|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 12, 2018 20:30:32 GMT
Under Sven we regularly qualified for quarter finals and were shootouts away from the semis twice.
England’s success at this tournament owes as much to foreign coaches as anything.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jul 12, 2018 20:33:50 GMT
What if he doesn't get us qualified for the next Euro's? Bobby Robson failed to qualify for Euro84. Calls for his head,media driven,were as loud vociferous as any manager ever had right up to Semi Final time in 1990. FA were right to stick with him. Southgate has shown more than any England manager this century,stick with him. Having said all that failing to qualify for the Euro's now it's expanded is now on impossible.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jul 12, 2018 20:35:20 GMT
Under Sven we regularly qualified for quarter finals and were shootouts away from the semis twice. England’s success at this tournament owes as much to foreign coaches as anything. He had a vastly superior squad though. You wouldn't get Delph or Livermore anywhere near Sven's squad.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jul 12, 2018 20:36:17 GMT
As bad as anything in the last 20 years?!... nah, I'm not having that one bit. I'm mainly thinking about World Cup/Euros, rather than routine qualifiers. I thought we played better against Uruguay and Italy in Brazil, for example. I'm not going to tear into them, because they don't deserve it. But I thought we were close to awful for the last 75 minutes Italy game we played pretty well, Uruguay nah,last night was better.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jul 12, 2018 20:37:57 GMT
The question we should be asking is how come a nation with a population of 4 million, which probably doesn't invest anywhere near the amounts we do in the game, produce technically better players than England ? we have nobody like Moderic and haven't had a technically gifted midfielder since Gascoigne. Scholes, Gerrard, Lamps,Beckham could all play. No one about right now though. Hopefully Foden fulfills his promise.
|
|
|
Post by WhyDelilah on Jul 12, 2018 20:45:26 GMT
Loved the feel good factor around the country - and he's handled himself flawlessly. But last night was as bad and depressing a performance as anything we've seen from England in the last 20 years (apart from Iceland!) And he seemed like a rabbit in the headlights a bit. That's extremely harsh Grapey. And I value your opinion more than most. We got ourselves ahead last night with a fine goal, and then created the kind of chance that Kane normally puts away all day long. 9 times out of 10 he buries that, we go 2 up and we go on to make a world cup final. I'm not saying it was a great performance or a polished performance, but we've seen a lot lot worse over the years. We were in control for more than 50% of the game, but then regressed towards the end. We got a second wind in the first half of extra time but then took our foot off again. Defintely an opportunity missed but also a massively impressive showing overall. They've done us proud and there is a connection between the team and the fans again. Nothing but pride from me.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jul 12, 2018 20:53:34 GMT
Loved the feel good factor around the country - and he's handled himself flawlessly. But last night was as bad and depressing a performance as anything we've seen from England in the last 20 years (apart from Iceland!) And he seemed like a rabbit in the headlights a bit. That's extremely harsh Grapey. And I value your opinion more than most. We got ourselves ahead last night with a fine goal, and then created the kind of chance that Kane normally puts away all day long. 9 times out of 10 he buries that, we go 2 up and we go on to make a world cup final. I'm not saying it was a great performance or a polished performance, but we've seen a lot lot worse over the years. We were in control for more than 50% of the game, but then regressed towards the end. We got a second wind in the first half of extra time but then took our foot off again. Defintely an opportunity missed but also a massively impressive showing overall. They've done us proud and there is a connection between the team and the fans again. Nothing but pride from me. Just thought after that really good half an hour, we slowly got worse and worse. And, by the end, I thought we looked really disjointed and a bit of a rabble. With the right tactical tweaks, I still think we could've done it. Possession 56-44 Shots 22-11 On target 7-2 Still, the tournament will hopefully have some kind of positive legacy for English football, so onwards and upwards!
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 12, 2018 21:02:03 GMT
Under Sven we regularly qualified for quarter finals and were shootouts away from the semis twice. England’s success at this tournament owes as much to foreign coaches as anything. He had a vastly superior squad though. You wouldn't get Delph or Livermore anywhere near Sven's squad. He did, but the fabled ‘golden generation’ was vastly overrated imo. He had his favourites and made some mistakes but I’m not sure he could’ve done a lot more in the tournaments he had really? Brazil were better than us in 02. You could maybe argue he was too negative in 04 but still a shootout from the semis and bad luck with Rooney’s injury. Didn’t play well in 06 but topped the group and was a shootout from the semis again. Rooney’s idiocy not his fault either.
|
|
|
Post by WhyDelilah on Jul 12, 2018 21:11:50 GMT
That's extremely harsh Grapey. And I value your opinion more than most. We got ourselves ahead last night with a fine goal, and then created the kind of chance that Kane normally puts away all day long. 9 times out of 10 he buries that, we go 2 up and we go on to make a world cup final. I'm not saying it was a great performance or a polished performance, but we've seen a lot lot worse over the years. We were in control for more than 50% of the game, but then regressed towards the end. We got a second wind in the first half of extra time but then took our foot off again. Defintely an opportunity missed but also a massively impressive showing overall. They've done us proud and there is a connection between the team and the fans again. Nothing but pride from me. Just thought after that really good half an hour, we slowly got worse and worse. And, by the end, I thought we looked really disjointed and a bit of a rabble. With the right tactical tweaks, I still think we could've done it. Possession 56-44 Shots 22-11 On target 7-2 Still, the tournament will hopefully have some kind of positive legacy for English football, so onwards and upwards! So do we get rid and roll the dice? I'd give him a 10 year deal right now. I'd fallen out of love with our national team and it's taken a massive effort to turn that around. He's done that.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Jul 12, 2018 21:15:56 GMT
Just thought after that really good half an hour, we slowly got worse and worse. And, by the end, I thought we looked really disjointed and a bit of a rabble. With the right tactical tweaks, I still think we could've done it. Possession 56-44 Shots 22-11 On target 7-2 Still, the tournament will hopefully have some kind of positive legacy for English football, so onwards and upwards! So do we get rid and roll the dice? I'd give him a 10 year deal right now. I'd fallen out of love with our national team and it's taken a massive effort to turn that around. He's done that. Couldn't agree more. This tournament has done more for national unity and the national team than the previous 5! Southgate's played a blinder in terms of getting people pulling in the same direction, which is a massive step forward.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 12, 2018 21:16:12 GMT
Just thought after that really good half an hour, we slowly got worse and worse. And, by the end, I thought we looked really disjointed and a bit of a rabble. With the right tactical tweaks, I still think we could've done it. Possession 56-44 Shots 22-11 On target 7-2 Still, the tournament will hopefully have some kind of positive legacy for English football, so onwards and upwards! So do we get rid and roll the dice? I'd give him a 10 year deal right now. I'd fallen out of love with our national team and it's taken a massive effort to turn that around. He's done that. Maybe there’s a middle way between getting rid now and giving him a 10 year deal?
|
|
|
Post by WhyDelilah on Jul 12, 2018 21:20:09 GMT
So do we get rid and roll the dice? I'd give him a 10 year deal right now. I'd fallen out of love with our national team and it's taken a massive effort to turn that around. He's done that. Maybe there’s a middle way between getting rid now and giving him a 10 year deal? There is mate. I wasn't being serious. I was just trying to portray how strongly I feel about him. I'd give him the next couple of tournaments at the very least. I love everything about the guy, and everything he's doing.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jul 12, 2018 21:21:12 GMT
He had a vastly superior squad though. You wouldn't get Delph or Livermore anywhere near Sven's squad. He did, but the fabled ‘golden generation’ was vastly overrated imo. He had his favourites and made some mistakes but I’m not sure he could’ve done a lot more in the tournaments he had really? Brazil were better than us in 02. You could maybe argue he was too negative in 04 but still a shootout from the semis and bad luck with Rooney’s injury. Didn’t play well in 06 but topped the group and was a shootout from the semis again. Rooney’s idiocy not his fault either. All good points but I still think those players were superior overall. Ferdinand, Campbell, Neville and Ashley Cole - just that back four alone should have been enough to keep most sides. Sven's sides underachieved for me Southgate has at the very least bit too end of any sensible expectation.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 12, 2018 21:22:21 GMT
Maybe there’s a middle way between getting rid now and giving him a 10 year deal? There is mate. I wasn't being serious. I was just trying to portray how strongly I feel about him. I'd give him the next couple of tournaments at the very least. I love everything about the guy, and everything he's doing. I like him and he definitely deserves the next tournament. I’ll absolutely love him if he stops bringing Eric Dier on as his go-to sub.
|
|
|
Post by WhyDelilah on Jul 12, 2018 21:24:14 GMT
There is mate. I wasn't being serious. I was just trying to portray how strongly I feel about him. I'd give him the next couple of tournaments at the very least. I love everything about the guy, and everything he's doing. I like him and he definitely deserves the next tournament. I’ll absolutely love him if he stops bringing Eric Dier on as his go-to sub. Agreed on Dier. I didn't like that. You're never going to get a manager that makes every single decision you after with though. Overall, it's been overwhelmingly positive. Massive steps forward.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 12, 2018 21:24:48 GMT
He did, but the fabled ‘golden generation’ was vastly overrated imo. He had his favourites and made some mistakes but I’m not sure he could’ve done a lot more in the tournaments he had really? Brazil were better than us in 02. You could maybe argue he was too negative in 04 but still a shootout from the semis and bad luck with Rooney’s injury. Didn’t play well in 06 but topped the group and was a shootout from the semis again. Rooney’s idiocy not his fault either. All good points but I still think those players were superior overall. Ferdinand, Campbell, Neville and Ashley Cole - just that back four alone should have been enough to keep most sides. Sven's sides underachieved for me Southgate has at the very least bit too end of any sensible expectation. Southgate’s ability to keep everything grounded is admirable and he’s handled the media brilliantly - far, far better than they deserve. I feel Sven for all his faults was a bit unlucky really. We probably would’ve won Euro 2004 if Rooney hadn’t got injured, though the Gerrard/Lampard thing was annoying and he should have grown the balls to drop one (Gerrard).
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 12, 2018 21:25:44 GMT
I like him and he definitely deserves the next tournament. I’ll absolutely love him if he stops bringing Eric Dier on as his go-to sub. Agreed on Dier. I didn't like that. You're never going to get a manager that makes every single decision you after with though. Overall, it's been overwhelmingly positive. Massive steps forward. Agreed, though as I was saying last night I think he has a fair bit to learn on the game management side of things. He’s done very well though and the players clearly love him.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 12, 2018 22:31:50 GMT
What if he doesn't get us qualified for the next Euro's? Bobby Robson failed to qualify for Euro84. Calls for his head,media driven,were as loud vociferous as any manager ever had right up to Semi Final time in 1990. FA were right to stick with him. Southgate has shown more than any England manager this century,stick with him. Having said all that failing to qualify for the Euro's now it's expanded is now on impossible. So because of something that happened 35 years ago nearly we shouldn't do it? Nah! He's got the Euros and if he fails miserable he will be lucky to have the World Cup. That's how it should work.
|
|
|
Post by stokeykez on Jul 12, 2018 22:47:42 GMT
Southgate has changed the public and media outlook on England which is a massive achievement. Still so many things to work on with the team.
Second half so many players sunk back into their shell, kane and alli were none existent.
|
|
|
Post by tony1234 on Jul 12, 2018 22:55:54 GMT
The question we should be asking is how come a nation with a population of 4 million, which probably doesn't invest anywhere near the amounts we do in the game, produce technically better players than England ? we have nobody like Moderic and haven't had a technically gifted midfielder since Gascoigne. Scholes, Gerrard, Lamps,Beckham could all play. No one about right now though. Hopefully Foden fulfills his promise. Right at the start of this world cup, I thought a rare astute quote from one of the panelists (forget which one) came when talking about the top players (Messi, Ronaldo etc) and whether they performed or not.... It went something like, "But, they've not only got to play against the (less good) opposing players, but against their opponents' systems." The point was made that if it was just a 1 v 1 competition only between Messi and some second division level defender, Messi would win hands down... but it wasn't.... he had to conquer the systems that the opposing teams had implemented to negate him. "Systems" are increasing proving to be levellers. Its why Tunisia came within a jot of a draw and why Japan nearly knocked out Belgium, as well as a myriad other "shocks", tight games which "should have been" walkovers etc. France-Australia, S Korea-Germany, Russia-Spain etc etc There is now a sea of data behind tactics and well planned teams with intelligent coaches are using it to understand how games are unfolding in flight and adapting to negate their opponents, notably their best individuals. Even a second tier nation with willing, fit and disciplined players can employ a clever manager, access reams of data on their opponents and close what would otherwise be a gulf in ability with well executed plans. The problem as has been discussed before was that our "Golden generation" - perhaps Lampard apart - was a bit thick compared to other top European nations. They could do the helter skelter premier league, with lots of turnovers giving them lots of chances to do something memorable, but couldn't outthink well planned opponents who gave them far fewer chances to hit a 30 yarder or find their favourite raking pass; They couldn't see the bigger pictures of the game, or devise strategies in the moment when blocked. In my view, its why we often started games quite well, stronger in the first half typically, but as the game went on, cleverer teams would spot our strengths and weaknesses. Strangled of a limited range of plans of attack, we were often left retreating and camped in our own last third, hitting hapless long balls and with Gerard and Lampard (or whoever) not really getting a sniff. Iceland was the mother of such performances. This WC we were better, but might still reflect on being better/stronger in the first half against Tunisia, Panama, Belgium, Columbia, Sweden and Croatia: plus Nigeria in friendlies before the finals - and running of out steam/ideas/chances as the game went on and so experiencing more pressure on us. Sometimes the pundits who scratched their head about Lampard, Gerard etc not performing forgot that half of the game is played without the ball - and even if you do have the ball - your "star turn" only has it for 1/10th of that time.
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Jul 12, 2018 23:55:48 GMT
Unfortunately, I think the hyperbole over England in this tournament could lead to more harm than good in the longer term.
We were not as mediocre as some may suggest, but we certainly are nowhere near what we are being hyped up to believe.
The same deficiencies we've had in English football for decades still remain.
And let's not kid ourselves, once they had worked us out, Croatia clearly deserved to win that game.
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Jul 12, 2018 23:59:48 GMT
Scholes, Gerrard, Lamps,Beckham could all play. No one about right now though. Hopefully Foden fulfills his promise. Right at the start of this world cup, I thought a rare astute quote from one of the panelists (forget which one) came when talking about the top players (Messi, Ronaldo etc) and whether they performed or not.... It went something like, "But, they've not only got to play against the (less good) opposing players, but against their opponents' systems." The point was made that if it was just a 1 v 1 competition only between Messi and some second division level defender, Messi would win hands down... but it wasn't.... he had to conquer the systems that the opposing teams had implemented to negate him. "Systems" are increasing proving to be levellers. Its why Tunisia came within a jot of a draw and why Japan nearly knocked out Belgium, as well as a myriad other "shocks", tight games which "should have been" walkovers etc. France-Australia, S Korea-Germany, Russia-Spain etc etc There is now a sea of data behind tactics and well planned teams with intelligent coaches are using it to understand how games are unfolding in flight and adapting to negate their opponents, notably their best individuals. Even a second tier nation with willing, fit and disciplined players can employ a clever manager, access reams of data on their opponents and close what would otherwise be a gulf in ability with well executed plans. The problem as has been discussed before was that our "Golden generation" - perhaps Lampard apart - was a bit thick compared to other top European nations. They could do the helter skelter premier league, with lots of turnovers giving them lots of chances to do something memorable, but couldn't outthink well planned opponents who gave them far fewer chances to hit a 30 yarder or find their favourite raking pass; They couldn't see the bigger pictures of the game, or devise strategies in the moment when blocked. In my view, its why we often started games quite well, stronger in the first half typically, but as the game went on, cleverer teams would spot our strengths and weaknesses. Strangled of a limited range of plans of attack, we were often left retreating and camped in our own last third, hitting hapless long balls and with Gerard and Lampard (or whoever) not really getting a sniff. Iceland was the mother of such performances. This WC we were better, but might still reflect on being better/stronger in the first half against Tunisia, Panama, Belgium, Columbia, Sweden and Croatia: plus Nigeria in friendlies before the finals - and running of out steam/ideas/chances as the game went on and so experiencing more pressure on us. Sometimes the pundits who scratched their head about Lampard, Gerard etc not performing forgot that half of the game is played without the ball - and even if you do have the ball - your "star turn" only has it for 1/10th of that time. Great points well made. A very good tournament for us but in the end the same old flaws did for us. Mainly being unable to adapt when the opposition changes their game plan. When Croatia started playing deep we were totally flummoxed by it. From that moment we were second best.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Jul 13, 2018 3:46:19 GMT
Right at the start of this world cup, I thought a rare astute quote from one of the panelists (forget which one) came when talking about the top players (Messi, Ronaldo etc) and whether they performed or not.... It went something like, "But, they've not only got to play against the (less good) opposing players, but against their opponents' systems." The point was made that if it was just a 1 v 1 competition only between Messi and some second division level defender, Messi would win hands down... but it wasn't.... he had to conquer the systems that the opposing teams had implemented to negate him. "Systems" are increasing proving to be levellers. Its why Tunisia came within a jot of a draw and why Japan nearly knocked out Belgium, as well as a myriad other "shocks", tight games which "should have been" walkovers etc. France-Australia, S Korea-Germany, Russia-Spain etc etc There is now a sea of data behind tactics and well planned teams with intelligent coaches are using it to understand how games are unfolding in flight and adapting to negate their opponents, notably their best individuals. Even a second tier nation with willing, fit and disciplined players can employ a clever manager, access reams of data on their opponents and close what would otherwise be a gulf in ability with well executed plans. The problem as has been discussed before was that our "Golden generation" - perhaps Lampard apart - was a bit thick compared to other top European nations. They could do the helter skelter premier league, with lots of turnovers giving them lots of chances to do something memorable, but couldn't outthink well planned opponents who gave them far fewer chances to hit a 30 yarder or find their favourite raking pass; They couldn't see the bigger pictures of the game, or devise strategies in the moment when blocked. In my view, its why we often started games quite well, stronger in the first half typically, but as the game went on, cleverer teams would spot our strengths and weaknesses. Strangled of a limited range of plans of attack, we were often left retreating and camped in our own last third, hitting hapless long balls and with Gerard and Lampard (or whoever) not really getting a sniff. Iceland was the mother of such performances. This WC we were better, but might still reflect on being better/stronger in the first half against Tunisia, Panama, Belgium, Columbia, Sweden and Croatia: plus Nigeria in friendlies before the finals - and running of out steam/ideas/chances as the game went on and so experiencing more pressure on us. Sometimes the pundits who scratched their head about Lampard, Gerard etc not performing forgot that half of the game is played without the ball - and even if you do have the ball - your "star turn" only has it for 1/10th of that time. Good post. This tournament particularly we’ve come out firing but lacked the nous to see games out. We went 1-0 up in all five of the games that mattered, but only managed to protect the lead in two of them.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 13, 2018 6:31:18 GMT
Scholes, Gerrard, Lamps,Beckham could all play. No one about right now though. Hopefully Foden fulfills his promise. Right at the start of this world cup, I thought a rare astute quote from one of the panelists (forget which one) came when talking about the top players (Messi, Ronaldo etc) and whether they performed or not.... It went something like, "But, they've not only got to play against the (less good) opposing players, but against their opponents' systems." The point was made that if it was just a 1 v 1 competition only between Messi and some second division level defender, Messi would win hands down... but it wasn't.... he had to conquer the systems that the opposing teams had implemented to negate him. "Systems" are increasing proving to be levellers. Its why Tunisia came within a jot of a draw and why Japan nearly knocked out Belgium, as well as a myriad other "shocks", tight games which "should have been" walkovers etc. France-Australia, S Korea-Germany, Russia-Spain etc etc There is now a sea of data behind tactics and well planned teams with intelligent coaches are using it to understand how games are unfolding in flight and adapting to negate their opponents, notably their best individuals. Even a second tier nation with willing, fit and disciplined players can employ a clever manager, access reams of data on their opponents and close what would otherwise be a gulf in ability with well executed plans. The problem as has been discussed before was that our "Golden generation" - perhaps Lampard apart - was a bit thick compared to other top European nations. They could do the helter skelter premier league, with lots of turnovers giving them lots of chances to do something memorable, but couldn't outthink well planned opponents who gave them far fewer chances to hit a 30 yarder or find their favourite raking pass; They couldn't see the bigger pictures of the game, or devise strategies in the moment when blocked. In my view, its why we often started games quite well, stronger in the first half typically, but as the game went on, cleverer teams would spot our strengths and weaknesses. Strangled of a limited range of plans of attack, we were often left retreating and camped in our own last third, hitting hapless long balls and with Gerard and Lampard (or whoever) not really getting a sniff. Iceland was the mother of such performances. This WC we were better, but might still reflect on being better/stronger in the first half against Tunisia, Panama, Belgium, Columbia, Sweden and Croatia: plus Nigeria in friendlies before the finals - and running of out steam/ideas/chances as the game went on and so experiencing more pressure on us. Sometimes the pundits who scratched their head about Lampard, Gerard etc not performing forgot that half of the game is played without the ball - and even if you do have the ball - your "star turn" only has it for 1/10th of that time. Completely agree. It's why the idea that 'football is a simple game' has held us back for years.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jul 13, 2018 9:02:24 GMT
Like almost everyone else, I find Southgate very likeable as a bloke. He's intelligent, he speaks well, he's clearly a gentleman who treats people as he would like to be treated and he's made the England team at least a bunch that you want to see do well.
However, I appear to be in something of a minority in that I think England were pretty crap on the whole and lost, in the end, to a far superior team on the night. In losing, it was clear from around 25 minutes, that Croatia were taking control of the midfield, that Ali and Lingaard were offering little to no support of Henderson but we let it happen and did nothing to change it.
In a World Cup Semi-Final we had 1 shot on target and to me at least, the manager fell into the same trap as those previous managers who let a players reputation dictate his thinking. Ali is a good player but he's struggled with injury throughout the tournament and he should have been subbed during the Croatia game. Kane didn't go into the box for pretty much 2 games solid and whilst it hasn't been revealed yet, he's clearly been struggling with an injury, which has been kept quiet, since late in the Columbia game. He could barely move yet he was still picked ahead of others who could have done a far better job than him given his state of fitness.
We were pretty ordinary v Tunisia after the opening 20 minutes, we thrashed Panama but barely created a chance from open play. Belgium was a nothing game but we were rubbish. Columbia was a brave rather than brilliant performance and we actually played pretty well, I thought, v Sweden. Against Croatia, we ran out of ideas and legs after 20 minutes and we lost to a far better side with a manager who sat back and appeared inactive in trying to reverse the tide.
I don't buy the easy ride stuff. We beat teams that had seen to it that opponents we didn't want to face weren't around anymore and fair play for that. We didn't really play well though and we lost, comfortably, the game that mattered.
Still a long way to go but I don't get the hype or plaudits that are floating around. We really do love a plucky loser in this country.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 13, 2018 9:14:37 GMT
Like almost everyone else, I find Southgate very likeable as a bloke. He's intelligent, he speaks well, he's clearly a gentleman who treats people as he would like to be treated and he's made the England team at least a bunch that you want to see do well. However, I appear to be in something of a minority in that I think England were pretty crap on the whole and lost, in the end, to a far superior team on the night. In losing, it was clear from around 25 minutes, that Croatia were taking control of the midfield, that Ali and Lingaard were offering little to no support of Henderson but we let it happen and did nothing to change it. In a World Cup Semi-Final we had 1 shot on target and to me at least, the manager fell into the same trap as those previous managers who let a players reputation dictate his thinking. Ali is a good player but he's struggled with injury throughout the tournament and he should have been subbed during the Croatia game. Kane didn't go into the box for pretty much 2 games solid and whilst it hasn't been revealed yet, he's clearly been struggling with an injury, which has been kept quiet, since late in the Columbia game. He could barely move yet he was still picked ahead of others who could have done a far better job than him given his state of fitness. We were pretty ordinary v Tunisia after the opening 20 minutes, we thrashed Panama but barely created a chance from open play. Belgium was a nothing game but we were rubbish. Columbia was a brave rather than brilliant performance and we actually played pretty well, I thought, v Sweden. Against Croatia, we ran out of ideas and legs after 20 minutes and we lost to a far better side with a manager who sat back and appeared inactive in trying to reverse the tide. I don't buy the easy ride stuff. We beat teams that had seen to it that opponents we didn't want to face weren't around anymore and fair play for that. We didn't really play well though and we lost, comfortably, the game that mattered. Still a long way to go but I don't get the hype or plaudits that are floating around. We really do love a plucky loser in this country. There’s some truth in that Dave but I think you have to look at it in the context of our recent tournament performances, when the same standard of opposition has posed us serious problems. If we’re now seeing off without too much fuss the kind of teams we ‘should’ be beating, that is still progress and something to build on based on the decade as a whole.
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Jul 13, 2018 9:17:30 GMT
Substitutions Gareth!
I dont want to be too critical because I like his tactical set-up for England and it was working for 35 minutes against Croatia
BUT 2nd half we were clearly losing our position in the game and Croatia was dominating more and more.
It was very reminiscent of watching Mark Hughes standing on the sideline incapable and seeing what changes need to be made to get back control.
1 substitution in normal time to replace Sterling with Rashford is borderline crazy. Henderson was being overrun in midfield and needed help it was so obvious.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jul 13, 2018 9:28:55 GMT
I think Southgate has done a decent job with a young team. We should stick with him and see how the next European tournament goes. He has certainly sparked my interest again in the fortunes of the national team, after years of appointing foreign, second rate, and crooked managers.
I repeat myself when I say the root causes of England's (and to the same degree the other home nations problems) are firstly the domination of club football, and secondly the lack of true competition between tournaments.
Between tournaments we play qualifying rounds against very weak opponents so that nowadays qualifying for a tournament is almost a given. We also play friendlies, which are just that; no one wants to take the risk of injury, clubs hold players back because of "niggles" and "need resting", and the result doesn't matter.
When we get to the tournaments, as soon as we come up against a quality side who want to beat us (not just put 10 men behind the ball) our weaknesses are exposed. When we played Scotland every year, at least our players knew they had to be at their very best because the opposition were going to move heaven and earth to give us a pasting.
Southgate has got to find a way of creating the synergy between the players. Maybe he has started by forming a young squad who can play together for years to come.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jul 13, 2018 9:41:15 GMT
Like almost everyone else, I find Southgate very likeable as a bloke. He's intelligent, he speaks well, he's clearly a gentleman who treats people as he would like to be treated and he's made the England team at least a bunch that you want to see do well. However, I appear to be in something of a minority in that I think England were pretty crap on the whole and lost, in the end, to a far superior team on the night. In losing, it was clear from around 25 minutes, that Croatia were taking control of the midfield, that Ali and Lingaard were offering little to no support of Henderson but we let it happen and did nothing to change it. In a World Cup Semi-Final we had 1 shot on target and to me at least, the manager fell into the same trap as those previous managers who let a players reputation dictate his thinking. Ali is a good player but he's struggled with injury throughout the tournament and he should have been subbed during the Croatia game. Kane didn't go into the box for pretty much 2 games solid and whilst it hasn't been revealed yet, he's clearly been struggling with an injury, which has been kept quiet, since late in the Columbia game. He could barely move yet he was still picked ahead of others who could have done a far better job than him given his state of fitness. We were pretty ordinary v Tunisia after the opening 20 minutes, we thrashed Panama but barely created a chance from open play. Belgium was a nothing game but we were rubbish. Columbia was a brave rather than brilliant performance and we actually played pretty well, I thought, v Sweden. Against Croatia, we ran out of ideas and legs after 20 minutes and we lost to a far better side with a manager who sat back and appeared inactive in trying to reverse the tide. I don't buy the easy ride stuff. We beat teams that had seen to it that opponents we didn't want to face weren't around anymore and fair play for that. We didn't really play well though and we lost, comfortably, the game that mattered. Still a long way to go but I don't get the hype or plaudits that are floating around. We really do love a plucky loser in this country. There’s some truth in that Dave but I think you have to look at it in the context of our recent tournament performances, when the same standard of opposition has posed us serious problems. If we’re now seeing off without too much fuss the kind of teams we ‘should’ be beating, that is still progress and something to build on based on the decade as a whole. Progress absolutely. Wild hysteria and a heroes return? I think not! Take Pickford. He came out and got to a cross, under little pressure and it was an example of bravery, aggression and dominant goalkeeping. The Croatia keeper came out and got one in the last minute of extra time, under pressure, and caught it. ITV commentators responded "and Croatia's keeper does his job".
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jul 13, 2018 9:50:41 GMT
There’s some truth in that Dave but I think you have to look at it in the context of our recent tournament performances, when the same standard of opposition has posed us serious problems. If we’re now seeing off without too much fuss the kind of teams we ‘should’ be beating, that is still progress and something to build on based on the decade as a whole. Progress absolutely. Wild hysteria and a heroes return? I think not! Take Pickford. He came out and got to a cross, under little pressure and it was an example of bravery, aggression and dominant goalkeeping. The Croatia keeper came out and got one in the last minute of extra time, under pressure, and caught it. ITV commentators responded "and Croatia's keeper does his job". I don’t think ITV’s commentators are a barometer of anything to be honest, they’ve been an embarrassment for 20 years at least. The media went OTT but then they always do. I think they deserve a decent reception when they come back, they’ve done well.
|
|