Tunisia - England

[chrisd_123]

Amazed that anyone is moaning about England. We deservedly won a game that should have been out of sight. Tunisia only had one shot on goal courtesy of the softest penalty you’ll ever see. We created countless chances - more than I remember seeing us create at any tournament game. Supposedly people had no expectations going into the tournament, yet still there’s all this complaining that we only won 2-1. Unbelievable.

Just enjoy the tournament or turn over and watch love island.

Sense at last. If the first half performance was in the second half and vice versa people would be lauding the performance. Completely dominated the game against a side that aren’t bad at all.

My view is this. England last night did exactly what you want a team who can challenge at a tournament to do.

Potential tricky opening game and started very well. Got in front. Bizarre penalty for them to score as they were never going to be anywhere near scoring any other way. Then kept going in a tough second half and won it.

It’s easy to slate England for that second half using the “slow and boring” excuse but if that was Germany or France last night everyone would be saying “But they get it done and know how to win.”

Germany, Argentina and Brazil have all fallen short. Only France, England and Belgium really have set a marker down so far from the so called ‘top teams’.

In 2016 we went in front vs Iceland, threw it away and we’re void of ideas and gave up with 10 mins to go really and accepted that we’re werent going to score. Last night, yes the intensity dropped, but they kept going and got the win.

The only thing I could criticise really was not playing Rose for a left footer on the left and not making changes a litter earlier to freshen it up. The performance was fine and a good opener

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Amazed that anyone is moaning about England. We deservedly won a game that should have been out of sight. Tunisia only had one shot on goal courtesy of the softest penalty you’ll ever see. We created countless chances - more than I remember seeing us create at any tournament game. Supposedly people had no expectations going into the tournament, yet still there’s all this complaining that we only won 2-1. Unbelievable.

Just enjoy the tournament or turn over and watch love island.

Sense at last. If the first half performance was in the second half and vice versa people would be lauding the performance. Completely dominated the game against a side that aren’t bad at all.

My view is this. England last night did exactly what you want a team who can challenge at a tournament to do.

Potential tricky opening game and started very well. Got in front. Bizarre penalty for them to score as they were never going to be anywhere near scoring any other way. Then kept going in a tough second half and won it.

It’s easy to slate England for that second half using the “slow and boring” excuse but if that was Germany or France last night everyone would be saying “But they get it done and know how to win.”

Germany, Argentina and Brazil have all fallen short. Only France, England and Belgium really have set a marker down so far from the so called ‘top teams’.

In 2016 we went in front vs Iceland, threw it away and we’re void of ideas and gave up with 10 mins to go really and accepted that we’re werent going to score. Last night, yes the intensity dropped, but they kept going and got the win.

The only thing I could criticise really was not playing Rose for a left footer on the left and not making changes a litter earlier to freshen it up. The performance was fine and a good opener

That's a good summary. I think he saw Young as a safe pair of hands given his experience and with Rose perhaps not fully up to speed. He may bring Rose in for the next game and maybe Rashford from the start, but I wouldn't want him to tinker too much. and say bring in Dier for Henderson. Play as near to your best team as you can every game to get that continuity and confidence going.

[drfchound]

Panama won’t be anywhere near as tough to beat as Tunisia were so whoever comes in may well shine more than the player they replace.
Hopefully we can put in another good performance as we did in the first game but the primary objective is a win however we get it.

[chrisd_123]

Panama won’t be anywhere near as tough to beat as Tunisia were so whoever comes in may well shine more than the player they replace.
Hopefully we can put in another good performance as we did in the first game but the primary objective is a win however we get it.

Exactly. England look like they’re learning how to win. As I said above, for those moaning, if that had been Germany last night we’d have been jealous commenting how they just know how to win things and get the job done no matter what.

[dickos1]

I think you are mistaken about me saying Wellbeck  should be playing.
   I agree with the professionals that Rashford for Lingard, and Rose for Young, which was in my first post.
  I asked a question about Wellbeck, and pointed out that he has one of the best scoring records, and he is noted for putting a shift in, drops back into midfield and helps out, a far better player than given credit for.
     The big change may come if Ali is injured for the next game.

I did ask you which two points you meant but you didn’t answer and just started telling me how good wellbeck is.

[sedwardsdrfc]

I think you are mistaken about me saying Wellbeck  should be playing.
   I agree with the professionals that Rashford for Lingard, and Rose for Young, which was in my first post.
  I asked a question about Wellbeck, and pointed out that he has one of the best scoring records, and he is noted for putting a shift in, drops back into midfield and helps out, a far better player than given credit for.
     The big change may come if Ali is injured for the next game.

Rashford for Lingered doesn't work either he's a striker, Lingard is playing midfield, that'd see us play 5:2:3! can put as many strikers as you want on the pitch but someone has to feed them and make space thats what Lingered does and criticism of him is way over the top

Missing a couple of chances is no reason to drop someone, playing and never looking like getting a chance to score is another thing

[DearneValleyRover]

The changes I would like to see in the next game are: Rose for Young, Jones for Walker, Loftus Cheek for Ali and Rashford for Sterling

[dickos1]

Jones for walker? f**king hope not

[BillyStubbsTears]

Is that David Jones we’re talking about? Cos he’d do a better job than Phil.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

I think Alli maybe injured so, will he go for RLC. Probably. Rose for Young, hope so. Rashford for Sterling? Hope so.

I wouldn't make any further changes unless we go at least 2 up etc. Don't mess about until its certain we've qualified. Hopefully we can choose whether we want to relax v Belgium.

[scawsby steve]

Is that David Jones we’re talking about? Cos he’d do a better job than Phil.

Even Spike Jones would do better than Phil; then again, you're maybe not old enough to remember him, Billy.

[DearneValleyRover]

Yeah pure rubbish that Jones I mean he only made the World Cup squad didn’t he!

[Jonathan]

I don’t think there’s any need to make sweeping changes. Maybe Rose in for Young to get some natural left sided balance. Other than that I’d keep it the same. If Alli is injured then bring in Loftus Cheek. Otherwise go with continuity. It was an encouraging all round display.

[Alan Southstand]

OK, just for fun and to help Selby with his selection of the England team for the next game:

By Phil McNulty
Chief football writer

"Jesse Lingard is usually assured in front of goal and can still be relied on, but there is no escaping the brutal truth that Raheem Sterling's England goal record is wretched and must improve soon.
As Kane's record of 15 goals in 25 games can be rightly lauded, Sterling has scored only twice in 39 internationals and has not scored in his past 21."

https://inews.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup/england-v-tunisia-ratings-world-cup-2018-kane-kyle-walker-sterling/

Jesse Lingard: Played his role perfectly as he constantly posed a threat to the Tunisia defence but was guilty of wasting three of England’s best chances and must be more clinical against higher quality opposition. 6/10
 Raheem Sterling: On the peripheries throughout and lacking the confidence to take on defenders – could have no complaints at being the first man to be withdrawn. 5/10
Marcus Rashford: Direct and found good spaces on the flanks after his introduction – definitely will be considered for a starting spot against Panama. 7/10 

Talk Sport:
The England shirt just doesn’t fit Sterling at the minute. He’s clearly gifted, an incredible season with Manchester City showed that beyond doubt, but he has failed to score for the Three Lions since 2015. Tonight was another night where he played within himself and failed to find that finishing touch. (5)

If Lingard finished like he did for Manchester United all season, England would’ve won comfortably. Four chances he wasted. At this level, you just can’t do that and the Three Lions were nearly punished. He was busy in England’s build-up and enjoyed plenty of clever touches, but that was overshadowed by his finishing. (5)

Joey Barton (Talk Sport)
Joey Barton has tipped Ruben Loftus-Cheek to play a big role for the rest of England’s World Cup campaign after an impressive cameo in Monday’s 2-1 win over Tunisia.
Loftus-Cheek may have only played for ten minutes in the last-gasp win in Volgograd, but he made a big impression with his energy and a number of tidy touches.
Replacing the flagging Dele Alli on 80 minutes, the 22-year-old Crystal Palace midfielder seemed to wake the rest of his team-mates up with his bustling attitude, which eventually produced a stoppage-time winner as Harry Kane’s brace got England off to a crucial winning start in Russia.

May I suggest that here is your replacement for Lingard, but only if Alli is fully fit.

England Squad

1. Jordan Pickford 2. Kyle Walker 3. Danny Rose 4. Eric Dier 5. John Stones 6. Harry Maguire 7. Jesse Lingard 8. Jordan Henderson 9. Harry Kane 10. Raheem Sterling 11. Jamie Vardy Read more: How will England line-up against Tunisia? 12. Kieran Trippier 13. Jack Butland 14. Danny Welbeck 15. Gary Cahill 16. Phil Jones 17. Fabian Delph 18. Ashley Young 19. Marcus Rashford 20. Dele Alli 21. Ruben Loftus-Cheek 22. Trent Alexander-Arnold 23. Nick Pope

Keepers
Pickford
Butland
Pope

Defenders
Walker
Rose
Young
Stones
Trippier
Maguire
Cahill
Jones
Alexander-Arnold

Midfield
Dire
Henderson
Alli
Delph
Loftus-Cheek
Lingard

Forwards
Kane
Welbeck
Vardy
Rashford

Southgate's Preferred System: 3-5-2

V Tunisia we started:
1. Jordan Pickford 2. Kyle Walker 5. John Stones 6. Harry Maguire 7. Jesse Lingard 8. Jordan Henderson 9. Harry Kane 10. Raheem Sterling 12. Kieran Trippier 18. Ashley Young 20. Dele Alli

Rashford for Sterling
Loftus-Cheek for Alli
Dier for Lingard

Selby:
To Alan and Steve,
Lingard reminded me of Alfie May in front of goal, not very good.

So, you are comparing a Man Utd first teamer and International player with a lad who has not long since been promoted about 7 tiers up the football pyramid! Insane.

What do you think of Welbeck playing instead of him, he averages about a goal every two games for England, a terrific scoring rate, but I suppose you don't like him either.

I think it's an idiotic suggestion ( see squad details below - Welbeck is a striker and Lingard is an attacking midfielder. I do like Welbeck, but not as an attacking midfield player). If that is one of the points that your talk sport mates were suggesting, then may I suggest you listen to something else.

Tunisia did not even try to win that game, were helped by poor finishing, and the poorest referee up to press in the competition.
They were the most negative side  in the competition, and we will now see if they are any good, and deserve their rating in the top twenty when they play Belgium and have to change their game.

Who mentioned anything negative about England. My belief is we are a decent side......with Rashford in instead of the clownshoes that is Sterling (in an England shirt).

It was a good result as Panama have to attack and be more open in play which should give us opportunities up front, and any of Vardy,Rashford, and Welbeck could come into it.

One statement I can agree with - but only at the expense of Sterling (is he your love-child? Or is he related to Mandeville?)

As the competition evolves, and if we progress, the makeup of the team will change, playing brilliant football is not the requirement, winning games is.

And again:

Actually Alan, both points were the views of three professional footballers I listened to on Talksport while walking the dog after the game last night.
 A bit naughty of me I know, but I wondered which touch line international  ( I had an idea though) would take the bait. I think I will go along with the two Chelsea players and the West Ham players knowing just a little bit more about the game than yourself mate and your two million mate.

See my comment above on your Chelsea and West Ham friends. As for 2 million 'mates', no mates of mine but at least they're on the same wavelength!

If you want to take it up with them phone in after 10pm tonight, they might give you a couple of minutes.

I'd rather spend the evening platting snot!

And, yet again:
I can just imagine the Belgian managers team talk before they play us.
Our scout Alan Southstand says England have a poor player in midfield called Sterling, when De Bruine says " hey just hold it there" who's he?

There you go again - Sterling played as the 2nd striker, alongside Kane and did not play in midfield. I couldn't possibly have said that, even in your weird imagination, because I understand where the players actually are supposed to be playing.

If this is your attempt at humour, then I suggest you try another avenue - try watching crown green bowling - but only the singles matches as the doubles may get a bit confusing for you!

As for taking the bait - you'll have to put a much bigger worm on the hook! I've spent the best part of 20 odd years in the Mining industry with the best piss takers in the World. Your woeful attempt at something approaching humour is bordering on insanity, obsession or maybe you have early onset of being a Barnsley supporter!

[dickos1]

Yeah pure rubbish that Jones I mean he only made the World Cup squad didn’t he!

He did, but no way should he be replacing walker.

[GazLaz]

Dean Saunders has just been on talk sport saying he would play Stones at wing back and Kane, Rashford, Vardy and Sterling in the same team.... tactical genius.

[selby]

 Good God and I didn't catch anything, Alan Tunisia started the game with a high line,and we looked world beaters, when they dropped back Lingard went out of the game and was no better than Sterling,and not as good out of the area and had missed chances.
 Sterling in past games has pulled the ball back from the byline for assists on more than a few goals, and that is why England pick him. The poor effort he made in front of goal in this game would not have counted by the way, Lingard was offside in the build up.
  I am not even bothered who plays as long as England win. 

[selby]

  Gaz, a bit of an exaggeration that, He did say he would play 4 4 2 in our next game, and did say that we COULD give other players a game against Panama the players you named.
  He also said he did not think we would make many changes, and also said the way he thought was the reason he was sat talking on the Radio.
  Alan Brazil is for Rashford coming in for Sterling, but expects Sterling to play if Ali is injured, it's talksport that's what they are paid for.

[GazLaz]

  Gaz, a bit of an exaggeration that, He did say he would play 4 4 2 in our next game, and did say that we COULD give other players a game against Panama the players you named.
  He also said he did not think we would make many changes, and also said the way he thought was the reason he was sat talking on the Radio.
  Alan Brazil is for Rashford coming in for Sterling, but expects Sterling to play if Ali is injured, it's talksport that's what they are paid for.

He did said he would play 442 and play the 4 players mentioned.

[RedJ]

Stones has previously played as a full back. What's wrong with that suggestion? I don't agree with it, but it's certainly not as ridiculous a thought as you seem to make it out to be.

[GazLaz]

Stones has previously played as a full back. What's wrong with that suggestion? I don't agree with it, but it's certainly not as ridiculous a thought as you seem to make it out to be.

The fact Tripper was brilliant in the first game is a starting point. Full back and wing back are completely different as well. It’s a ridiculous suggestion.

[dickos1]

He surely can’t have said play 4-4-2 and play wingbacks?

[GazLaz]

He surely can’t have said play 4-4-2 and play wingbacks?

No he didn’t really, he said he wanted 442. The Stones at WB comment came a bit out of the blue after Stuart Pearce said he’d think about playing Rose at left centre half.

[drfchound]

I certainly don’t think we will need to worry about which defenders we start with, Panama are going to sit back and defend with ten men.
We will need to think about how to break them down.
Not a game for Vardy though as he is better against teams who like to attack us, he needs room behind defenders to run into.

Those comments about wingbacks and 4-4-2 show how misleading some posts can be when trying to put over what a person has said.

[dickos1]

I’d consider only playing 2 centre halves and pushing someone else into midfield

Say stones and Maguire at centre half, rose and trippier wingbacks and add Loftus-Cheek into middle of park
We won’t need 3 centre halves against Panama,
Just wasting a player

[drfchound]

I’d consider only playing 2 centre halves and pushing someone else into midfield

Say stones and Maguire at centre half, rose and trippier wingbacks and add Loftus-Cheek into middle of park
We won’t need 3 centre halves against Panama,
Just wasting a player

Wait for it............
.
.
.
.
100% agree. 

[GazLaz]

I’d consider only playing 2 centre halves and pushing someone else into midfield

Say stones and Maguire at centre half, rose and trippier wingbacks and add Loftus-Cheek into middle of park
We won’t need 3 centre halves against Panama,
Just wasting a player

Did you see Harry Maguires heat map against Tunisia? He was in front of Henderson a lot of the time. Walker and Maguire get plenty of licence to get forward. I’d keep the same shape solely to give the players more experience playing that way.

[BillyStubbsTears]

I’d consider only playing 2 centre halves and pushing someone else into midfield

Say stones and Maguire at centre half, rose and trippier wingbacks and add Loftus-Cheek into middle of park
We won’t need 3 centre halves against Panama,
Just wasting a player

Did you see Harry Maguires heat map against Tunisia? He was in front of Henderson a lot of the time. Walker and Maguire get plenty of licence to get forward. I’d keep the same shape solely to give the players more experience playing that way.

Exactly.

Playing 3 centre backs is not necessarily a defensive formation. If your 2 wing backs play as de facto wingers and one of your centre halves pushes on, it can be a very offensive formation against weaker opponents.

[GazLaz]

I’d consider only playing 2 centre halves and pushing someone else into midfield

Say stones and Maguire at centre half, rose and trippier wingbacks and add Loftus-Cheek into middle of park
We won’t need 3 centre halves against Panama,
Just wasting a player

Did you see Harry Maguires heat map against Tunisia? He was in front of Henderson a lot of the time. Walker and Maguire get plenty of licence to get forward. I’d keep the same shape solely to give the players more experience playing that way.

Exactly.

Playing 3 centre backs is not necessarily a defensive formation. If your 2 wing backs play as de facto wingers and one of your centre halves pushes on, it can be a very offensive formation against weaker opponents.

Definitely. Also if organised correctly it’s a harder formation to counter against, which when dominating teams, is the only usual danger.

[DearneValleyRover]

Yeah pure rubbish that Jones I mean he only made the World Cup squad didn’t he!

He did, but no way should he be replacing walker.

Given the size of the Panama forward Jones would do a better job than Walker defensively against him. I’m not suggesting dropping Walker for the pen or the rest of the tournament just the next game given the opposition.