Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Rob1981

Group G: England v Panama (1300BST)

Recommended Posts

The thing with Kane though is even if he's not playing well, you want him on the pitch. If a chance falls to him or if there's a penalty you'd back him to score it, he's one of the deadliest strikers in the world. 

Share this post


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

The thing with Kane though is even if he's not playing well, you want him on the pitch. If a chance falls to him or if there's a penalty you'd back him to score it, he's one of the deadliest strikers in the world. 

Of course, its the same with Sterling, he needs to have the confidence that 1 failed run into a player isn't going to result in him being slagged off and probably hauled off after 60 minutes, you need your creative players to be able to express themselves because they're the ones who at any moment can change the game. I think the fact he lasted the full 90 minutes yesterday will have done him more good than scoring a goal 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Ruben Loftus-Cheek has been mentioned much.  Thought he was quite poor against Panama.  I've been impressed with him before when playing for England, he brings a physical presence and jedi like ability to keep the ball and retain possession.  He seemed to get muscled off the ball a few times and looked a little intimidated by Panama and just wasn't as crisp as normal, which was a little disappointing, but he does seem to be a natural fit for this system so hopefully that was just a blip. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He did ok, pretty much like the rest of the team, I don't think there was any real stand out performances from anyone

Thats really the problem in tournament football when you bring a sub on late against a tired side and suddenly their fresh legs make them look world beaters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm in the camp that says we should rest players who need a rest but try and keep the spine together.  

There are the players like Dier, Jones, Cahill, Rashford, Delph and Rose who need game time to keep them sharp.  They should start, as should Alli if he's fit by Thursday.  Otherwise you risk going into the second round with a team with players are needlessly potentially fatigued, with back ups who haven't played a game in a while.  That's not ideal. 

Keep the core of the team as much as possible, but give those on yellows and in need of a rest a game off. 

Share this post


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

He did ok, pretty much like the rest of the team, I don't think there was any real stand out performances from anyone

Thats really the problem in tournament football when you bring a sub on late against a tired side and suddenly their fresh legs make them look world beaters

I thought Trippier, Henderson and Lingard stood out.  Henderson in particular is putting in Hargreaves 2002 type performances in the middle of the park :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't see what benefit we get out of playing a 2nd string against Belgium, if we were playing 1 of the other 2 teams then sure maybe, but its an ideal time to play your best team against top opposition and get a free go at it that you can learn from 

Share this post


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

I just don't see what benefit we get out of playing a 2nd string against Belgium, if we were playing 1 of the other 2 teams then sure maybe, but its an ideal time to play your best team against top opposition and get a free go at it that you can learn from 

But that's the point, it won't be top opposition because they'll be doing the same, and playing the first team again when they won't get another chance for a break could hinder us if we do genuinely want to progress far. You can give 5/6 players some game time and still keep the spine of the team so that we play in the same way, that is the way we would get the most benefit from the Belgium game imo.

Share this post


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

I just don't see what benefit we get out of playing a 2nd string against Belgium, if we were playing 1 of the other 2 teams then sure maybe, but its an ideal time to play your best team against top opposition and get a free go at it that you can learn from 

Well fatigue for one.  If England beat Belgium the next game is on the 2nd of July, next Monday. 

That 4 games in 15 days I think, with a potential 5th in 19, That's a lot of game time, nevermind the added mental fatigue caused by playing in something so high profile. 

England's got themselves into a great position where we can rest players who need a rest.  Don't need to change the entire team, but those who need the rest should have a rest, as should the couple of players on yellows.  Keep the team and those who are expected to be used as subs fit and sharp, and jobsagoodun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but like I said before, what happens if Vardy gets a hat trick, or Cahill gets MOTM etc, do we just ignore those performances for the next game?

I think losing momentum is far worse than any fatigue they'll suffer 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd give game time to Rose and Dier against Belgium for sure. I'd be tempted to maybe rest Trippier as well, he's really vital for his set piece delivery alone. Would definitely start Rashford too.

Share this post


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

but like I said before, what happens if Vardy gets a hat trick, or Cahill gets MOTM etc, do we just ignore those performances for the next game?

I think losing momentum is far worse than any fatigue they'll suffer 

I don't see why you would need to ignore them?  Even if Vardy went and scored 1000 goals against Belgium he's not going to get in the team over Kane in the next game, but, you know he's in form and sharp and ready to play if need be. 

Similarly in defense, if Cahill does well and plays a blinder - great.  He's an option and if Southgate feels that he's a better option than Mcguire for instance, then it's better to have a sharp and fit better option than one that hasn't kicked a ball in a month. 

Cahill or Jones are definitely playing either way against Belgium, I think Walker has that yellow card for the pen he gave away in Tunisia. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Barry Cartman said:

but like I said before, what happens if Vardy gets a hat trick, or Cahill gets MOTM etc, do we just ignore those performances for the next game?

I think losing momentum is far worse than any fatigue they'll suffer 

That'd be a nice problem to have with Sterling, Maguire and Walker not being altogether convincing and the team needing a plan B for if Kane isn't available.

Sides lose momentum far more from top players picking up injuries or even just the first choice side looking weak against decent opposition because they're not prepared to throw everything into a dead rubber than they do from acknowledging the opportunity to rotate a bit.

Edited by enigmatic

Share this post


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

That 4 games in 15 days I think, with a potential 5th in 19

Most of our players play for club teams who have European competition. 4 games in a fortnight is business at usual. Giving them 'a rest' will mean no game in 9/10 days that's worse for match readiness.

1 hour ago, Robbie.Knox said:

But that's the point, it won't be top opposition because they'll be doing the same,

Belgian B team (if they do rest anyone) is much stronger than Panama and Tunisia, so still the first genuine test for our team.

1 hour ago, Bliss Seeker said:

Even if Vardy went and scored 1000 goals against Belgium he's not going to get in the team over Kane in the next game,

Exactly, so why bother! If you are Vardy does that make you feel less like you are there to make up the numbers? If it was me that would further highlight that I'm just a backup player. The 23 will all be happy to be there, they are all involved with morale of the camp... Vardy knows he is second choice, I don't think he's suddenly going to kick up a fuss half way through the tournament because he hasn't had game time?!

Share this post


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

Belgian B team (if they do rest anyone) is much stronger than Panama and Tunisia, so still the first genuine test for our team.

But still not as good as a genuine 'test', as you put it, so still relatively useless.

12 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Exactly, so why bother! 

Because let's say Kane gets injured or sent off in the second round, you either go into the Quarter Final with Vardy who's semi match-fit and proven with a couple of goals or you go in with Vardy who's barely played a minute and will take the first quarter of the game getting up to speed.

Vardy knows in this instance that he's a 'backup' player. It's not an insult in this instance, Kane is in top form, and any decent pro will understand that.

Edited by Robbie.Knox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There doesnt seem to be many downsides either way - you either top the group, have momentum etc or come 2nd and have a potentially easier path anyway. No complaints really with any result on Thursday now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not like the Belgium game will be played at full intensity, both sides will hold something back, will be a good run out for the first 11 without stressing them too much. As Westy says, if someone doesn't play against Belgium they end up going 9-10 days without a game which isn't great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Robbie.Knox said:

Because let's say Kane gets injured

hopefully... he's used his lifetime of luck already. World Cup final ... WELLLBBZZZY with the winner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Barry Cartman said:

Don't even bother its Baptista, England win 6-1 and he only comes into the thread to somehow have a go at Sterling, he's pathetic 

Only because there was a lot of discussion about him.

Share this post


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

I don't see how Cahill gets in this team when things start to get serious regardless of what he might do if he plays, unless Stones is moved to left centre-back. Maguire and Walker, adding to the numbers in midfield, is clearly a huge part of how Southgate wants his wider centre-backs to perform and move. Cahill can't contribute the same way. Jones could possibly but he hardly exudes confidence. 

I think I'd prefer Cahill as the central CB and Stones on the left side. Maguire had a few shaky moments against two weak teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Baptista_8 said:

Only because there was a lot of discussion about him.

and because Delle Alli didn't play so we can't moan about him :D 

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...