Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: Sammy Chung was King on June 20, 2016, 12:25:16 am
-
To make upto five changes if reports are to be believed. It sounds like as most of us wanted sturridge and vardy come in, but also Clyne for Walker and Bertrand for Rose, with Wilshere coming in as well.
It's a risk we have four points, france did it tonight but they already had six points. We face a tricky side, in Slovakia. I had a feeling he might look at france and do something similar when i saw the game tonight!.
I think if he is going to make the changes, then the full backs maybe a rest would help, because they have done a lot of running over the two games.
The strikers i wanted to see anyway, Wilshere might need a full game for sharpness. It also sounds like he is keeping Sterling in the team, is it admirable?, or pigheaded?.
Personally i think some of the criticism has got too personal with sterling, the manager has to show faith in him. Not to support would lead to having a player in the squad who would'nt be any use to him, because it would destroy him!.
I don't think he deserves to play but sometimes a manager has to stick with certain players, and not give into the mob. If he can find anywhere near the form he had at Liverpool, then we would have a very useful player.
Overall it's risky, but if you make changes, they are in the right areas, what do you think?.
-
No, he should continue to play the best team he can. They can only improve on the pattern of play if they do this. I would start Vardy and Sturridge at the expense of Kane and Sterling. Get the job done.
-
I would make changed we should win anyway and prob go thru if we lose
-
It's a major tournament. You play your best available XI. End of.
If we lose and finish third we'll probably go through, but we'll face a more difficult opponent in the next game.
Vardy and Sturridge for Kane and Sterling should be the only changes he's contemplating, barring injuries.
-
Agree .... play best side (as he sees it).
No point resting anyone as who knows we may have just one game to come after Croatia anyway !
HOWEVER if we do continue to win we need as DonnyBazRover said earlier to develop the system and the understanding
-
He might make 6 changes the papers say. I'd have made 3 or even 4 at an avsolute push but 6 is too many for me. He should get the sack if we lose.
-
Two obvious changes in attack. I would rest Cahill, who is on a booking. I would bring in Wilshere for Alli - I thought he looked knackered in the last half hour. Even a defeat would see us go through and I don't think it matters where we finish, no stand out team in the competition and if we are to win it, we have to beat them at some stage.
-
It's a major tournament. You play your best available XI. End of.
If we lose and finish third we'll probably go through, but we'll face a more difficult opponent in the next game.
Vardy and Sturridge for Kane and Sterling should be the only changes he's contemplating, barring injuries.
Disagree - it's a major tournament so you manage your squad and make sure you have your best players available as we progress...
I would also rest Ali and leave Cahill out and I would bring Milner in for Sterling...
-
If we'd won the first game I would probably agree with 6 changes, but we haven't even qualified for certain yet.
Better to start with a strong team and if we're winning comfortably then make changes.
-
I would hope that even if he changed 11 players that the starting XI would be strong enough to beat Slovakia.
In addition, the changes allow other partnerships to be created i.e. Wilshere and Dier in midfield might work well.
-
We shouldn't underestimate Slovakia. They were unlucky not to get something from the Wales game and they beat Russia, which is more than we could manage.
Three changes is quite enough. Six is excessive.
-
I agree make the changes...We have a history of sticking with the same team in tournaments...After a hard premiership season they play 3 games in 9 days I'm sure that contributes when it comes to the knockout stages...Some of the changes are like for like and it keeps everybody involved, and key players fresher for the inevitable extra time in the knockouts...Slovakia shouldnt be underestimated I agree but crikey if we cant put out a team to be able to beat them out of our squad then we wont win it anyway...
Other big teams arnt afraid to make the changes France and Germany do it regulary...So we should be frightened of it either...
-
I agree make the changes...We have a history of sticking with the same team in tournaments...After a hard premiership season they play 3 games in 9 days I'm sure that contributes when it comes to the knockout stages...Some of the changes are like for like and it keeps everybody involved, and key players fresher for the inevitable extra time in the knockouts...Slovakia shouldnt be underestimated I agree but crikey if we cant put out a team to be able to beat them out of our squad then we wont win it anyway...
Other big teams arnt afraid to make the changes France and Germany do it regulary...So we should be frightened of it either...
Agreed, the only problem I would have is if Sterling keeps his place.
-
To make upto five changes if reports are to be believed. It sounds like as most of us wanted sturridge and vardy come in, but also Clyne for Walker and Bertrand for Rose, with Wilshere coming in as well.
It's a risk we have four points, france did it tonight but they already had six points. We face a tricky side, in Slovakia. I had a feeling he might look at france and do something similar when i saw the game tonight!.
I think if he is going to make the changes, then the full backs maybe a rest would help, because they have done a lot of running over the two games.
The strikers i wanted to see anyway, Wilshere might need a full game for sharpness. It also sounds like he is keeping Sterling in the team, is it admirable?, or pigheaded?.
Personally i think some of the criticism has got too personal with sterling, the manager has to show faith in him. Not to support would lead to having a player in the squad who would'nt be any use to him, because it would destroy him!.
I don't think he deserves to play but sometimes a manager has to stick with certain players, and not give into the mob. If he can find anywhere near the form he had at Liverpool, then we would have a very useful player.
Overall it's risky, but if you make changes, they are in the right areas, what do you think?.
Seeing as Vardy and Sturridge came on for Sterling and Kane wouldn't it be logical to assume that if Vardy and Sturridge are starting against Slovakia it would mean that Sterling and Kane don't play?
-
I agree make the changes...We have a history of sticking with the same team in tournaments...After a hard premiership season they play 3 games in 9 days I'm sure that contributes when it comes to the knockout stages...Some of the changes are like for like and it keeps everybody involved, and key players fresher for the inevitable extra time in the knockouts...Slovakia shouldnt be underestimated I agree but crikey if we cant put out a team to be able to beat them out of our squad then we wont win it anyway...
Other big teams arnt afraid to make the changes France and Germany do it regulary...So we should be frightened of it either...
Agreed, the only problem I would have is if Sterling keeps his place.
That's something else that's annoyed me..Sterling has had two poor games I agree but again the reaction is another symptom of this countries negative attitude..This campaign to pay for him a ticket home to me is scandalous..In every paper last week there was a article showing this so called England fan in his replica kit crowing about how much money it has raised for charity...Stories like that shouldn't get anywhere near publication while a tournament is half way through...Sterling is capable of that moment of magic that might be the difference between going forward or a flight home..He's a confidence player so what good does slaughtering him in the press do???? it's fine when the post mortem is delivered if we fail but sometimes I wonder whether some people actually want us to do well.....
-
For me, I wouldn't be making so many changes as there is still plenty to play for despite the fact we are almost certain to advance. We want to be winning this group, not finishing third and being handed a tougher second round match.
That said, of the alleged six changes, I can agree with four of them anyway - Vardy and Sturridge should be starting over Kane and Sterling on merit anyway, and our other full backs are similar types of player to Walker and Rose. If they were on bookings it would make more sense I guess.
Wilshere and Henderson both starting in midfield is not something I'd be keen on however.
-
He might make 6 changes the papers say. I'd have made 3 or even 4 at an avsolute push but 6 is too many for me. He should get the sack if we lose.
so if we lost then say got to the final or won it he should be sacked? The French made changes and didn't win should there manager be sacked? Tournament football is about getting the best out of the players throughout the competion,every player was picked on merit and should be good enough to beat Slovakia
-
If we lose and finish 3rd in the group it will be a disaster. We should still win but there is definitely less chance of us doing so. It's a gamble.
-
I agree make the changes...We have a history of sticking with the same team in tournaments...After a hard premiership season they play 3 games in 9 days I'm sure that contributes when it comes to the knockout stages...Some of the changes are like for like and it keeps everybody involved, and key players fresher for the inevitable extra time in the knockouts...Slovakia shouldnt be underestimated I agree but crikey if we cant put out a team to be able to beat them out of our squad then we wont win it anyway...
Other big teams arnt afraid to make the changes France and Germany do it regulary...So we should be frightened of it either...
Agreed, the only problem I would have is if Sterling keeps his place.
That's something else that's annoyed me..Sterling has had two poor games I agree but again the reaction is another symptom of this countries negative attitude..This campaign to pay for him a ticket home to me is scandalous..In every paper last week there was a article showing this so called England fan in his replica kit crowing about how much money it has raised for charity...Stories like that shouldn't get anywhere near publication while a tournament is half way through...Sterling is capable of that moment of magic that might be the difference between going forward or a flight home..He's a confidence player so what good does slaughtering him in the press do???? it's fine when the post mortem is delivered if we fail but sometimes I wonder whether some people actually want us to do well.....
I've never enjoyed the National obsession of kicking someone when they are down in the media. I didn't agree with Sterling's inclusion in the squad purely based on his complete lack of form this season, nor did I believe that Henderson or Wiltshire should go due to a lack of fitness. Sterling's performances so far in this tournament back up what I thought. I believe he should be dropped but not ridiculed.
-
A disaster??
Really? or just a disappointment?
Not qualifying when 3 from a group can get through, and when we already have 4 points, now that would be a failure for certain!
-
As a Welshman I shall be mighty p*****d off if England lose to Slovakia after these changes, and that result puts Wales out :thumbdown:
Of course Wales just need to do the business against Russia but I have a horrible feeling (I have been supporting Rovers for to long I suppose) that it might go wrong.
-
Wales will win 2-1. England's Reserves will draw 1-1. We will go through in second and potentially meet Portugal in Round 2.
-
If that was the case i would welcome a game against Portugal because they really do look to be a poor side.
-
If that was the case i would welcome a game against Portugal because they really do look to be a poor side.
Bit of a nemesis for England though. Also I can't believe Ronaldo will continue to play so poorly.
-
I think Wales will win..
-
We have the basis of a good team that can frighten anyone, I don't see how changing the team to the degree we're hearing will help our continuous improvement. Also seems to be underestimating the opposition.
I really hope the team he puts out does the business otherwise he'll come in for some warranted criticism.
-
We have the basis of a good team that can frighten anyone
The thought of our defence coming up against Spain or Germany or France certainly scares me.
-
I'm scared about Croatia, Belgium and Portugal, never mind those lot.
-
Six changes from the last starting line up, recipe for disaster imo
England XI to play Slovakia: Hart, Cahill, Smalling, Bertrand, Clyne, Dier, Henderson, Wilshere, Lallana, Vardy, Sturridge. #SSNHQ
-
Six changes from the last starting line up, recipe for disaster imo
England XI to play Slovakia: Hart, Cahill, Smalling, Bertrand, Clyne, Dier, Henderson, Wilshere, Lallana, Vardy, Sturridge. #SSNHQ
I agree. Wilshere for Alli I can live with, but leaving Rooney out is madness. He's been our best midfielder and it was no coincidence that we conceded when he came off against Russia.
-
In Roy's mind we can win it. He's resting his players for the long run.
Fair play, it's a gamble but it's what we were all calling for two years ago.
-
I can understand him making one or two changes, not sure about 6 though.
Changing the forwards isnt a problem as Kane and Sterling have been poor. Not sure about resting Rooney because hes been our most creative player, he could have perhaps taken him off if we were comfortable. Both full backs have done a hell of a lot of running but they have been good. Again perhaps subbing them tonight may have been safer.
-
Heard all the fuss then saw the team. It's hardly weak is it? In some areas it's clearly stronger I would say. Right decision.
-
Where would you say it's stronger? Sturridge for sterling and Wiltshire for Ali are the only changes I would've made
-
You can't expect the same team of players to play 7 games in 29 days - in heat, in frenetic paced international football, and win the tournament. We're going need a squad to win it.
-
I'm backing Roy here. Come on England!
-
My two concerns with the side Roy's picked are Henderson who I believe he is a Donkey and offers nothing to the side and Clyne who as gone backwards since he joined Liverpool.
Cannot understand his judgement. I hope this side win and we finish top of the group.
-
At least "resting" players gives some of those who aren't Roy's favourites a chance to impress. Sterling needs a firm kick up the arse, and Ali and Kane are either knackered after a long season, or not half as good as the Spurs-loving press would have you believe.
Hopefully Wilshere will provide creativity from the centre of the pitch for once. Against Russia, he was the only player in midfield willing to take on his man and try to create space through the centre.
When your right back has been arguably your most creative player, it's pretty embarrassing.
-
Playing well. Speed and urgency and closing down.
-
I'd take Wilshere off and put Rooney on second half.
-
Rooney for Henderson in my opinion
-
Bertrand off Rose on, Betrand is offering nothing down the left.
Rooney or Ali on, Henderson or Wilshire off
-
We dominated that. Got lucky Slovakia, I wouldn't change owt immediately.
-
Disagree I thought Bertrand doing well. I agree Rose is better.
-
Rooney for Wilshere for me.
-
Same here. I've been pleasantly surprised by Henderson. He's linking well with his Liverpool chums. Wilshere is a weak link though.
-
Henderson has been decent in general play. Crossing awful though.
-
One think is for sure, we need a goal to calm the nerves, the longer it goes 0-0 the more nervy we'll get. As things stand a Slovakia goal pushes us into 3rd place
-
Trouble is we haven't scored after dominating, Slovakia are going to have at least one opportunity.
-
They haven't had one so far or even come close. This is the tournament of late late goals.
-
Trouble is we haven't scored after dominating, Slovakia are going to have at least one opportunity.
I'm not convinced they will. They are rubbish!
-
To make upto five changes if reports are to be believed. It sounds like as most of us wanted sturridge and vardy come in, but also Clyne for Walker and Bertrand for Rose, with Wilshere coming in as well.
It's a risk we have four points, france did it tonight but they already had six points. We face a tricky side, in Slovakia. I had a feeling he might look at france and do something similar when i saw the game tonight!.
I think if he is going to make the changes, then the full backs maybe a rest would help, because they have done a lot of running over the two games.
The strikers i wanted to see anyway, Wilshere might need a full game for sharpness. It also sounds like he is keeping Sterling in the team, is it admirable?, or pigheaded?.
Personally i think some of the criticism has got too personal with sterling, the manager has to show faith in him. Not to support would lead to having a player in the squad who would'nt be any use to him, because it would destroy him!.
I don't think he deserves to play but sometimes a manager has to stick with certain players, and not give into the mob. If he can find anywhere near the form he had at Liverpool, then we would have a very useful player.
Overall it's risky, but if you make changes, they are in the right areas, what do you think?.
Short answer no. We are not guaranteed qualification. Lets hope his selection doesn't bite us in the arse. 1st half had gone well, with the exception of Welsh Wales being 2 up!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Henderson has been decent in general play. Crossing awful though.
All his corners and free kicks have hit the first man.
-
F*(k me! Has Smalling been watching Evina?
-
How the fudge have we not scored.
-
Tonight the result sucks but second or first is largely irrelevant really. Apart from wanting the next round to be Saturday.
-
Dog shot Roy no idea
-
What more could RH have done?
We did everything except score. Packed defence, a team which showed no ambition what so ever.
-
Goes back to selection. Put your strongest team on the park. Win the game. Then you make changes.
We could get lucky in Round 2, but the odds are we'll get France in Paris in the quarters now.
-
You got what you risked Roy. Clyne played well but Walker would have made mincemeat of them.
Credit to Wales but why give them top spot????
-
Nothing to do with selection, we had 4 or 5 chances that bounced off their players that should have gone in. It was just luck.
-
Just seen the goals for Wales, criminal defending from Russia. Disgrace to the tournament them.
-
We've struggled to break three teams down that we should have beaten comfortably despite massive amounts of possession in all three games, great teams find a way to score
-
I now make it we'll play Hungary or Austria in the last 16, France in the 1/4 and Germany in the semi if we get there. It was fun while it lasted.
-
England dominated but couldn't get through a packed defence.
Apart from not scoring, I think England should have tried more runs towards and into the box - did we have one decent free kick opportunity?
Credit to Slovakia, they parked the bus and with 4 points will probably get through in 3rd place.
One thing annoyed me, the bloody ITV commentator - made it sound like finishing second, unbeaten in the group, was not very good - and OMG we MIGHT end up playing Portugal! They've been crap though, but I doubt they would park the bus, so the next round should see more space for attacking play.
-
Russia's two centre backs are 72 yrs old between them.
We should have hammered them. The mistake RH made was not playing Vardy against them.
I still believe this England squad shows a lot of promise.
Just need to be more clinical.
Skirtal and the keeper were outstanding.
-
I now make it we'll play Hungary or Austria in the last 16, France in the 1/4 and Germany in the semi if we get there. It was fun while it lasted.
I don't think France or Germany are unbeatable on the evidence of what we have seen.
This England team are not rabbits in front of the headlights. Showing no fear so far.
I wouldn't right us off just yet.
-
29 shots tonight according to the stats on BBC, 5 on target, but how many were blocked so quickly they didn't count as on target?
And that's without being much of a threat from corners, or crosses and with no dangerous free kicks.
On another night that performance generates 4 or 5 goals.
-
We won't win it. But I'd be f**king delighted with getting to the semis. Happy with quarters. Any less, well...
-
29 shots tonight according to the stats on BBC, 5 on target, but how many were blocked so quickly they didn't count as on target?
And that's without being much of a threat from corners, or crosses and with no dangerous free kicks.
On another night that performance generates 4 or 5 goals.
CORRECT
-
Just caught the recording after putting the kids to bed.
That's two hours I won't get back again. Clueless. In that second half, we didn't have the first idea how to pull the defence out of shape. Plodding, lumpen clodhoppers. England trying to emulate Spain by keeping possession is like Bella Emberg putting on a thong and a pair of fishnet stockings.
And here's a thought. The gap between Jack Wilshere and Andreas Iniesta is as big as the gap between Jack Wilshere and Richie Wellens.
-
Yes we are through. We could have made the passage easier but we have a reactive manager rather than a proactive manager.
He talked about hindsight. Use foresight Roy. Don't sacrifice your best performing players when they're on top of their games. You don't get extra points for playing the most players in the tournament.
He's probably ended up confusing himself now Clyne and Henderson have played well. Wilshire is another player who's not up to it so at least by process of deduction, we should see Milner, Sterling and now Wilshire benched for the rest of the tournament.
-
England got exactly what the performance deserved. Build up play so predictable and easy to defend against.
If you're wanting to play at that tempo then you need some serious flair and creativity around the box to create chances. We don't have that.
-
Wilshere and Sterling. Two blokes picked on past glories who should be watching this on their sofas back in England.
-
We needed to move the ball much quicker to break them down, we had wave after wave of attacks, but each time we allowed them to set themselves
-
Everyone thinks they have some kind of steak in the starting line-up, and the first minor failing justifies their opinion.
Doesn't work like that in reality. The fact is we dominated that game from start to finish and created plenty of chances, more than enough, but it just didn't bounce for us. Every shot hit one of their players.
They had one chance in the whole game when they got a lucky bounce and it fell to their player. No other team has done that to another team in the tournament. It was the right selection and the players performed fine.
-
Reminded me a lot of watching Rovers under SOD.
However its not the end of the world. If we cant beat whoever we play out of Group F (arguably weakest group) then we don't deserve to progress.
-
I now make it we'll play Hungary or Austria in the last 16, France in the 1/4 and Germany in the semi if we get there. It was fun while it lasted.
That group's wide open. We could get any of the four.
If we avoid Portugal I'll be happy. I suppose if Wales end up with Croatia we might look back on this as a good outcome, if not a good result.
-
Copps
As you wish.
I'll demur on a couple of points.
1) We didn't "create plenty of chances". We created maybe three or four half chances, and for the rest of the match, we dominated possession against a team who were perfectly happy to cede possession and keep a disciplined shape. We had very little idea of how to break that shape. We laboured to play the ball in front of them, then either let Wilshere try something stupid and give the ball to them (1st half) or attempted camel-through-eye-of-needle shots from 25 yards (2nd half).
2) The one chance that Slovakia had. Imagine that Evina-esque defending against any of the top 10 sides in this competition. Thank you and goodnight...
-
Find me a team who had 29 shots on goal in a single game this tournament.
-
If only Theo was eligible! ;)
-
Copps
As you wish.
I'll demur on a couple of points.
1) We didn't "create plenty of chances". We created maybe three or four half chances, and for the rest of the match, we dominated possession against a team who were perfectly happy to cede possession and keep a disciplined shape. We had very little idea of how to break that shape. We laboured to play the ball in front of them, then either let Wilshere try something stupid and give the ball to them (1st half) or attempted camel-through-eye-of-needle shots from 25 yards (2nd half).
2) The one chance that Slovakia had. Imagine that Evina-esque defending against any of the top 10 sides in this competition. Thank you and goodnight...
Vardys, wasn't a half chance, sturridges wasnt, Ali cleared off the line, Clyne wasn't a half chance.
We had these and then a shit load of half chances
-
They were all of the 25:75 variety. They were all ones where the striker would have to do something very good to score, or the defence not step up to the plate. Maybe I'm just not easily stirred, but in none of those cases was I out of my seat thinking, "THIS is it!" Vardy's perhaps was a clear chance, but that was it. Saying Sturridge had a chance when his foot didn't get within 18 inches of making contact with the ball is stretching a definition a bit.
Vardy's apart, they were half chances. The rest weren't even half chances.
-
They were all of the 25:75 variety. They were all ones where the striker would have to do something very good to score, or the defence not step up to the plate. Maybe I'm just not easily stirred, but in none of those cases was I out of my seat thinking, "THIS is it!"
They were half chances. The rest weren't even half chances.
There is no way on earth that the chances that fell to Vardy, Sturridge and Alli were only half-chances.
-
Vardy was clean through one on one with the goalie? If that doesn't get you out your seat nothing will
Sturridge just had to get his toe on it, both extremely good chances
-
Lads.
I've just edited my earlier post on the Vardy chance. But to call the others good chances is getting a bit desperate.
Both of them were indicative of the way the game went in the second half. The Sturridge chance (sic) came from a straight run onto a straight ball. It's the hardest thing to do in the final third, and it was no surprise that Sturridge couldn't even make contact. It takes perfection to make that work. He nearly got there. But he didn't. So it's a half chance at best.
Alli's one similarly. Decent cross into the box, but Alli was stretching for it and did extremely well to direct the ball on target. But a moderate defender has done a good job of clearing it.
We've just played a side that is unlikely to make it past R2. Yes we've dominated possession, but you're clutching at straws to think that we've piled up lots of gilt-edged chances.
And as I say, f**k about at the back like Smalling did, against a decent side and we'll be one behind immediately. We've been in a poor group. We've scored three goals and we've shown vulnerabilities at the back in all three matches.
Had we had the nous and guile to win tonight, we'd have been looking at maybe NI/Czech Rep/Albania in R2 and Hungary/Portugal/Belgium/Sweden in the Quarter Finals. As it is, we're now looking probably at Hungary/Portugal in R2 and France in the Quarter Finals.
We have NOT had the nous and guile to win and to make the path to the business end of the competition significantly easier. Real contenders step up to the plate in those situations. We weren't able to do so.
-
Not sure Portugal can finish 2nd in their group or it's highly unlikely. Have to disagree on sturridge he got there but missed the ball he didn't need a clean connection anything would've done. The Clyne chance was a great chance, he was fouled if he wasn't vardy would've had a tap in
Playing against better opposition will suit us, we're set up to utilise space in the final 3rd there was no space tonight
-
Dickos
Aye. But will playing against a better side suit our defence?
-
Yes 29 shots seems like a lot but that alone doesn't tell the whole story. Of those, 13 were blocked before they even reached the goal and only 5 were actually on target. I wouldn't automatically define a shot as a chance. It depends on the quality, so the total number of shots (or even shots on target) isn't particularly meaningful if they are mostly of poor quality.
The only clear cut chance I remember was Vardy's 1 on 1. On top of that we probably had about 4 half chances; Alli, Lallana, Clyne, Sturridge. I wouldn't class those as clear chances because you wouldn't overwhelmingly expect them to be converted.
The rest of the shots aren't worth considering at all. Mostly of the easily blocked or hopeful, long range effort variety.
-
Dickos
Aye. But will playing against a better side suit our defence?
Don't know, defence hasn't been tested yet has it, that was the worry coming into the tournament,
And to be honest were playing far better than I can recall us playing in a tournament for a long time
-
Not going to lie, had a few Bucks fizz. Vardy chance wasn't the only one. What about the one Skurtle toed off the line, don't know what England player it was. Miracle defending.
-
Copps: It was Alli's chance. It was good, competent defending.
Dickos: Aye, we've controlled matches. In a group of very, very poor quality. As I've been saying for months (in fact years...in fact, decades) wait until we play a half decent side...
-
For the next round:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClbHvmRWkAgR49s.jpg) (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClbHvmnWkAAZoXn.jpg)
-
Well that didn't work out did it?, and no doubt we will end up with portugal in the next round, when it could have been albania!. We did it under sven in the 2002 world cup, we needed a certain result, which would have meant us facing a beatable nigeria, instead we got brazil !.
This is going to sound stupid, but i thought tonights game, would have been ideal for sterling starting, kane, just looks jaded, what's happened to him?, he looks similar to the start of the season.
In hindsight i was wrong, because i just tipped in favour of Roy making changes. I thought the full backs compared to most in this tournament, had a good game, but compared to our first choices they were disappointing.
Just remember though, this game, the opposition were sitting in the spaces and telling us to come and break them down, wales were adventurous when they had the chance.
This game was an almost exact copy of the russia game, only in this game we had even more possession, more shots and failed to score one!.
Henderson i give him a lot of criticism, but all game he was trying different things to break them down. What we gained on the physical side with him, we lost in creativity with Alli on the bench.
Sturridge was a major disappointment. Yes he had no space, but i don't think he was getting into the right positions to damage them, and he lacked confidence in himself.
Vardy had a couple of chances, one that wilshere set up, he really should have scored. He wasn't really a factor in the game, with his pace he should have been stretching them across the field a bit.
Wilshere apart from that great ball he played for vardy, went downhill from that point. Lallana looked no threat at all, he looked to have needed the game off rather than others.
Sterling in hindsight might have been the choice over lallana to start. I thought he picked our best two strikers, then put no creativity behind them. Could it be a case of giving the fans what they want, while reducing their chances of scoring?. Because he really wants to play the line up that started against russia?.
Dier was just about our best player tonight, composed on the ball, and tried to create. That was a really tough game for subs to come on and really influence the game. Rooney really didn't get into the game properly, Alli neither apart from the goal he almost scored.
Smalling produced his one error a game, we were very lucky with that, apart from that him, cahill and hart would have more action against a lower league english side.
All tonight told me, is we have solid replacements, but not one's that can take us much further. It's why i think he made a bad error not selecting Andros Townsend instead of milner, and also Drinkwater over henderson, even though he did well tonight, he hasn't picked them, so it doesn't matter.
Barkley this game also could have suited him, with his ability to run with a ball, it's pass, pass, pass. I'm not comparing him to gazza, but he is as near to him and his style that we have, i thought he made the wrong changes.
I would have gone with
Hart
Smalling Stones
Clyne Bertrand
Dier
Alli Sterling
Barkley
Sturridge Vardy
All we can hope for is that drawing this game, thus losing the group doesn't hurt us, and that the games rest does the players rested a lot of good.
No disrespect to Henderson etc, they put the effort in, but the team went back to just being a solid hard to beat team. There wasn't enough invention in the midfield, the movement of the strikers wasn't good enough, and yet again the final ball just wasn't there.
We had run out of ideas by the hour mark. Sterling should have been brought on, Barkley and i would have put young Rashford on.
Rooney wasn't the sub we needed, we needed Sterling to run at defenders, Barkley and Rashford to do the same.
It sounds imbecilic not bring on you're best player, but i think rashford might just have given us something different, along with the other two.
The manager seems to have certain players that 'must come on', instead of looking at what is needed.
A chance missed at not topping the group, let's hope it doesn't cost us. A different manager and we could have nicked that game, he made decisions but not the one's needed!.
-
For the next round:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClbHvmRWkAgR49s.jpg) (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClbHvmnWkAAZoXn.jpg)
It's not who we will face NEXT. Its the fact that France are then waiting in the QFs. When it could have been (probably) one of Hungary, Portugal, Belgium and Sweden.
-
We will get Portugal, Ronaldo won't have another goal free game!.
-
I wouldn't mind Portugal. They look like a team that isn't getting on together. Ronaldo is out of sorts and blaming everyone else but himself, kyle Walker will have him in his pocket.
I think a lot of you guys are being a bit unfair in your criticism of England.
I thought before the game that we'd win 3-0 but Slovakia played very deep with10 players behind the ball. We couldn't get behind them so had to try and go through them. At one point, I noticed they had four players in a centre back position.
Someone mentioned we were trying to play like Spain, I disagree, if anything we were in too much of a hurry to get at Slovakia where it hurts.
We could have moved the ball about a bit more 40 yards out to try and find pockets and also tire them out.
I would have been worried if we looked like we didn't have any ideas in these three games but we've played very well.
These first round games are tense affairs, but we are through, first stage mission completed.
Why worry who we might play later in the competition? I've only seen Italy (in one game) and Spain ( in one game) look really good.
Chill out and enjoy the build up to the next game. The fun starts here.
-
Had Vardy tucked that chance away and Alli's chance gone in people would be lauding a brilliant performance. Vardy was an odds on chance to score there and it was a miracle block on the like for the Alli chance. MS did very well but still could have done very well to get there and put it in his own net.
The last 10 minutes or so after they put a nail in it and had 11 men camped in the box we struggled a bit but prior to that whe had dragged their defence all over the place to create space in and around the box. Lallana's movement was excellent.
You are never usually too far away from the mark BST but I disagree with you here. We have been very good in all 3 games without taking as many chances as we may have and the odd defensive error. The shape has been very good and very fluid at times.
-
The bigger issue is the fact through not winning the group they have to relocate or travel to southern France from their northern base. It will be a lot warmer down there as well.
-
You have to laugh really when you listen to some comments from us English about our own team. You can expect silly amateur responses from posters on a public forum like this one, but when professional journalists come out with it on TV it makes you realise there's no wonder why some people emulate them.
A prime example came this morning when an ITV reporter gushed about Wales' successful tournament so far, explaining that Wales did what England couldn't when they put 3 goals past Russia. He was obviously insinuating that this was proof that Wales are superior to England, completely disregarding the fact that England beat them the other day!
Now I know that some people on here will also think Wales are better than England, claiming that tables don't lie, etc. It really does take all sorts, at all levels of intellect!
-
I think it would take a bit of a skewed perspective to put the spotlight on a single piece of shaky defending (that amounted to nothing but was as close as our opponent came to a goal) and dismiss everything we created at the other end.
That said, it was a frustrating watch and after a bright start I felt we ran out of ideas in the end. 5 points from a group of that quality is a poor total but we're through and have to move on from that now.
I'd say Hungary would be the most likely opponent in the next round. Not sure why all the focus on Portugal but if it is to be them then so be it.
We've got through the group largely untroubled and, whilst it has been frustrating that we haven't found the cutting edge yet, we haven't been put on the back foot for any sustained spell in any game. I feel there's more to come from this team.
-
I don't think Wales is better than England, I think that Wales stays only in 2 players, Bale and Ramsey. They attacked more when they played against weaker teams or teams with approximate the same value, but when they meat better teams, they play only counter-attack, like many other teams.
-
We can't be sure of course, but I think if changes had been kept to a minimum we would have had more chance of winning the game.
Leaving out Rooney was the big one for me. He's the captain and I want the captain to be able to read the situation and make minor changes on the field. By the time Rooney got on the game had taken shape and was the football equivalent of trench warfare.
-
Ultimately though why the fear of France etc. If we want to win it we have to beat strong sides. Quarters would be OK, semis very good, final exceptional.
Anyone who compares England and Wales look at the margins, Ie late goals. Also look at how the teams played against Wales, which meant more space for them. The better teams should give us more opportunity to play, it may help us.
-
Puts it better than I could:
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36580159
-
One thing to consider is Russia and Slovakia were set up to defend and play for 1 point when they played us; when they played Wales they were more attack minded and would have been in the mindset they had more chance of winning, which then left them open to the counter-attack, which Wales are set up perfectly to take advantage of.
-
Puts it better than I could:
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36580159
But what about all them chances?
-
Ultimately though why the fear of France etc. If we want to win it we have to beat strong sides. Quarters would be OK, semis very good, final exceptional.
Anyone who compares England and Wales look at the margins, Ie late goals. Also look at how the teams played against Wales, which meant more space for them. The better teams should give us more opportunity to play, it may help us.
1) That "you have to beat strong sides" comment misses the point by a wide margin. In tournament football, you can have an easy route to the latter stages or a hard route. If you have a hard route, even the best side in the world is has the dice loaded against them. The probability is that sooner or later, someone trips you up. We have, through a combination of bizarre team selection (Wilshere? I mean, really? Wilshere?) and limitations of the players just chucked away what should have been a relatively easy route to the semi-finals and taken on what looks like a much harder one. It doesn't help.
2) I keep hearing that we might find it easier against better, more expansive teams. Yes, maybe we'll be able to get in behind them. But what do you think they will do to us?
-
Not a lot when they are three nil down after 20 minutes haha.
-
Right. It's time for that biennial question.
How many of the world's leading nations have England beaten in the knockout stages of Euros and World Cups since 1966?
-
Spain in 96. Now I'm struggling...
-
That one at a stretch. Spain were never really a top footballing nation pre-2008.
Any more?
-
Here's the full record.
EC68 Lost to Yugoslavia
WC70 Lost to West Germany
EC72 Lost to West Germany in what was effectively the QF
WC86 Beat Paraguay. Lost to Argentina
WC90 Beat Belgium and Cameroon. Lost to W Germany
EC96 Beat Spain. Lost to Germany
WC98 Lost to Argentina
WC02 Beat Denmark. Lost to Brazil
EC04 Lost to Portugal
WC06 Beat Ecuador. Lost to Portugal
WC10 Lost to Germany.
EC12 Lost to Italy.
In 50 years, we've a grand total of 6 wins and 12 defeats in knockout stages of tournaments. In the last two decades, we've beaten Denmark and Ecuador.
-
Puts it better than I could:
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36580159
But what about all them chances?
We created chances, but not enough clear cut ones. The point he's making is that it was folly to make so many team changes.
Going back to chances and conversion, we've left the best pure box predator back at home.
-
Puts it better than I could:
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36580159
But what about all them chances?
We created chances, but not enough clear cut ones. The point he's making is that it was folly to make so many team changes.
Going back to chances and conversion, we've left the best pure box predator back at home.
Theo?
-
Wasn't Spain 96 a draw.
-
Ok. If you take penalty shoot out defeats to be actually draws (which I do to be honest, but the consensus seems to be against that) then our record over the past 50 years is (taking into account the two-legged "QF" in 1972):
P19 W5 D8 L6
Victories against Paraguay, Belgium, Cameroon, Denmark and Ecuador
Draws against (West) Germany x3, Spain, Argentina, Italy and Portugal x2
Defeats against Yugoslavia, (West) Germany x2, Brazil, Argentina
Sobering reading for a country that thinks of itself as a major footballing power.
Even worse is that fact that 10 times in the past 22 tournaments (ignoring Spain 82 which was a bizarre format) we've not even made it to the knockout stages.
-
I doubt anyone would deny the english were shite at penalties when representing their country. If they weren't our record would be far better. I reckon the reason for it is down to the english media putting them under intolerable pressure by breathing down their necks almost hoping they miss so that they can produce a story of ridicule the next day. The extra pressure caused by this also affects their general performance in games.
It's sad that the gullible members of the public have been brainwashed into copying the press with this attitude.
I've said it before, and I'm saying it again. The english media only like losers.
-
Just seen the goals for Wales, criminal defending from Russia. Disgrace to the tournament them.
Off to the Salt Mines for them.
-
You can't expect the same team of players to play 7 games in 29 days - in heat, in frenetic paced international football, and win the tournament. We're going need a squad to win it.
I was thinking about that. However, would you rather run out of steam in the semis or get knocked out in the quarters or before simply because you'd caused yourselves to go down a tougher route?
Anyway, by the time you get to the last four, most teams will be running on adrenaline anyway.
-
Rather than revelling in our past failings I still have hope and belief in this young team. Maybe I'm deluded but I'm English and a football fan so I'm going to believe we can build on the positive signs on show so far in this tournament and still do something.
Most of these players are not associated with the history of disappointments so I take no pleasure in looking back at it all and casting aspersions over the limitations of this team. We have all got a bit frustrated but it'll be interesting to see how this group of players rise to the challenge of knockout football. We may fall flat but I hope we have a good crack at it, starting next Monday.
-
YOU ARE BEING WATCHED, ENGLAND.............No pressure like!
-
Puts it better than I could:
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36580159
But what about all them chances?
We created chances, but not enough clear cut ones. The point he's making is that it was folly to make so many team changes.
Going back to chances and conversion, we've left the best pure box predator back at home.
Theo?
Ha, ha! No, I was thinking Defoe. Doesn't offer you what Kane, Sturridge or Vardy do but would be very handy to bring on in a tight game.
-
You can't expect the same team of players to play 7 games in 29 days - in heat, in frenetic paced international football, and win the tournament. We're going need a squad to win it.
I was thinking about that. However, would you rather run out of steam in the semis or get knocked out in the quarters or before simply because you'd caused yourselves to go down a tougher route?
Anyway, by the time you get to the last four, most teams will be running on adrenaline anyway.
Tougher? I'm not so sure. Wales will (most likely) have to play Croatia, Belgium/Portugal, then Spain or something similar. We basically have to play France and Germany. In both half of the draws we were due to play someone decent in the 1/4 final. So It's academic about player fitness really, you're going to have to beat someone decent eventually.
As for adrenaline. I think possibly teams like Brazil in the last world cup were running on adrenaline but unfortunately teams like Germany were still running on skill and stuff like that.
-
Players are apparently of world class levels (they definitely are pay-wise). so the talent is there.
Surely then it must be poor managerial skills from the pensioner up top?
-
Hmm... We are through to the second round, unbeaten. We have created chances in every game but need to improve in the final third, be more ruthless in front of goal.
Remember the world cup in 82? Italy were poor in their group, 3 draws was it?
I am not saying England now are the same as Italy in 82, but the point is that in tournament football there is time to improve.
-
You can't expect the same team of players to play 7 games in 29 days - in heat, in frenetic paced international football, and win the tournament. We're going need a squad to win it.
I was thinking about that. However, would you rather run out of steam in the semis or get knocked out in the quarters or before simply because you'd caused yourselves to go down a tougher route?
Anyway, by the time you get to the last four, most teams will be running on adrenaline anyway.
Tougher? I'm not so sure. Wales will (most likely) have to play Croatia, Belgium/Portugal, then Spain or something similar. We basically have to play France and Germany. In both half of the draws we were due to play someone decent in the 1/4 final. So It's academic about player fitness really, you're going to have to beat someone decent eventually.
As for adrenaline. I think possibly teams like Brazil in the last world cup were running on adrenaline but unfortunately teams like Germany were still running on skill and stuff like that.
We could drop lucky, but most times you're going to be more likely to win against a team that finished third in their group than one that finished second.
-
Hmm... We are through to the second round, unbeaten. We have created chances in every game but need to improve in the final third, be more ruthless in front of goal.
Remember the world cup in 82? Italy were poor in their group, 3 draws was it?
I am not saying England now are the same as Italy in 82, but the point is that in tournament football there is time to improve.
I was discussing this the other night. The "winners start slowly" idea. Doesn't seem to work in England's case.
-
Let's just wait and see who we get? The game may be more open and goals may come.
-
Plus we haven't had a major surprise in this tournament yet. There's always a surprise.
I certainly think N.Ireland can get a draw against Germany if they defend for their lives potentially putting them in the other half of the draw to England.
-
We're now up against the second-placed team from what looks the weakest group on the evidence so far so that's a result.
Whoever you get in the quarters and semis are going to be decent but we've already beaten Germany and France this year so neither of those teams should frighten England.
We've dominated every game we've played and one of those was with a virtual reserve side. If the goals come, this team could go a very long way but I still don't think it will peak until 2018.
-
I agree totally with the 'clueless' tag. I think we had run out of ideas by half time - the 2nd half was dire watching. This manager is made for qualifying but is absolutely hopeless when it comes to the proper stuff - he's like a rabbit caught in the headlights.
Had a good listen to the West Ham manager after the game last night and you would all do well to rewind your recordings and have a good listen to him (what a find for ITV by the way).
We need new ideas rather than this tried, tested and failed management. He should have gone after the World Cup, imho. But, he's still here and we have to put up with more of the same.....again. His squad 'picks' (pre tournament) certainly raised a few eyebrows, with Wilshere and Henderson being allowed to travel, despite their injury nightmares, and to have Sterling in there at all totally baffled me. How we could have done with a bit of pace last night - something that only the full backs currently seem to be able to put to good use, Vardy excused.
I'm in the BST camp on England and I believe a lot of our failings are down to the ineptitude (albeit at a high level) of the current management set-up.
One final point - where are all those that were suggesting there wasn't even a place for Rooney in the side? I agree, he is no impact player from the bench as we learned last night, but he has been (arguably) our best midfield player by a country mile!
-
In both half of the draws we were due to play someone decent in the 1/4 final. So It's academic about player fitness really, you're going to have to beat someone decent eventually.
There are scales though.
Setting England aside, list the top 7 other sides in the competition. The ones who, all other things being equal, if the best sides progressed, you'd expect to make the last 8.
France
Germany
Spain
Italy
Belgium
and a couple from
Portugal, Croatia, Poland, maybe Switzerland
Now, had be won our group, the only ones of those that we could realistically end up playing in the QFs would have been Belgium, and Portugal. As it is, assuming we get there, our QF opponent is likely to be France. That looks like a significantly harder match. I'd have expected us to be favourite or at least on level odds against either Belgium or Portugal. We'll be very much the underdog against France. We've made it much harder than it needed to have been. Which, I suspect, will set us up for another underwhelming final outcome.
Fingers crossed that I'm wrong.
-
I'm not one to put ALL the blame for England's half-century of under performance at the door of the manager. The core of our problem is the inability to produce genuinely world-class players with ability, intelligence and discipline. But management decisions like last night's hardly help, do they?
-
I don't think the changes were the problem,if we haven't got squad players capable of beating a poor team like that we haven't a hope...I also agree with how tactically inept we are at adapting..We did exactly what they hoped we would do,play aimless balls across free space in midfield while looking to find a ball through a packed defence...Wilshere isn't fit,any fool can see that he shouldn't have been on the plane and Berkely should have played....
It is totally beyond me how bad our crossing is from either set pieces or general play,i'm not exaggerating when I say it's Sunday League standard...
The first thing I would like to do is make them put all the carpet slippers they play in these days in the bin and make them play in proper boots which means you can beat the first man from a dead ball...Especially Henderson but hopefully that's the last we've seen of him...
I thought we were inept,cluless and plain awful against a team that once again every other good team would beat everytime....Clyne was the only positive and once they doubled him up our chance was over...As we always do we've made life hard for ourselves in a group we should win at a canter and made our passage through so much harder..We've come second to Wales for gods sake,a team made up of championship and league 1 and 2 footballers and while ever other team with a chance of winning it has been able to stroll through the last game saving mental and physical energy we had to push to the end...
I agree with the theory we will do better against sides who now have to come out and play but last night was simply not good enough,and once again showed how far behind we are with our ability to manage a football game and adapt tactically....However well we do from here Hodgson shouldn't get another contract...
-
It is totally beyond me how bad our crossing is from either set pieces or general play,i'm not exaggerating when I say it's Sunday League standard...
For me it's the running in the box that is the problem. Cahill is basically stationary 12 yards out on corners and free-kicks. He should be bombing in there from deep. He also seems to be the only one who gets on the end of balls. Where are the others?
-
Rather than revelling in our past failings I still have hope and belief in this young team. Maybe I'm deluded but I'm English and a football fan so I'm going to believe we can build on the positive signs on show so far in this tournament and still do something.
Most of these players are not associated with the history of disappointments so I take no pleasure in looking back at it all and casting aspersions over the limitations of this team. We have all got a bit frustrated but it'll be interesting to see how this group of players rise to the challenge of knockout football. We may fall flat but I hope we have a good crack at it, starting next Monday.
I think you're confusing "revelling" with "being aware of and tempering one's expectations as a result".
-
They probably worked out it wasn't worth the effort making the runs as the corner either failed to beat the first man (mostly) or was aimed at Skirtels head on the 6 yard line...Something he's made a career defending against for Liverpool week in week out...
And if they were crossing from the wings the best position to attack the ball was sat next to the cameraman behind the goal....
-
Not ALL the blame BST, but most of it. Our obsession with an Englishman has seen us with some right tools as managers over the years. Then, when we did eventually look abroad, we got Sven and Capello! Says a lot for the hirers and firers.
The present incumbent is ok and he's a nice guy but he's from a time 20 years ago, not the here and now.
We have some good young lads and, on recent evidence, some good ones in the U21's - please let's not waste the opportunity we have to build on what we have - instead of floundering from one debacle to the next.
-
Rather than revelling in our past failings I still have hope and belief in this young team. Maybe I'm deluded but I'm English and a football fan so I'm going to believe we can build on the positive signs on show so far in this tournament and still do something.
Most of these players are not associated with the history of disappointments so I take no pleasure in looking back at it all and casting aspersions over the limitations of this team. We have all got a bit frustrated but it'll be interesting to see how this group of players rise to the challenge of knockout football. We may fall flat but I hope we have a good crack at it, starting next Monday.
I think you're confusing "revelling" with "being aware of and tempering one's expectations as a result".
It's just a perception of how it comes across, that's all.
-
I'm just a jaded old get who expended all his naive enthusiasm on England years ago.
I've seen this "This time we've got a different set" plenty of times. I've yet to see anything from this group to suggest that they are any more capable of living up to that concept than their forebears. Here's hoping they prove me wrong.
-
I'm just a jaded old get who expended all his naive enthusiasm on England years ago.
I've seen this "This time we've got a different set" plenty of times. I've yet to see anything from this group to suggest that they are any more capable of living up to that concept than their forebears. Here's hoping they prove me wrong.
That's a fair point Billy and I agree with it...If you had confidence the old mistakes have been eradicated maybe I could get a bit more excited but it has previous history written all over it..Fail to win a simple group without been able to save mental energy,which gives us a much harder draw going forwards to what ends up with the inevitable quarter final defeat...
I really wanted to be positive about Englands chances this time around but they have to offer the fans something to get behind and make a statement to all the other teams...
-
I think this was the first tournament in a long time people went in to with a pragmatic appraisal of England's chances. Everyone knows the history. To start drawing on it after we've absolutely dominated all three games in the group stage is just odd timing.
-
I cant understand this fascination with getting excited about dominating games it means absolutely nothing and is no reflection on performance....We've dominated possession because the opposition were happy for us to do so, confident that we can do little with it and they have been proved right...Russia had the same plan as the Slovaks,both worked for them and in both games apart from one set piece free kick we failed to break either team down.!!!
-
Dominating a game is no reflection on performance? Really? You're going to have to explain that one to me WC.
In the first half against Russia we were fantastic, in the 2nd half against Wales it was wave after wave of attack and against Slovakia they hardly even made it into our half.
It's no good being wet flannels at this point lads. You have to give credit where it is due. Does it mean anyone is getting excited about actually winning the tournament? Of course not.
-
I have explained it Copps..It was nothing to do with our good play that we dominated both games.Both Russia and Slovakia's game plan was for us to have possession in a certain area limiting us to long range shots and chances with low percentage of conversion...We had lots of both that the opposition were happy with,forget the stats we had 2 good chances all game,the rest were nothing other than speculative chances when we ran out of ideas how to break them down...
If you believe that both those teams had started the game with a intention of getting at us and it was our good play that gave us that dominance then we will have to disagree...
-
The game plan from Russia and Slovakia was clear.
I would hope that in the knockout stages, teams will be a bit more attack-minded as they will need to score to progress. That said, If I was managing ANYONE against England in a knockout match I'd try to take it to penalties...
-
I have explained it Copps..It was nothing to do with our good play that we dominated both games.Both Russia and Slovakia's game plan was for us to have possession in a certain area limiting us to long range shots and chances with low percentage of conversion...We had lots of both that the opposition were happy with,forget the stats we had 2 good chances all game,the rest were nothing other than speculative chances when we ran out of ideas how to break them down...
If you believe that both those teams had started the game with a intention of getting at us and it was our good play that gave us that dominance then we will have to disagree...
Completely agree, annoys me at the upmost when i see all these pundits and reporters saying that we dominated a team that parked the bus. what they need is a good slating from the press and manager, but can you see roy hodgson grilling the england squad?
We need a manager who has passion for the game and gets the players to realise that they are representing the country such as west hams' slavan bilic bloke.
somebody needs to bring these players down to earth, because i cannot see a spark of creativity or desire from half of these players.
-
When Poland beat Ukraine and Germany draw with N. Ireland people will start realising Roy's played a blinder and should be knighted.
-
Since it appears that one or two people have misinterpreted my take, I'll spell it out.
I have wanted to see my country show that they are a match for the best since I first understood what football was.
As a infants school kid I saw Gunter Netzer run rings round us in 1972. Tomakiewski and the marvellous Polish team finish us off the year after. Every couple of years since I've wanted us to prove that we're as good as the others.
But we never have. And I realised a couple of decades ago that we probably never would. Because our game has neither the wit nor the interest to do so.
But every generation we suspend disbelief and tell ourselves that maybe this group might be the one. And whilst ever we're prepared to big up the current crop and look for positives where they don't really exist, it'll never get any better.
So yeah, we've "dominated" three group matches. But those three group matches are the equivalent of a regiment Trooping the Colour. Let's see what happens when they come up against oppositions who fire big bullets from big guns.
Enthusing about dominating possession (and failing to Winnie scored rom open play) against sides as weak as Slovakia and Russia is your right. Telling yourself that we created a host of chances and were denied by miraculous defending is fine if that's your choice.
But we really ought to be better than that. Maybe this lot will prove me wrong. But there was nothing in last night's performance to indicate that they will.
-
When Poland beat Ukraine and Germany draw with N. Ireland people will start realising Roy's played a blinder and should be knighted.
haha I suspect if that goes wrong you might be reminded of that later Copps ;-)
-
And that Copps is the difference...NI set up in a similar way to Slovakia..Sat behind the ball asking the Germans to break them down...half hour gone and Germany have created more good chances than we did all night..Hit the bar twice and winning 1-0
-
As much as they have been under the cosh they've been in the Germany box on three or four occasions which is more than Slovakia achieved all game.
-
It's a very subjective thing. I get that some people have been worn down by decades of 'failure' and / or no longer care how the national team get on as a yardstick for enjoyment of the tournament. But people are also entitled to look for and pick out the positives. It may be considered delusional but so what? This is a game of hopes and dreams and delusion.
Some may think it a better and more pragmatic approach to chastise the lack of cutting edge, pre-empt the ultimate and inevitable disappointment and dismiss the territorial dominance based upon the unheralded nature of the opposition. There are reasons for that and a history behind it, as explained, but it does come across as revelling in the predicted failure before it's been confirmed. Whether it's meant that way or not, I can only say how it reads to me. Perhaps it strikes me more as I'm one of the delusional, substandard accepting buffoons that has got some enjoyment from watching England in this tournament so far.
It got frustrating as the game wore on yesterday, and it's hard to evaluate the good and bad in the performance without that being jaded by the way it fizzled out into a disappointing result. But if we are so shit then that should've been expected rather than blown up into an issue. I side with those that saw something different in the majority of the performance against Russia, the majority of the performance against Wales and at least the first half of yesterday. I'm not blind to the fact that there's room for improvement, but the energy and intent in this team gives me hope.
I don't care that in a week or two's time I'll probably look a clown for showing enthusiasm and belief in my disappointingly English country. This is a team and a set of players that I want to get behind and I intend to enjoy doing so.
-
As much as they have been under the cosh they've been in the Germany box on three or four occasions which is more than Slovakia achieved all game.
[/quote
Your clutching at very wispy straws there...lol 😉
-
I'm wanting these set of players to do well. But changing six of the side was wrong. Roy and his staff do not set the team up to win in tournament football.
I hope he can get the side right, the mid field is the most important to provide chances for the strikers. Diet in front of the centre halves as been very good. Walker and Rose are the best two fullbacks.
So now the attacking five are the layers Roy must get right
-
You read WAY too much into my posts Jonathan.
You've ignored the several times I say "I hope I'm proved wrong". Not sure how much clearer I can make it.
-
The current group of players should be a real force in two years time at the World Cup
-
You read WAY too much into my posts Jonathan.
You've ignored the several times I say "I hope I'm proved wrong". Not sure how much clearer I can make it.
It has been a while since we've disagreed on a point. This was inevitable eventually.
-
BST
I hope you're proved wrong too. I've got £20 on England to win it, based on your prediction. :)
-
In hindsight Hodgsons biggest mistake was resting Rooney. I can live with the other changes,resting full backs and replacing an ineffective Kane and sterling, but without Rooney there was no creativity. WILSHIRE isnt fit and was poor. Roy should have started with Rooney then subbed him when we had the game won.
He was trying to do too much when he came on as sub and struggled to pick up the pace. Id have probs brought Rashford on instead of Kane who is woeful at the minute.
-
I just don't get why people keep saying we've made mistakes. We've qualified. We've played well. You can't deny any of those things.
Why is it fashionable to criticse England at the wrong times?
Wet flannels the lot of you.
-
He and we can argue the team he put out was good enough to win the game. He referred to hindsight might have done it different but when the majority of us have the foresight to suggest he made too many changes, it shows he's not the man for all seasons.
You put your best team out and if the game goes well, then you can juggle your subs.
Continuity means alot to players in any game, so to deprive Rooney, Alli, Walker and Rose to continue their top form was poor management imho.
Now, he should know his best XI and stick to it through the rest of the tournament. Those starting players should be good enough to be able to adapt and change shape during a game if necessary.
-
Usual story. Bright for first 20 minutes of tournament then quickly revert to clueless and aimless dirge, limp through group and then go out at first whiff of a credible nation.
Someone has told them that international football is all about possession. As a result they fanny around with the ball passing between centre backs and defensive shield for just long enough so that two banks of four get back and we then amble into this treacle like morass at the pace of an arthritic slug and wonder why we can't get see the goal let alone have a shot.
Either attack at pace or be good enough like Spain or Brazil to pass through teams. We ain't going to be latter so FFS play to type and do the former.
-
Missing one on ones, having shots cleared off the line means you have broken teams down, I agree possession stats don't always mean much but when you're creating chances its daft to suggest we didn't manage to break them down
-
Plural Dickos?
-
We'll, the Germans scratched a win against the Irish and the invincible Spanish list against Croatia.
I guess their media people will be bashing them but it bet it isn't nearly as hard as our lot do to our team.
We finished second in our group and are going about how crap we are.
To flip that round, I wonder what the likes of Hungary or Portugal are thinking about now that one if them is likely to play us now instead if Wales.
I expect some responses on here to be "great, we can play England now" but in reality I bet they would rather have played Wales.
Oh and to compare our national team to Sunday league is daft beyond belief.
-
We'll, the Germans scratched a win against the Irish and the invincible Spanish list against Croatia.
I guess their media people will be bashing them but it bet it isn't nearly as hard as our lot do to our team.
We finished second in our group and are who gong about how crap we are.
To flip that round, I wonder what the likes of Hungary or Portugal are thinking about now that one if them is likely to play us now instead if Wales.
I expect some responses on here to be "great, we can play England now" but in reality I bet they would rather have played Wales.
Oh and to compare our national team to Sunday league is daft beyond belief.
Spain now play Italy in the round of 16.
The winner will play Germany in the QF if they win their round of 16.
So by finishing second we are in this side of the draw. All group F teams will be aiming to finish first to go into the other side of the draw.
Because the winner of our round of 16 will play France in the QF if they win their round of 16 game.
Therefore if we had won our group we would have avoided all the big hitters until the final. Therefore Roy's decision making last night was wrong and made our chances harder to get passed the QF
-
Plural Dickos?
Clyne and vardy
-
One on ones?
Shots cleared off the line?
-
One on ones?
Shots cleared off the line?
Clyne was clean through and so was vardy,
-
I see improvement from the last tournament, i see no point really going any further back. All three games have been of about the same standard. We have dominated possession, but in all three games the ice cool nerve to play the final ball, or finish with a goal has mostly not been there. We have averaged a goal a game over the three.
Against russia, we faced them first, they still had the chance to do well, we dominated them, we played attacking football, final ball, bad luck, finish let us down, plus poor substitutions. Wales faced them last, with confidence rock bottom, also teams play more open against wales, than against us, Wales deservedly won the game .
Against Wales same performance, was going the same way, until the substitutions won us the game.
Against slovakia, many changes similar performance, again final ball, bad luck, lack of finishing cost us, plus poor team selections and subs.
We could have faced northern ireland next round, instead we will get portugal.
The fa have given him everything to do well, it was just a poor decision in hindsight. Against slovakia or anybody defensive minded, you need movement, pace and the ability to dribble past players.
The players don't believe in themselves enough to take chances, the manager suffers with inner caution that nags away at him!.
It's great we have made it out of the group, and unbeaten, but being in that half of the draw will need career best performances in each round to get through.
The other half of the draw, we might have got away with the steady progress, needed because we have a new team, it puts instant pressure on, rather than being able to improve steadily.
Our best chance is to attack, under any pressure the defence will struggle. For me to beat the better teams you must have a centre half, that can bring the ball into midfield, Stones should be in the team.
We have the best full backs in the tournament for me, best defensive midfielder, plus we have Alli finding his way around tournament football.
Lallana has been reliable in all the games, though he looked tired in the last one. Rooney is improving in midfield, though i'd like to see him nearer the front players.
Hart is capable of being very good, but like all keepers is prone to a mistake. Upfront Sturridge and vardy are our best, get them in the right areas and they will score. On the bench good options for change.
We have a lot to be excited about, i just think it's now much harder for a new team like ours to have to dramatically improve. We are in the next round let's see what happens!.
-
It's not very likely we can get Portugal
-
We'll, the Germans scratched a win against the Irish and the invincible Spanish list against Croatia.
I guess their media people will be bashing them but it bet it isn't nearly as hard as our lot do to our team.
We finished second in our group and are who gong about how crap we are.
To flip that round, I wonder what the likes of Hungary or Portugal are thinking about now that one if them is likely to play us now instead if Wales.
I expect some responses on here to be "great, we can play England now" but in reality I bet they would rather have played Wales.
Oh and to compare our national team to Sunday league is daft beyond belief.
Spain now play Italy in the round of 16.
The winner will play Germany in the QF if they win their round of 16.
So by finishing second we are in this side of the draw. All group F teams will be aiming to finish first to go into the other side of the draw.
Because the winner of our round of 16 will play France in the QF if they win their round of 16 game.
Therefore if we had won our group we would have avoided all the big hitters until the final. Therefore Roy's decision making last night was wrong and made our chances harder to get passed the QF
Yeah, well in our half of the draw the Italaians now play Spain then if the Germans win their next game they play the winner of Spain v Italy so that takes care of at least two of the "big hitters".
We have to play some of them at some time if we are to win the thing !!
-
Wasn't Spain 96 a draw.
If you are saying that we didnt beat Spain (because we only got through on pens) then that makes our record quite a bit better.
I feel much better now knowing that the Germans didnt beat us in that 96 semi final !!
-
That Slovakia defence is bloody hard to break down int it?
-
The Germans have made the mistake of peaking too soon.
-
Billy you're well versed enough to know one game can never be compared with another
Belgium beat Ireland 3-0, Italy beat Belgium 2-0, Ireland beat Italy 1-0
-
Actually Dickos, Ireland beat an Italy side that had brought 8 second string players into the line-up.
-
By the same logic then, Slovakia managed a draw against and England team with six "second choice" players in it whereas they played against a full strength German team.
-
Aaaannndddd...we get back to the point of the thread.
Thank you Hound.
-
Wasn't Spain 96 a draw.
If you are saying that we didnt beat Spain (because we only got through on pens) then that makes our record quite a bit better.
I feel much better now knowing that the Germans didnt beat us in that 96 semi final !!
To be pedantic , we only beat Spain because they had a perfectly good goal disallowed for off side. :)
-
England beat Wales
Wales beat Slovakia
England drew with Slovakia
Bradford beat Chelsea rovers beat Bradford we're better than chelsea
-
Dickos.
An England team with six changes drew withSlovakia.
Aaaaaaannnddd... we get back to the point of the thread.
-
Does Roy's decision, look better in hindsight, when we look at how the republic of ireland, visibly tired in the second half. Or can we really only decide that, if we beat iceland?.
I have seen a fair few teams, who have either gone down the rotating players route, and the playing the same side every game route, and it looks better for the rotating teams.
The problem is, most of the sides who have kept the same side, tend to be the weaker nations who have less options to play with, it's hard to judge for me.
-
Wasn't Spain 96 a draw.
If you are saying that we didnt beat Spain (because we only got through on pens) then that makes our record quite a bit better.
I feel much better now knowing that the Germans didnt beat us in that 96 semi final !!
To be pedantic , we only beat Spain because they had a perfectly good goal disallowed for off side. :)
To be pedantic back then, Argentina only beat us in France because Sol Campbell had a perfectly good goal disallowed.
Come to think of it, if Lampards shot had crossed the line the Germans might not have beaten us that day.
-
Sterling, wilshere, smalling.. Definitely shouldn't haven't been at the tournement, feel for Ross Barkley, brilliant play but don't understand why Roy didnt see that.
-
Barkley?
Here's a thought.
Because he's even more clueless and more of a liability than the cack that played tonight?
-
Made this point last week. Take no pleasure in saying I was absolutely right - but I was absolutely right.
We have been soundly defeated by a country the size of Donny.
Total embarrassment but not unexpected in any way, shape or form. When will folk realise?
-
Wasn't Spain 96 a draw.
If you are saying that we didnt beat Spain (because we only got through on pens) then that makes our record quite a bit better.
I feel much better now knowing that the Germans didnt beat us in that 96 semi final !!
To be pedantic , we only beat Spain because they had a perfectly good goal disallowed for off side. :)
To be pedantic back then, Argentina only beat us in France because Sol Campbell had a perfectly good goal disallowed.
Come to think of it, if Lampards shot had crossed the line the Germans might not have beaten us that day.
Hound. Go and have a look at the video again, and watch Shearer's arm.
And while you're at it, watch Owen's dive for the early penalty.
-
Give over billy, you could go through every game in history and find silly things like that,
-
Dickos
The point being, of course, that we weren't unfairly treated in that game. I was responding to Hound's implication that we had been.
-
At least Roy Hodgson had a coherent plan on how we should exit Europe.....
-
Dickos
The point being, of course, that we weren't unfairly treated in that game. I was responding to Hound's implication that we had been.
Billy, there are very many goals in very many games that could be ruled out if the letter of the law was upheld and the refs spotted all the wrongdoings.
What about the greatest wrongdoing of all time (probably), that is Maradonnas' handball goal.
Maybe they wouldnt have won that day if the goal had been ruled out and Diego had been red carded for cheating and ungentlemanly conduct?
-
Made this point last week. Take no pleasure in saying I was absolutely right - but I was absolutely right.
Total embarrassment but not unexpected in any way, shape or form. When will folk realise?
Funny, that's what a lot of folk said about Rovers last season while others were saying they'd reach the play-offs! And those that did predict right were condemned as petulant ingrates!
When will folk realise indeed!
-
Hound
Follow your logic.
You're saying that because refs sometimes miss infringements, they should ignore all infringements? Or if we commit a foul which the ref sees, we're hard done to and are justified in feeling cheated?
-
No Billy, i am just stating a fact, that is all.
We (our teams) have got away with just as many as we have committed.
Originally i responded to a comment which said we drew with Spain (because we had only won on pens) which had (IMO) been made to worsen our record in tournaments (bringing down our win ratio -see what i mean).
I made my not being beaten by the Germans in 96 comment to equal that out (by bringing down our defeats ratio ).
I know you will still be with me.
-
Hound
In your words, we had "a perfectly good goal" disallowed against Argentina.
I say, "no we didnt". Shearer's forearm went into the keeper's face. It was a foul. It was a correct decision.
That was all we were talking about. The rest is irrelevant.
-
Well, it wasn't all that i was talking about.
I still say that there will have been loads of goals allowed in similar circumstances, for and against us.
That goal of Campbells could quite easily have been allowed by a different ref or even the same ref on another day.
-
But. It. Was. A. Foul.
Therefore it wasn't "a perfectly good goal". Therefore there is nothing to complain about. Your complaint boils down to the fact that the referee didn't make a mistake.
-
In the words of the Knight in The Quest for the Holy Grail, "lets call this a draw then".
-
Aye.
Penalties?
-
See you in the park in the morning then.
I have a ball.