield that was causing the issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Westy looking to needle people unnecessarily at times. 

In your opinion I was needling. Of course you sent BC a PM as well to warn him about needling me by saying Kane scoring 6 scabby goals means he is better than Pele? And you PM Mr Adam for needling by saying we had overachieved in a tournament where we only beat teams far worse than us and lost two games to teams on par with us?

In the Colombia thread I may have 'needled' a little by celebrating their goal. However, it was a Colombia vs England thread, not an England support thread... Cedrik and others were more damning than me about Englands performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, westy8chimp said:

Of course you sent BC a PM as well to warn him about needling me by saying Kane scoring 6 scabby goals means he is better than Pele

You mean that clear and obvious joke that you took such huge exception to that you started linking to a bunch of Black and White footage of goalkeepers watching shots 2 yards away from them fly in the goal as some sort of overwhelming evidence that Harry Kane's 6 goals should simply be dismissed :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Anyone could have told you what would happen against a free playing rakitic and Modric. Rose for young would have changed nothing because it was the midfield that was causing the issue. 

It would for me as extra time showed that even with midfield being same, like for like.

The extra body in there for example Dier for Alli/Lingard wouldn’t have suddenly seen us gain control of game, we’d have still been playing 5 passes in our own half before going back to Pickford to go long. Modric/Rakitc would have still had control of the game, just less space through middle, but would have still worked it to Vrsjalko because he was camped 25 yards into our half out right all the time because Young was so deep. 

Could tell in that 2nd half that Rakitic/Modric have played in high pressure games multiple of times and faced similar scenarios. Never fazed them, unlike our players. Hopefully they develop that experience to come, whilst Southgate improves tactically.

Edited by pearcey_90

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Barry Cartman said:

You mean that clear and obvious joke that you took such huge exception to that you started linking to a bunch of Black and White footage of goalkeepers watching shots 2 yards away from them fly in the goal as some sort of overwhelming evidence that Harry Kane's 6 goals should simply be dismissed :D 

Isnt that trolling... or is it only when I joke/exaggerate etc that it's trolling? Are you admitting Kane was rubbish? That's also trolling :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, pearcey_90 said:

It would for me as extra time showed that even with midfield being same, like for like.

The extra body in there for example Dier for Alli/Lingard wouldn’t have suddenly seen us gain control of game, we’d have still been playing 5 passes in our own half before going back to Pickford to go long. Modric/Rakitc would have still had control of the game, just less space through middle, but would have still worked it to Vrsjalko because he was camped 25 yards into our half out right all the time because Young was so deep. 

Could tell in that 2nd half that Rakitic/Modric have played in high pressure games multiple of times and faced similar scenarios. Never faxed them, unlike our players. Hopefully they develop that experience to come, whilst Southgate improves tactically.

Of course the change in midfield would have made a difference. Have you seen Henderson's pass map? He had no out balls offensively. Defensively, rakitic and Modric were constantly in behind Alli and Lingard, which meant the back three got pressed, which means young and Trippier dropped back, which meant their fullbacks could create overlaps at will. 

Not sure why you keep saying  Dier, when we also had Delph and RLC. England needed to play a true midfield. They didn't. They didn't even adapt to one so you basically had Rakitic, Modric and Brozodvic vs Henderson

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Isnt that trolling... or is it only when I joke/exaggerate etc that it's trolling? Are you admitting Kane was rubbish? That's also trolling :D 

Trolling is when you don't want your team to win because of the quality of their football, then instead support the most anti football nation at the World Cup in Sweden, then try and claim they played the better football in a 2-0 defeat 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

England Vs. Croatia, England played something of a 5122, with Henderson in DM and Alli/Lingard as AMs. Up against one of the Greats of his generation in Modric who had already beaten Henderson last month in the CL final :D 

England could have dropped one or both of Alli and Lingard (or even Sterling - but then Kane would have to step up big time) and it would have been understood by everyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, m_fenton said:

Doesn't change my point though. Football's about scoring more goals than your opponent. If your strength is set pieces, score them from set pieces. It just seems weird to be banging on about as if they are somehow inferior.

This. Got it in one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JDownie said:

England Vs. Croatia, England played something of a 5122, with Henderson in DM and Alli/Lingard as AMs. Up against one of the Greats of his generation in Modric who had already beaten Henderson last month in the CL final :D 

England could have dropped one or both of Alli and Lingard (or even Sterling - but then Kane would have to step up big time) and it would have been understood by everyone. 

He wasn't even up against just Modric, he has Rakitic moving at will because Brozovic gave them both a platform. We needed to engage that midfield with our energy. We didn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Barry Cartman said:

you don't want your team to win because of the quality of their football

Primarily I support Brazil in international football. I stood up for them at every opportunity... when they were being touted as not playing well I pointed out they had created most shots and most chances etc.

Of course as an Englishman I would love us to win the WC... but it's the worlds biggest stage for football, I want to be able to look back fondly and remember great moments from the tournament... especially by the winning team. So when we were playing awful in every game... or acting like we didn't want to beat Belgium ... it's very hard to be passionate about us. Add on top the whole nation creating this myth that the lads are heroes who are overachieving... it's very easy to go the other way and end up with anti sentiment.

I couldn't agree more with the post match comments coming out from Modric etc... we talk a big game and fail to deliver time and time again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Of course the change in midfield would have made a difference. Have you seen Henderson's pass map? He had no out balls offensively. Defensively, rakitic and Modric were constantly in behind Alli and Lingard, which meant the back three got pressed, which means young and Trippier dropped back, which meant their fullbacks could create overlaps at will. 

 

And with Dier alongside him, it wouldn’t have gave him a forward pass, would have just resulted sideways at best before working back and going forward long, Modric/Rakitic pick it up off the CBs and work it wide right again. 

Even that showed Henderson had loads of forward passes on, one at 18 seconds most notable with Alli in loads of space :D At the end just epitomised that 2nd half, Lingard drops in to show that forward pass, plays it to Hendo who instead of laying out wide to Trippier in acres knocks way long for CB to win and Croatia midfield to pick up again. Dier for Lingard there wouldn’t have stopped that for me. Probably being very critical of Henderson there, but just the way it went and was painful watching that 2nd half unfold.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Coulthard's Jaw said:

You need to play well in open play to get the set pieces in the first place. 

When teams are defending deep you can just allow Sterling to sprint with the ball and mis-hit it off of defender's legs. Probably saw that a good 10 times this summer :D

but it's not as easy as that against teams like Croatia and France. And ultimately they aren't the teams England were playing well against. They were playing well against inferior teams. And it's hard to criticise them for that because you can only beat who the draw gives you, but it's indicative of a wider issue. England can't compete with superior midfields who don't need to back off and give 1-man midfield Hendo the time and space he needs to cover up for England's bold 1-man midfield set-up :lol:

I feel bad for Henderson actually. I think he had a bloody brilliant tournament. Especially considering how disadvantaged he was in being asked to do a 3-man job by himself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

He wasn't even up against just Modric, he has Rakitic moving at will because Brozovic gave them both a platform. We needed to engage that midfield with our energy. We didn't. 

Oh of course, I've not really done justice to the situation because it wasn't JUST Henderson Vs Generational great Modric. There was also world class Rakitic and then Brozovic, who is also a very good player in his own right. 

Henderson probably **** himself when he saw Croatia hadn't went with just Rakitic Modric like their game Vs. Russia. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JDownie said:

I feel bad for Henderson actually. I think he had a bloody brilliant tournament. Especially considering how disadvantaged he was in being asked to do a 3-man job by himself. 

Almost felt like Gareth was trying to get the midfield 3 to be like how they are for Pep, with Fernandinho being the sole one in the middle and KDB/Silva being lot further forward to receive ball on half turn further up the pitch, just Gareth didn’t realise none of our players are up to that level, or capable of playing that way :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Of course as an Englishman I would love us to win the WC

 

On 03/07/2018 at 20:54, westy8chimp said:

GET IN COLOMBIA!! hahaha 

 

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRJZ4YFS70cNiiuOIRWF8KnxtE2Dby3zl3mA6OeIIX80C6j-E8CsA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, pearcey_90 said:

Almost felt like Gareth was trying to get the midfield 3 to be like how they are for Pep, with Fernandinho being the sole one in the middle and KDB/Silva being lot further forward to receive ball on half turn further up the pitch, just Gareth didn’t realise none of our players are up to that level, or capable of playing that way :D 

:lol:

Good comparison. Silva and KDB have the mental side of the game to operate there, Lingard and Alli don't. 

Silva didn't play the CM role until Pep came, so there's plenty of time for Southgate to try and change the way Lingard and Alli play. But I'm not sure he will get that time; international football doesn't allow it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

In the Colombia thread I may have 'needled' a little by celebrating their goal.

@Wigmore ...

I do like your bantz tho, defo my fav hater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said before, you'd like to think we will have better players and use better tactics in the future so we can be considered one of the leading teams again. But that's the future, we pretty much maxed out what we had available to us in this World Cup, Kane puts away that chance from 1 yard out we probably go through to the final. All the England games were fun to watch from a fans point of view, the stuff in between was lots of fun, don't really get what more anyone could want from this World Cup given the circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, pearcey_90 said:

And with Dier alongside him, it wouldn’t have gave him a forward pass, would have just resulted sideways at best before working back and going forward long, Modric/Rakitic pick it up off the CBs and work it wide right again. 

Even that showed Henderson had loads of forward passes on, one at 18 seconds most notable with Alli in loads of space :D At the end just epitomised that 2nd half, Lingard drops in to show that forward pass, plays it to Hendo who instead of laying out wide to Trippier in acres knocks way long for CB to win and Croatia midfield to pick up again. Dier for Lingard there wouldn’t have stopped that for me. Probably being very critical of Henderson there, but just the way it went and was painful watching that 2nd half unfold.

 

How many times do have I have to say we also have Delph and RLC too. Also I watched the game, all his passing options are risky forward ones, which is why his long ball completion rates were terrible. 

The whole ****ing point is that he needed some easy safe sideways and short forward options, to go with the riskier passes. That's what a proper midfield does. That is exactly what Croatia had. So we could try and control the tempo. You don't always need to go forwards. If you can't see how playing two central midfielders on Delph and RLC over two attacking mids in Alli and Lingard would have changed that, I can't help you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Coulthard's Jaw said:

As I said before, you'd like to think we will have better players and use better tactics in the future so we can be considered one of the leading teams again. But that's the future, we pretty much maxed out what we had available to us in this World Cup, Kane puts away that chance from 1 yard out we probably go through to the final. All the England games were fun to watch from a fans point of view, the stuff in between was lots of fun, don't really get what more anyone could want from this World Cup given the circumstances.

I don't think we did max out what we had, that's what will disappoint me the most about this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, themadsheep2001 said:

I don't think we did max out what we had, that's what will disappoint me the most about this. 

Agreed.

England had a great tournament and defied expectations by making it to the SFs. They've bucked the recent trend of being terrible. 

But like I said earlier today, I really feel there were a bunch of obvious things that Southgate could have done to maximise the potential of the squad he chose. More midfielders, telling Kane to make dangerous runs a bit more and probably start Rose to offer a natural option on the left - as I've seen another stat that England were the 29th best team (or 4th worst) for the number of crosses attempted from open play. You have Kane and 2 wingbacks and you're not playing crosses in? Why bother with the wingbacks then?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

If you can't see how playing two central midfielders on Delph and RLC over two attacking mids in Alli and Lingard would have changed that, I can't help you. 

absolutely, I posted my tactical summation of what went wrong a couple pages ago... basically that... we used an attack plan & personnel that does not suit a 5-3-2. Individually you can probably find snippets of Lingard and Sterling performing OK, but they didn't suit the tactic and it created a huge gap for Henderson to plug... should have taken one if not both of those AMs out for a proper CM (Dier) and a playmaker (RLC) or use Alli deeper and go with a striker partner for Kane (Vardy/Welbeck) ... best option would have been Kane and Alli upfront (Alli licence to roam and less defensive burden that he had)... RLC, Dier & Hendo in midfield, with the primary goal of keeping the ball allowing WBs to get high up the field as attacking outlets.

Every tournament we go with a mish mash of tactic and trying to slot our best 11 in... we need to cement a formation, then utilise it properly with the right players in the right place... even if it does mean one of our better players has to be on the bench.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...