alexthelion
Full Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2019
- Messages
- 3,637
Yes, and you'd be completely wrong, hence the reply.You know exactly who I mean!
Yes, and you'd be completely wrong, hence the reply.You know exactly who I mean!
Would take Shaw, Maguire, any of your right back, posssibly Rice and Sancho in Belgium first 11Quite a lot of our players would start for Germany & Belgium to be fair.
Would take Shaw, Maguire, any of your right back, posssibly Rice and Sancho in Belgium first 11
To be fair i think our depth in front (in cf) is quite decent compared with other nations. Personally i would have preferred watkins over calvert lewin becaise i think his all round game is betterA combination of both.
The spine of the team lacks any real depth and quality apart from an unfit Maguire and a knackered Kane. Then you have Southgate, who seems to excel more as a keynote speaker than he does a football coach.
That said, we do have some genuinely brilliant attacking options up top and at full back. It’s a shame we haven’t seen the best of them yet.
I’m open to reading your examples.Quite a lot of our players would start for Germany & Belgium to be fair.
Uh. Just thought about it, but combining england and germany you get Bayern, internationalQuite a lot of our players would start for Germany & Belgium to be fair.
He would have had Owen on the bench in 98 and Rooney on the bench in 04.Bizarre reasoning imo.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
This sums up my thoughts too. I can not understand why you would play two defensive midfielders but then go and hold your full backs back as well. Surely the advantage of Rice and Philips playing is that they can drop back into defence as one or other full back bombs forward to overload a wing. Holding the fullbacks back as well, which we've done in those first two games kills off any decent balls into for forwards and isolates them, you basically have 6 players primarily focused on defence with only four pushing forward, no wonder Kane is getting no ball at all. and this is against the perceived weaker teams in the tournament.Southgate for me.
There's balance and then there's 2 DM's and defensive full-backs. It emphasises England's weakest areas while depriving their best, very strange approach.
Which incredible teams did we beat to get to the semi final?Southgate hasn't done that badly, has he? I mean world cup semi-final, qualified with ease, on course to get out of the group. It is not like England are favourites and all teams have off performances sometimes. It seems to me he isn't half as bad as you lot make out. Mind you the England manager is always vilified.
he's done well?Southgate has done well up until the game on Friday for me, people need to calm down a bit. The way I look at it these managers have the magic four points total in their heads and he knew getting the four points secured our passage through regardless of what happens on Tuesday night.
I'm hoping he shows so common sense on Tuesday and he rotates the team a little, give Rashford and Sancho a start up top with Kane. Also give Grealish a run out in the midfield.
It's crazy man. Such a waste of talent.This sums up my thoughts too. I can not understand why you would play two defensive midfielders but then go and hold your full backs back as well. Surely the advantage of Rice and Philips playing is that they can drop back into defence as one or other full back bombs forward to overload a wing. Holding the fullbacks back as well, which we've done in those first two games kills off any decent balls into for forwards and isolates them, you basically have 6 players primarily focused on defence with only four pushing forward, no wonder Kane is getting no ball at all. and this is against the perceived weaker teams in the tournament.
and... all the previous managers for the last... what... 30 years?It's Southgate
Yes that's the problem. He did well and they said he got easier teams on the way to semi final of world cup. But England achieved before that for past three decades?. No is the answer.Southgate hasn't done that badly, has he? I mean world cup semi-final, qualified with ease, on course to get out of the group. It is not like England are favourites and all teams have off performances sometimes. It seems to me he isn't half as bad as you lot make out. Mind you the England manager is always vilified.
We didn't, but then we didn't draw any of them so it wasn't really a possibility. I get the point that we only played to our ranking, perhaps, but the team played well at times in that tournament. He deserves a little credit, surely. Lots of time left in this tournie too.Which incredible teams did we beat to get to the semi final?
It's garbage. Unrealistic expectations? If you don't want to put "unrealistic expectations" on the shoulders of these youngsters then don't be bringing Grealish on at what 27 minutes to go in a 0-0 game. Or Rashford on for Kane with 16 minutes left? Expecting them to change a game in that time?Bizarre reasoning imo.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Agree.Southgate.
3 shots on target across 2 games is shocking considering the talent we have up top.
He's doing what he's always done, make us hard to beat and banking on Kane to score. Nothing else up his sleeve - just an uncharismatic Mourinho
Completely forgot that they were playing the mighty, eh, Wales?That Verratti from the farmers league was woeful again today.
It's especially bizarre because the same doesn't apply to others, like Foden, Mount, Rice, James.Bizarre reasoning imo.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date