Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Fuel for banter twitter
England Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Fuel for banter twitter
It’s a rather bizarre call up with nobody leaving the squad like usual.
It will be good for him to experience the camp, if he gets his first cap with a cameo 10 mins then it’s a bit pointless but Gareth isn’t one to throw them in is he? This kid is one for the future tournaments, happy to see him start the journey.
It will be good for him to experience the camp, if he gets his first cap with a cameo 10 mins then it’s a bit pointless but Gareth isn’t one to throw them in is he? This kid is one for the future tournaments, happy to see him start the journey.
Congrats to Kobbie on his first call up. I didn’t expect him to get called up so soon but it’s testament to the quality and impact he has shown for us in a short space of time. I don’t think he will get many minutes for England in the next few games, I think it it will be to just get him training with the first team but you never know.
But not in such a high profile game
It was a strategic choice. Xabi Alonso diminished their capacity for goals in exchange for superior ball retention, ball movement, and defensive solidity. Spain were at their most attacking under Aragones, and he chose Marcos Senna - a highly mobile defensive specialist, over Xabi Alonso to partner Xavi in central midfield
I’ve never said that selecting Alonso wasn’t a strategic choice - of course it was. It was a strategy that saw Spain win three tournaments on the bounce without conceding a single goal in the knockout stages. And I completely concur with everything you’re saying about ball retention, ball movement and defensive solidarity. Absolutely zero disagreement.
Where I very much disagree with yourself and @Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber is that the selection was because of doubts over how well Xavi, Iniesta and Busquets would cope as a midfield trio in international football. I think they would have been fantastic.
Would they have been as good as Spain turned out to be when they added Alonso into the mix? Probably not, seeing as he’s one of the finest deep-lying playmakers in history.
Would they have been as good as they were when they played for Barca? Probably not, seeing as national sides can never hope to have the cohesion of club sides and Messi was born in Argentina.
Anyway, I feel we’ve derailed this thread enough. I think we all understand each other’s points.
@Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber
I think the goalposts have shifted somewhat.
Your original point wasn't that Xavi/Ineista/Busquets wouldn't have worked in a midfield three, but your point was that specifically it wouldn't have worked defensively.
I agree that that midfield three would be nowhere near as effective for Spain as it would be for Barcelona but you then changed your argument away from the defensive side to the offensive side. But defensively, without Alonso, it would have been fine. Iniesta would be far less effective however.
Alonso was never put there to provide defensive stability, as was your original point, he was there to provide more accurate passing from deep to the channels in a more congested midfield, something which Spain had a problem with as they never played with any real width in the attackers. Messi solved this problem for Barcelona by being all over the pitch.
Actually, Del Bosque actually tried the Barca way in the 2010 world cup semi final vs Germany. He set up Villa to be a free roaming forward in a false nine fashion, interchanging with Pedro who would also drop deeper and throughout the whole pitch. The idea was to give Iniesta space to both drive forward into the midfield and to loiter in the channels AND the fullbacks to provide the width. Xavi would drive from midfield from deep and Alonso actually played the Xavi role of playmaking from deep. Villa played the Messi role, Pedro played the Villa role at Barcelona and Iniesta bizarrely played the Villa role. This backfired spectacularly resulting in a drab game that should have ended 0-0 in all honesty.
Pedro and Villa both constantly dropped deep, hoping to drag the Germans out of position and to create space. The problem was, when Messi drops to the 35 yard area, he has to be marked because he can conjure up bullshit magic from nowhere. Germans just left Pedro and Villa alone and let them have the ball in that area. What ended up happening was Pedro and Villa got the ball constantly in the deep, neither had the creativity or forward dribbling to really threaten from there and the Germans just let them have the ball.
This is the heat map for Pedro:
This was the heat map for Villa:
As you can see, both these players dropped deep and did nothing. Germany kept their shape and their discipline. Iniesta didn't have the space in the channels to really get behind the defense OR to drive forward with the ball. Xavi driving forward from deep faced the same problem (no space) and Alonso couldn't do the Xavi ticking job as well as Xavi himself could. Spain had shit tonnes of the ball but couldn't do anything with it. With this setup, where Xabi Alonso wasn't even playing defensive midfielder, defensively Spain were fine.
This is where they gave up trying to replicate Barcelona type of football. They just couldn't do it with the players up top that they had at their disposal.
Rice, Foden and Bellingham will work fine. Bellingham can provide the type of offensive and defensive output to assist both up top and in the deep.
Look at France 2018 team, their midfield 3 was Kante, Pogba and Griezmann as number 8. They had Matuidi, yes, but he was utilized as a left winger for some reason.
I think the goalposts have shifted somewhat.
Your original point wasn't that Xavi/Ineista/Busquets wouldn't have worked in a midfield three, but your point was that specifically it wouldn't have worked defensively.
I agree that that midfield three would be nowhere near as effective for Spain as it would be for Barcelona but you then changed your argument away from the defensive side to the offensive side. But defensively, without Alonso, it would have been fine. Iniesta would be far less effective however.
Alonso was never put there to provide defensive stability, as was your original point, he was there to provide more accurate passing from deep to the channels in a more congested midfield, something which Spain had a problem with as they never played with any real width in the attackers. Messi solved this problem for Barcelona by being all over the pitch.
Actually, Del Bosque actually tried the Barca way in the 2010 world cup semi final vs Germany. He set up Villa to be a free roaming forward in a false nine fashion, interchanging with Pedro who would also drop deeper and throughout the whole pitch. The idea was to give Iniesta space to both drive forward into the midfield and to loiter in the channels AND the fullbacks to provide the width. Xavi would drive from midfield from deep and Alonso actually played the Xavi role of playmaking from deep. Villa played the Messi role, Pedro played the Villa role at Barcelona and Iniesta bizarrely played the Villa role. This backfired spectacularly resulting in a drab game that should have ended 0-0 in all honesty.
Pedro and Villa both constantly dropped deep, hoping to drag the Germans out of position and to create space. The problem was, when Messi drops to the 35 yard area, he has to be marked because he can conjure up bullshit magic from nowhere. Germans just left Pedro and Villa alone and let them have the ball in that area. What ended up happening was Pedro and Villa got the ball constantly in the deep, neither had the creativity or forward dribbling to really threaten from there and the Germans just let them have the ball.
This is the heat map for Pedro:
This was the heat map for Villa:
As you can see, both these players dropped deep and did nothing. Germany kept their shape and their discipline. Iniesta didn't have the space in the channels to really get behind the defense OR to drive forward with the ball. Xavi driving forward from deep faced the same problem (no space) and Alonso couldn't do the Xavi ticking job as well as Xavi himself could. Spain had shit tonnes of the ball but couldn't do anything with it. With this setup, where Xabi Alonso wasn't even playing defensive midfielder, defensively Spain were fine.
This is where they gave up trying to replicate Barcelona type of football. They just couldn't do it with the players up top that they had at their disposal.
Rice, Foden and Bellingham will work fine. Bellingham can provide the type of offensive and defensive output to assist both up top and in the deep.
Look at France 2018 team, their midfield 3 was Kante, Pogba and Griezmann as number 8. They had Matuidi, yes, but he was utilized as a left winger for some reason.
Well no. Alonso was there to provide control. Del Bosque diagnosed Spain's weakness in transition and fast paced games, and went for the lineup that would guarantee his team's ability to control game pace and reduce defensive transition to a minimum. Thus massively improving defensive stability. It also improved their ability to move forward, yeah, but the lack of actual forwards worsened the attack overall. It was a choice motivated by a distrust in the forward options
That is asking A LOT of Rice. And I mean A LOT. Bellingham and Foden aren't deep playmakers, they're not first phase players in the build up. They've never been.
I mean not really. Matuidi was used as a balancer, his role was to run and cover for Pogba and Griezmann essentially. And that midfield was better assembled than Rice-Jude-Foden anyways. Pogba was an amazing ball progressor, he and Griezmann didn't step on each other's foot, and again - they had Matuidi for cover as needed. Plus, Mbappé. The way that France team played, Foden doesn't see the pitch either
Fabregas wasn't competing with teams anywhere near as strong - he had to play Utd twice a season.
Mainoo is absolute quality.
Tom Davies was ruining City at 17 lad.
Inverted Trent to support
I don't think England will as they have Rice and Bellingham as certified starters and someone like Henderson as an experienced back up in case it's too much for Mainoo.
Ever once in a while Gareth makes a good decision. Mainoo had to be called up. Well in for the Euros anyway. We’d all have preferred him to have a break but if ever there was a time to gel and bed him into the England squad it’s now with some meaningless friendlies.
Englands weakest area is central midfield. The idea of going into the Euros with Phillips and Henderson as central midfield options was a scary prospect. Although the idea of Trent in there has been touted (and he’s world class creatively) I don’t think he has the midfield manoeuvring skills of Kobi. Mainoo is the one type of player England don’t have at the minute. Him Rice and Bellingham is mouthwatering long term. To think that so easily could have been Uniteds midfield ….
Englands weakest area is central midfield. The idea of going into the Euros with Phillips and Henderson as central midfield options was a scary prospect. Although the idea of Trent in there has been touted (and he’s world class creatively) I don’t think he has the midfield manoeuvring skills of Kobi. Mainoo is the one type of player England don’t have at the minute. Him Rice and Bellingham is mouthwatering long term. To think that so easily could have been Uniteds midfield ….
Rice, Bellingham and Mainoo will be the starting trio by the time the Euros comes around. It's a really complete midfield with the qualities they all possess between them.
About the bolded but, You've also misundertood me. This below was what I said when I first brought up the analogy of Spain not using Barca's midfield magic triangle, as I was disagreeing with the idea of a Rice-Bellingham - Foden 3 man midfield:
[...It's why for example Spain at their brilliant best STILL added Xabi Alonso to Busquets in the middle. Pushed Xavi to 10 and played Iniesta as a wide forward rather than full scale replicate their magic triangle from Barca. For the also knew full well because the defence personnel was different, plus the combination of attackers ahead of them, they'd not be able to replicate it as effectively.]
I was expilicitly reffering to the overall effectiveness of the side in and out of possession, which coves defence and offense. My point wasn't about just one aspect.
Fantastic !!!!Alonso was never put there to provide defensive stability, as was your original point, he was there to provide more accurate passing from deep to the channels in a more congested midfield, something which Spain had a problem with as they never played with any real width in the attackers. Messi solved this problem for Barcelona by being all over the pitch.
Actually, Del Bosque actually tried the Barca way in the 2010 world cup semi final vs Germany. He set up Villa to be a free roaming forward in a false nine fashion, interchanging with Pedro who would also drop deeper and throughout the whole pitch. The idea was to give Iniesta space to both drive forward into the midfield and to loiter in the channels AND the fullbacks to provide the width. Xavi would drive from midfield from deep and Alonso actually played the Xavi role of playmaking from deep. Villa played the Messi role, Pedro played the Villa role at Barcelona and Iniesta bizarrely played the Villa role. This backfired spectacularly resulting in a drab game that should have ended 0-0 in all honesty.
Pedro and Villa both constantly dropped deep, hoping to drag the Germans out of position and to create space. The problem was, when Messi drops to the 35 yard area, he has to be marked because he can conjure up bullshit magic from nowhere. Germans just left Pedro and Villa alone and let them have the ball in that area. What ended up happening was Pedro and Villa got the ball constantly in the deep, neither had the creativity or forward dribbling to really threaten from there and the Germans just let them have the ball.
This is the heat map for Pedro:
This was the heat map for Villa:
as you can see, both these players dropped deep and did nothing. Germany kept their shape and their discipline. Iniesta didn't have the space in the channels to really get behind the defense OR to drive forward with the ball. Xavi driving forward from deep faced the same problem (no space) and Alonso couldn't do the Xavi ticking job as well as Xavi himself could. Spain had shit tonnes of the ball but couldn't do anything with it. With this setup, where Xabi Alonso wasn't even playing defensive midfielder, defensively Spain were fine.
This is where they gave up trying to replicate Barcelona type of football. They just couldn't do it with the players up top that they had at their disposal.
This entire bit of your post outlines communicates clearly what I have tried and failed miserably (for like a day plus now
) to put accross! The players of Spain could simply not replicate the effectiveness of Barca ball if they set up that same way thanks to the type and know how of the personnal at hand.That is the ENTIRE crux of my argument. At club level a Rice is used to playing with 2 10s. Foden is used to playing in midfield like that at City. Bellingham is a 10 at Real Madrid etc. However the issue lies with the REST of the team! They don't have the know how in defence nor attack, to play with such a midfield. I also contend that international football does not allow enough training time to instill it in to them. So Engand should go for what is pratical like Spain did. Set up to maximise the strengths they do have to maximise their winning chance
I felt France set up their midfield similar to Allegri's Juve off the ball, (the first time Pogba was signed by Juve that is). Matuidi was left wing so that he and Kante operated as ball winners either side of Pogba, put os possesion whilst Griezmann was in the hole. With Giroud as the target man and Mbappe as a free role strike partner.
For me the Bellingham, Rice, Foden, triangle only tactically make sense if and ONLY if England try to adopt what City did last year after January to lift the treble. A Back 4 of 4 defensive stout players, there strictly to stop all counters and Stones allowed to push into midfeld as an extra pivot to Support Rice when the side is attacking. Other wise if the normal set up of the fullbacks going into attack happens, I think they'd be done on the counter by the better offensive sides in the tournament
You can pretty much guarantee someone is getting injured a month before the tournament though.
Henderson shouldn't be anywhere near an England squad even with our limited midfield options.
I also just don't trust Southgate's judgement on basic things like this. If it wasn't for the media and injuries he'd probably still be picking Mount over Bellingham. In his mind Phillips also got better enough to start for England by barely playing a minute of football for years at City...he just magically got better by not doing anything, and then he apparently got worse again by actually playing football for West Ham.
Southgate also passively throws his players under the bus whenever things go wrong or he fecks something up himself. That's not good for young players and he's done it multiple times now.
Basically I don't like the idea of Mainoo being in the hands of an idiot with the national team, while also being played more than he probably should be by his club. Although I do think its a no brainer to call him up so its more a concern than a criticism.
An idiot who through his entire football life has been antagonistic to our club and it's players. Southgate can stay the feck away
Well neither do I. Because I NEVER once argued the Barca player where ineffective without their team mates. I instead said Spain were a far weaker team attempting to use them the identical way Barca did.
I disagree, Bellingham started every game at the World Cup and Mount didn't start a game after the first two group games. Even Phillips, has gone from a regular starter to a bench player under Southgate. He's barely played for City and despite making England squads, he's not featured when it's mattered. He played about 40 minutes at the last World Cup.
I'm not his biggest fan and would welcome someone like Potter or Howe replacing him in the summer but I think the criticism he gets is over the top.
I think that England have plenty of players capable playing in such a system, including Ramsdale, Stones, White, Walker, Grealish and Saka.
You could literally select an England side where 6 of the 8 players surrounding the midfield trio play with Rice and Foden at club level with City and Arsenal. The idea that you couldn’t select that midfield trio because there are not enough players with the know how to make the system work doesn’t stand up to much scrutiny.
I think the criticism is because this is the most talented squad England have likely ever had, and due to their being highlights of every game nowadays people are more aware of what the players are capable of week in week out for their club sides.
The general public disregard the differences between international football and club football, and so when you've got actual world class players like Kane and Bellingham not playing similar styles to what they do at their clubs it grates on people.
Its why no one ever says they'd love for a manager that has excelled in the international game to take over England, no international side plays great football really. Its more tumescent with games being decided by moments rather than teams playing the other off the park.
If Southgate had exactly these players at a club side where he could train them week in week out I've no doubt we'd see a more attacking game plan.
My only criticism of him is that he isn't brave enough and it's already cost him a couple of times.
What?
Fabregas the year he broke out had to play United, Chelsea in the league And was our star performer in the CL especially when we were reeling after losing Patrick, all at 18. He was already one of the best breakouts in the world at 18.
Mainoo is an amazing talent and I'd break the bank to get him if somehow could however with all due respect he's had 15 games so far. Thats it.
This isn't how footballing systems work. A club team is built around each player being signed and/or developed to do a specific role within said team. Even if one piece doesn't work well, the entire process breaks down and falls apart. Read what I said about Spain to see this example in motion. Just because they've guys have played together at club level doesn't mean they can replicate the same system at International level.
You use City and Arsenal as your examples - perfect. I can explain why these exact players doing City/Arsenal system won't work very well.
City and Arsenal both play with a metronomic midfielder. City have Rodri to do this job, Arsenal use Odegaard. They are not the same type of players but both control the "beat" of their respective teams possession based football. England have nobody to do this job, Bellingham at Real is an all action number 8/10/false 9, honestly his position is pretty new and undocumented. Kroos is usually the metronome. Rice has never played in that position. Problem number one for starters.
If you decide to play with the City style of play, you need very technical, great on their feet, creative, ball carriers playing narrow on the wings with fast and aggressive overlapping fullbacks providing low crosses and cutbacks for the very advanced lying forward in Haaland and the oncoming deeper 8/10 in De Bruyne and Silva. Sure, put Foden and Grealish there, that works. Now you lose Saka, who isn't really that kind of player but a direct, physical, fast threat. You now force Kane to stop dropping deep to only lead the line, which is acceptable I guess but doesn't use some of his best abilities like playmaking from deeper. Now, Bellingham can do the De Bruyne role at City even though they're different players and probably less effective, and his goalthreat is no longer viable. England's fullbacks can probably achieve the same results as City, given the similar personnel. Only, the problem you have now is that there's still no metronome with the midfield in possession, do you give Rice extra duties and hope he performs? Do you reduce Bellingham's role to that and put in Maddison to do the surges/driving from deep? you're left with all sorts of problems because although the players are almost the same, they're actually not and next thing you know, you're left with a half baked attempt.
Do the same exercise with Arsenal. Fast, direct, aggressive wide attackers who cut inside. A roaming frontman. Saka right wing, Kane up front works fine for this. Do you put Foden on the left? He's not really a direct, physical, direct, taking players on 1 on 1 and aiming to drive the ball into the box at every ample opportunity kind of player. Grealish certainly is not that. Do you bring back Stirling? Rashford could be used in this capacity but bad form. But in doing so you lose out on Foden in his best position. Let's say you do that and put Rashford Left, Saka Right, Kane down the middle and put Foden in the Odegaard/Havertz role in front of Rice. Now between Bellingham, Rice and Foden, nobody plays that Odegaard metronome role for their respective club sides.
Both these attempts to replicate Arteta/Pep tactics and playstyle will be nothing more than a hollow imitation because even lacking 1 or 2 key personnel in a specific role means that the whole thing can fall apart. A club team buys players to fit that exact role that the manager wants a player to play. International managers have to come with a solution to build a playstyle around the players he has available at his disposal at the current moment in time.
This is mad, Cesc was literally dominating midfields on route to the CL final at like 17
It's less "the system wouldn't work because players don't know how to make it work" and more "the system doesn't work because it's missing the single most important piece that makes it work". Did you miss the way City falls to pieces without Rodri?
Most confusing thing I learned from this nomination cycle is that Joe Gomez is only 17 months older than TAA. I figured he was closer to 30.
England really are stacked at the moment and for the foreseeable. Would be more of a waste than the ‘golden generation’ if this lot don’t bring it home.
I'm Scottish so I'm looking at things from the outside.
Gareth Southgate for me has done a brilliant job with England. Fans might bitch and moan that he's too conservative (which is ironic as he's a liberal) but I would disagree.
Fans say that this is perhaps the best England squad ever. Really?
If you look at the squads under Capello and Eriksson, none of the present centerbacks would get into those squads. Same with the midfielders. And no, I don't regard Bellingham as a midfielder. He's more of a number 10 or a false 9.
In the past England have had Scholes, Hargreaves, Carrick. But all three there criminally under utilised, from Scholes playing left midfield to Hargreaves at right back.
Now there's no one of that ilk.
Mainoo has tremendous potential but he's more of a dynamic midfielder than a playmaker.
Personally, I don't think he's ready. He's being fast tracked because there's no one else.
There's Rice and Phillips, who are classic anchormen. That's pretty much it in midfield. People keep questioning the inclusion of Henderson, but who else is there?
Because of the deficiencies at the back and midfield of course Southgate has to be cautious. He has no choice.
People question the reasons why Kane drops so deep. He only does so because he's a better passenger than any of the England midfielders.
The squads is top-heavy with inside forwards.
Another issue that'll rear its head is who takes over from Kane?
There's Watkins and Toney, but they're both just a couple years younger than Kane.
It should have been Mason Greenwood. That lad's finishing is a cross between Robbie Fowler and Alan Shearer.
So yeah, "golden generation 2.0"? Only in the minds of FIFA Soccer fanatics.
Gareth Southgate for me has done a brilliant job with England. Fans might bitch and moan that he's too conservative (which is ironic as he's a liberal) but I would disagree.
Fans say that this is perhaps the best England squad ever. Really?
If you look at the squads under Capello and Eriksson, none of the present centerbacks would get into those squads. Same with the midfielders. And no, I don't regard Bellingham as a midfielder. He's more of a number 10 or a false 9.
In the past England have had Scholes, Hargreaves, Carrick. But all three there criminally under utilised, from Scholes playing left midfield to Hargreaves at right back.
Now there's no one of that ilk.
Mainoo has tremendous potential but he's more of a dynamic midfielder than a playmaker.
Personally, I don't think he's ready. He's being fast tracked because there's no one else.
There's Rice and Phillips, who are classic anchormen. That's pretty much it in midfield. People keep questioning the inclusion of Henderson, but who else is there?
Because of the deficiencies at the back and midfield of course Southgate has to be cautious. He has no choice.
People question the reasons why Kane drops so deep. He only does so because he's a better passenger than any of the England midfielders.
The squads is top-heavy with inside forwards.
Another issue that'll rear its head is who takes over from Kane?
There's Watkins and Toney, but they're both just a couple years younger than Kane.
It should have been Mason Greenwood. That lad's finishing is a cross between Robbie Fowler and Alan Shearer.
So yeah, "golden generation 2.0"? Only in the minds of FIFA Soccer fanatics.
What role does Gallagher play for Chelsea?
I also feel a Mason Mount in form temporarily solves the midfield conundrum
I also feel a Mason Mount in form temporarily solves the midfield conundrum
It's the best squad because of the depth. Those sides of old had better starting lineups but the backup was fecking awful in comparison.
Their point stands though.
I've said it before, but every time England manages to put 3 world class players together, it gets labeled a golden generation, people somehow demand it not only wins, but wins playing like 1970 Brazil, and when it doesn't it's all the manager's fault and they need a better manager
This is a great generation of players, it's not a special generation of players, it's not a team that *should* win, it has glaring holes in central midfield and defence, the goalkeeper has performed really well for England, but he's still Jordan Pickford.
It's a great team with a fantastic group of forwards. If they're lucky, they'll win something. If not, they won't. The only thing that might change this paradigm is someone - probably Bellingham - turning into at least a Mbappé caliber of player, and showing up fit and in form for the tournaments(aka Why The Previous Golden Generation Didn't Win)
Correct. Before whenever we'd have an injury we'd have to rely on a poor player to fill in. These days we replace like for like. We've also got a very strong forward lineup, probably the best in Europe.
I don't think the glaring holes in defence and midfield are that bad though and the reason they're amplified is because of Southgate continuously picking people like Maguire, Phillips etc.
Also, Argentina had a good squad in the WC but they had the Messi factor which can take you that extra mile. Not only do England have the best squad but they arguably have the best and most in form striker in the world this season (Kane) and they have one of the best and in form young talents this season (Bellingham) while multiple (should be) starters like Rice, Foden, Walker, Stones etc. are playing for the best and most in form clubs which play the best and most effective football in the world. Golden generation it may not be if you don't want to call it that but Southgate has been given probably the best collective of players when you take into account all these factors than I can remember an England manager having in many many years.
Last edited:
Who else is there? Which English CBs would you say are definitely world class, based on club form? Maguire gets picked because he has consistently been england's best CB at international level
Phillips, who else is there with that skillset? Besides Jordan Henderson?
You are comparing Kane to Messi. Read that again 10 times please.
Already covered
Cool. Too bad they don't all play in the same team. I believe the most england can do is stones-walker-lewis-foden-graelish?
France, for example, still has the best player in the world, arguably the best gk in the world, the best LB, one of the best CB pairs possible, a deeper wealth of options in CM and Griezmann
Germany plays at home, will play Neuer, Rudiger, Kimmich, Gundogan, Kroos, Musiala, Havertz, Wirtz, Sane, etc...
I tend to agree with that assessment, mostly because I'm a big believer that attacking depth is the best thing to have - everything else you can coach and scheme for, lack of players who can actually reliably provide goals not so much. Shit on a stick football with Messi, Suarez and Villa up top is more reliable to win international tournaments than a WC squad bottom to midfield but lacking in forward options.
That said, it's still not by any means a team so good that it would have to go out of its way to not win
In his first tournament the squad was certainly weak but now I would say its up there with the best we have had in the last 20 years. Sure there are some gaps but maybe only France doesn't have some weaker positions.
Guess you can interpret Gareths time in different ways, one the one hand he has progressed deep into tournaments on the other we have generally gone ojt to the first decent team we have met having been incredibly lucky with the draws.
Personally I think he should have left after the last tournament having taken us as far as he can and think his flaws including an inability to adapt to in game changes
You don't need to have world class players in each position to win tournaments though? Aside from that, they have Walker and Stones who are some of the best in their position in the world and play for the best team in the world. You then have very good options to play alongside them in Tomori, Gomez, White, Branthwaite, Dunk, Shaw, Chilwell, Guehi, Colwill etc. It's a good enough selection of options to win the Euros and should have in 2021.
They don't and shouldn't play with Rice and Phillips though, they should play with a runner and more combative midfielder like Gallagher, RLC etc. or technical players in Foden or drop Bellingham deeper so you can have Maddison in the hole. There is enough depth and 'good' quality to win a tournament. Again, you don't need to have world class or perfect players in each position. You can have 5 or 6 world class/excellent options which England do and then good players to make up the numbers.
My point re-Messi was that in international football you can have individual players with quality carry/make the difference in knockout games. France have that with Mbappe too. England have it with Bellingham and Kane.
I think people just expect or think England should be putting in much more of a fight than they have been in recent years. They have enough quality to win a tournament now and nothing less than the final is acceptable for this squad.
Do they? If anything, past tournaments have proven that Kane will not win you those games. Bellingham is still an unknown as of yet
Well. They made the final in 2021 and lost on penalties and all I hear is how they should have won, and it's all Southgate's fault that they failed to beat a side that was in the process of setting a world record for consecutive games without a loss in international football
Against France in Qatar England played the way people want them to play, took the game to France, largely outplayed them for most of the game, were aggressive and courageous and proactive, and ultimately lost the game on a missed penalty. What exactly should they have done more? Besides, you know, not missing a penalty...
Interesting post, I do remember that game as one of the worst I've ever watched and the one that cemented that Spain team as utterly boring to watch in my eyes.@Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber
I think the goalposts have shifted somewhat.
Your original point wasn't that Xavi/Ineista/Busquets wouldn't have worked in a midfield three, but your point was that specifically it wouldn't have worked defensively.
I agree that that midfield three would be nowhere near as effective for Spain as it would be for Barcelona but you then changed your argument away from the defensive side to the offensive side. But defensively, without Alonso, it would have been fine. Iniesta would be far less effective however.
Alonso was never put there to provide defensive stability, as was your original point, he was there to provide more accurate passing from deep to the channels in a more congested midfield, something which Spain had a problem with as they never played with any real width in the attackers. Messi solved this problem for Barcelona by being all over the pitch.
Actually, Del Bosque actually tried the Barca way in the 2010 world cup semi final vs Germany. He set up Villa to be a free roaming forward in a false nine fashion, interchanging with Pedro who would also drop deeper and throughout the whole pitch. The idea was to give Iniesta space to both drive forward into the midfield and to loiter in the channels AND the fullbacks to provide the width. Xavi would drive from midfield from deep and Alonso actually played the Xavi role of playmaking from deep. Villa played the Messi role, Pedro played the Villa role at Barcelona and Iniesta bizarrely played the Villa role. This backfired spectacularly resulting in a drab game that should have ended 0-0 in all honesty.
Pedro and Villa both constantly dropped deep, hoping to drag the Germans out of position and to create space. The problem was, when Messi drops to the 35 yard area, he has to be marked because he can conjure up bullshit magic from nowhere. Germans just left Pedro and Villa alone and let them have the ball in that area. What ended up happening was Pedro and Villa got the ball constantly in the deep, neither had the creativity or forward dribbling to really threaten from there and the Germans just let them have the ball.
This is the heat map for Pedro:
This was the heat map for Villa:
As you can see, both these players dropped deep and did nothing. Germany kept their shape and their discipline. Iniesta didn't have the space in the channels to really get behind the defense OR to drive forward with the ball. Xavi driving forward from deep faced the same problem (no space) and Alonso couldn't do the Xavi ticking job as well as Xavi himself could. Spain had shit tonnes of the ball but couldn't do anything with it. With this setup, where Xabi Alonso wasn't even playing defensive midfielder, defensively Spain were fine.
This is where they gave up trying to replicate Barcelona type of football. They just couldn't do it with the players up top that they had at their disposal.
Rice, Foden and Bellingham will work fine. Bellingham can provide the type of offensive and defensive output to assist both up top and in the deep.
Look at France 2018 team, their midfield 3 was Kante, Pogba and Griezmann as number 8. They had Matuidi, yes, but he was utilized as a left winger for some reason.