Discussion in 'Football Forum' started by Sean_RedDevil, Aug 28, 2019.
England don't have world class players in every section of the pitch like France either.
People act like Maddison is still potential like Mount, but he's already one of the best midfielders in the league, and England's best. He's probably going to get better, too, considering his age. I'd say only Pogba and De Bryune are better playmakers than him in the league.
I really do find it strange to see Barkley and Mount preferred to him.
I disagree with you. They both have incredible talent. I think Foden especially will be one of the worlds best players within 5 years. I would play Foden now for the England seniors he is that good.
Yeah, he is playing well in PL for almost a year now. I was impressed with Mount for Chelsea but Maddison has played better and deserves to start.
Michael Keane at CB is going to be exposed badly in a tournament. Think that's a problem area for England the CB next to Maguire as Stones obviously has an error in him against better nations.
Maguire, Stones, Joe Gomez should be good enough with Keane/Mings/Tarkowski as 4th choice.
if Southgate can't get him on the pitch in these 2 games then he may as well not bother calling him up as we all know Dele will be in the next squad
The most aggravating thing about it is that England have lots of young midfielders who are perfectly capable of being confident in possession and creating chances.
You can't tell me that squad wouldn't cause damage the Euros next year but Southgate seems reluctant to go with it.
Reward someone for having talent but not showing what he can do.
I remember when Wilshere was Englan'd saviour but how did that turn out?
Yeah if Eriksen has already gone to Real Madrid, sure.
Yeah, he always seems to be one or two selections away from a fully balanced team - IMO.
Interesting player to mention because in his first two seasons in England his output was similar to Maddison last season.
Good result last night for England. Far too sloppy with the Kosovo goals though and against bigger nations we will be punished. Look at the Netherlands game in the Nations League, for example.
I do think it is strange the way Mount is preferred over Maddison. Wonder what Southgate's thinking is.
Also, Rashford was greedy in his ten minute cameo. He did a good run with the ball but could have passed to Kane instead of shooting. Him and Lingard seem to have tunnel vision at the moment, which is worrying.
Dele Alli has been poor for England for a while. I don't he should be in the starting 11.
Yeah, it was good chance to play him to see how he integrates with other players.
I think it comes down to formation. If he wants to play a 4-2-3-1 then I would put Maddison in. But it appears as though he prefers a 4-3-3. I know some will not see too much difference in the 2 formations, but the way I look at it is that in a 4-3-3 your outside guys stay up the field a little more to be outlets to start counter attacks while in a 4-2-3-1 they play a little more defensive with the #10 staying closer to the striker...
Maddison hasn't played as a 10 since January and regularly plays as part of a midfield 3, this excuse about formation/system just doesn't wash
Maddison has been playing as a CM in a 4-3-3 at Leicester under Rodgers. Alongside Tielemans and ahead of Ndidi.
Mason has been playing a more advanced role if anything, and he got his chance. Seems pretty clear to me that if Madisson played for Chelsea and Mount Leicester, it wouldn't be the latter getting chances.
Ärger, Madfison over Mount is a strange choice. It may be though he saw it as a better test for Mount, who ultimately might not make the squad for the Euros.
Maybe he is more confident about taking Maddison to the Euros?
then Maddison needs as many minutes as possible to settle into the team before the tournament, there are only 6 games before he names his squad
It's his work rate, or lack thereof, when playing in a 4-3-3.
KM per 90 last season
This doesn't play for a big club thing supposedly being the reason Maddison is not playing is a bit weak considering Maguire established himself in the side while playing for Leicester and Chillwell seems to be doing the same.
Rice also averaged 10.8 kms per 90 mins. Should have at least came on as a sub.
I've said it a lot but I don't rate Eriksen. Never have. Maddison is already better for me.
Yeah, and he's excelled as a CM in said 3. That's why I find it so strange as it's not as if he's unproven there and is being played as a 10 or on the left all the time at club level.
Yeah, I just think Southgate prefers Mount as a talent, and probably sees Barkley as the more secure option right now.
Like, as you say, he was fine choosing Maguire and Chillwell over the likes of Smalling and Shaw in the past.
In a 4-4-3 it's the Henderson & Barkley positions that are required to be all action.
Rice is supposed to shield the defence and initiate attacks by playing out
except he wasn't expected to start at the world cup before Gomez got injured, was expected to be a sub after the world cup, replaced by Gomez, it's only injuries to Stones and Gomez that allowed him to do so.
Chilwell got in due to injuries and as soon as Rose was fit he played the next game.
Players from non top 6 clubs have to do move to prove they can do it, players at them have to prove they can't and that's what big club bias is
Last season Matic and Xhaka averaged 11.5 kms, they are also defensive mids.
Not sure what your point is here?
He's been playing on the left for most of the end of last season and the start of this. He did have a spell playing as one of the two more advanced midfielders for Leicester in the early part of the year but the idea that he's been really hard done by not to be playing for England there doesn't hold up. At the moment he is still very much an attacker.
Also, you'd think England never hold training sessions according to some of the comments. It's not like Southgate has ignored him completely, he's had 10 days to experiment with his midfield and see where he would fit in. If anything, he'd find more out about him playing against his England teammates than in competitive matches against cannon fodder like Bulgaria and Kosovo.
I don't think work rate is the issue for not playing Maddison.
Maybe, the upcoming oponnents are tougher, which makes them a more suitable test for Maddison?
Bulgaria and Kosovo were nothing more than cannon fodder really.
(I agree with you though. My guess is just that Southgate wants to include as many youngsters as possible. So in a weirdly way Mount over Maddison might make sense.)
We are playing a 4-3-3, in the position that Maddison would play in that system a high work rate is required. Rice does not play the same position with the same requirements in that system.
Yeah, the way Southgate sets up he doesn't require creative midfielders. The England midfield's job is essentially to keep the ball and win it back quickly to unleash Sterling and Sancho.
Someone like Maddison will probably end up being a plan B for when sides don't push forward enough to allow for England's counter attack, which is why he'll start getting more minutes come the pre-tournament friendlies where I assume those kind of opponents will be deliberately selected.
Then why even select him as him covering 10.8 kms was known long back.
Yeah, I don't even think Mount and Maddison are in direct competition with one another. One is in the squad primarily to score goals and the other is there to create. It's like comparing Lampard with Beckham.
The majority of Leicester games I watched last season (after Youri arrived) Maddison was in a midfield 3 and was just excellent. That's when Barnes started getting lot of games on the left who caught my eye.
As an outright central midfielder - not on the left or as a AM - of which he played quite a bit of last season after Youri arrived, I just think he's our best option.
You can justify it however you want. None of us know outright why Southgate isn't picking him, but, regardless, from the outside, I, and many others, can't see any reason from a football POV as to why he didn't get any minutes at all when, outside of Kane, Sterling & Sancho, he's the next best performing player in a top league. Even as a sub.
Maddison when playing in a 3 is often sitting deeper allowing Tielemans to bomb on, he is very tactically aware and when in the role doing just go forward and leave the side exposed, if Southgate doesn't rate him fine, but say that and don't select him and don't make up crap excuses for it
To get him in the squad, see how his personality fits in the group etc? Southgate said after selecting him that he didn't really know how to fit him in whilst Mount was a natural fit for the system.
I think they are.
Henderson and Rice (at the moment) are guarantees.
Then there's one spot left for the more advanced CM which is Barkley at the moment, and that's where Mount has played in the previous two games and where Maddison would play if chosen. Ox is probably competing for that spot with Barkley, Mount and Maddison, too.
Separate names with a comma.