England Thread

[LFCMarshall]

False nine.

As such, playing him as a lone striker would be an excellent option.

I honestly cant see how this would be good, defensive tactics, defensive mindset and now not even a out and out striker in the team

 

[zzeezzy]

Roy Hodgson after the game against Belguim "Very pleasing I now know we can keep quality teams like Norway and Belguim at bay".

That pretty much sums it all up, Belguim have some good players but Norway.. come on god help us.

 

[GodCubed]

Think I would rather see Sven back in charge rather than having to watch England play so deep with two banks of four relying on two or three chances in a game, if we are lucky. This is just rediculous for the talent we have coming through, we have better players than most nations apart from the obvious.

Quite apart from the fact that you're painting Sven being back as the lesser of two potential evils in this case, when in fact Sven was an excellent England manager, stop complaining. In the World Cup we played **** football and lost. At this moment in time, with Rooney unavailable, Carrick practically retired, and Lampard, Wilshere, Huddlestone and every other creative deep-lying player we have injured, grinding out 1-0 draws is absolutely fine by me. The way I see it, with this depleted squad and this unprepared team, either we play ugly or we lose, and I'd rather we won 1-0 than lose 4-2.

I honestly cant see how this would be good, defensive tactics, defensive mindset and now not even a out and out striker in the team

I wasn't referring to context, since your original post didn't make any reference to it.

 

[Alcaraz]

Quite apart from the fact that you're painting Sven being back as the lesser of two potential evils in this case, when in fact Sven was an excellent England manager, stop complaining. In the World Cup we played **** football and lost. At this moment in time, with Rooney unavailable, Carrick practically retired, and Lampard, Wilshere, Huddlestone and every other creative deep-lying player we have injured, grinding out 1-0 draws is absolutely fine by me. The way I see it, with this depleted squad and this unprepared team, either we play ugly or we lose, and I'd rather we won 1-0 than lose 4-2.



I wasn't referring to context, since your original post didn't make any reference to it.

I have been saying the same thing to him for quite some time now yet zzeezy keeps harping on about playing good football.

 

[GodCubed]

Roy Hodgson after the game against Belguim "Very pleasing I now know we can keep quality teams like Norway and Belguim at bay".

That pretty much sums it all up, Belguim have some good players but Norway.. come on god help us.

Norway are higher than Belgium on the rankings by a fair bit. They've got some excellent players as well: Hangeland, Riise, Henriksen, Yttergard Jenssen, Gamst Pedersen, Grindheim and Braaten are all capable top-level performers, and they've got a truly top coach in Olsen. They're well drilled and a good match for anyone.

 

[mccollio09]

Quite apart from the fact that you're painting Sven being back as the lesser of two potential evils in this case, when in fact Sven was an excellent England manager, stop complaining. In the World Cup we played **** football and lost. At this moment in time, with Rooney unavailable, Carrick practically retired, and Lampard, Wilshere, Huddlestone and every other creative deep-lying player we have injured, grinding out 1-0 draws is absolutely fine by me. The way I see it, with this depleted squad and this unprepared team, either we play ugly or we lose, and I'd rather we won 1-0 than lose 4-2.



I wasn't referring to context, since your original post didn't make any reference to it.

But against France it is very likely we will play ugly AND lose. And the same will happen against any team as good as or better than them, so I don't really get what we're learning from this.

 

[Alcaraz]

I really do not know what options we have left now short of playing Gerrard in a double pivot. Only realistic option is for us to play Milner/Jones as a energetic shuttler beside a destroyer like Parker. Not exactly ideal but better than playing Gerrard there

But I doubt it will happen. Gerrard is captain so he will be starting and probably in a double pivot. God help us

 

[zzeezzy]

Quite apart from the fact that you're painting Sven being back as the lesser of two potential evils in this case, when in fact Sven was an excellent England manager, stop complaining. In the World Cup we played **** football and lost. At this moment in time, with Rooney unavailable, Carrick practically retired, and Lampard, Wilshere, Huddlestone and every other creative deep-lying player we have injured, grinding out 1-0 draws is absolutely fine by me. The way I see it, with this depleted squad and this unprepared team, either we play ugly or we lose, and I'd rather we won 1-0 than lose 4-2.



I wasn't referring to context, since your original post didn't make any reference to it.

Not the fact of that, if Roy was appointed to do a job just for this Euro's then maybe it would be acceptable due to the situation. But the fact Roy has been appointed on a four year contract they obviously see him as a pretty long term English manager, that is what worries me. His system being ingrained into the talent we have coming through, we don't need to play like this with the talent we have though, Capello played more expansively than this as well by the way, that is saying something, not to forget Capello you could see constantly on the touchline wanting the team to press higher up, with Hodgson it is rigid, stay in shape, hope for a few chances even against teams even those what are inferior aka Norway and hope we can keep them at bay by giving them large amount of the ball.. when we should not let them have anyway.

 

[GodCubed]

But against France it is very likely we will play ugly AND lose. And the same will happen against any team as good as or better than them, so I don't really get what we're learning from this.

But if we try and play a fluid, attacking system with no preparation under a coach who's had no time to actually coach, we'll almost certainly lose. I'd rather we have a chance at winning rather than just go banzai from the first minute and get spanked 5-0.

'Learning' is a stupidly cliche word in International football. What would we 'learn' if we won playing attacking football? What would we 'learn' if we won playing defensive football? Very little either way.

 

[Alcaraz]

But against France it is very likely we will play ugly AND lose. And the same will happen against any team as good as or better than them, so I don't really get what we're learning from this.

Err not really. Chelsea played ugly against the likes of Bayern/Barcelona who have truly excellent teams and beat them. they beat Bayern on their own pitch mind and came back from 2-0 down to draw with Barcelona with 10 men.

You are making the assumption that we will lose by playing this tactic. The way I see it, we have a much greater chance of winning by playing this way rather than playing good football and losing 3-0. Only tweak is to dump Gerrard and bring in Milner/Jones which looks unlikely of happening sadly

And seriously where do people get these idea of learning from. What exactly will we learn by playing good football and getting massacred. That we suck at playing good football?

 

[LFCMarshall]

The fact people are happy with Narrowely beating Norway and Belgium, despite not deserving much at all sums up everything.

 

[Alcaraz]

His system being ingrained into the talent we have coming through, we don't need to play like this with the talent we have though

You want to play beautiful football with the current depleted squad. We went through this on the previous page and you conceded you were wrong and yet you mention the same thing again

Capello played more expansively than this as well by the way, that is saying something, not to forget Capello you could see constantly on the touchline wanting the team to press higher up, with Hodgson it is rigid, stay in shape

Nice bit of generalisation there. Capello is Italian. Italian play boring football. Capello play boring football.

hope for a few chances even against teams even those what are inferior aka Norway and hope we can keep them at bay by giving them large amount of the ball.. when we should not let them have anyway.

Hardly.. We give them large amounts of the ball but we defend deep with two banks of 4. So at the end of the day Belgium could not convert their high possession into goals or even good chances. You could see they got frustrated and took pot shots at times

No idea why you are so against reactive football which is what we are capabale of playing. Granted we could be much better at what we are trying to play but you seem to suggest that due to us being England we should play possession football

 

[GodCubed]

Not the fact of that, if Roy was appointed to do a job just for this Euro's then maybe it would be acceptable due to the situation. But the fact Roy has been appointed on a four year contract they obviously see him as a pretty long term English manager, that is what worries me. His system being ingrained into the talent we have coming through, we don't need to play like this with the talent we have though, Capello played more expansively than this as well by the way, that is saying something, not to forget Capello you could see constantly on the touchline wanting the team to press higher up, with Hodgson it is rigid, stay in shape, hope for a few chances even against teams even those what are inferior aka Norway and hope we can keep them at bay by giving them large amount of the ball.. when we should not let them have anyway.

Roy's been appointed on a four year contract, so why don't we wait until he's more than a month into his tenure before we start bashing him for playing negative football? He's had so little time to effect the team's philosophy that we may as well mostly discount any changes he's made.

Who are you to say we don't 'need' to play like this? I'd argue we ****** well do. A depleted squad, a very recently appointed manager, and the global trend over the past five years in International football has been pragmatic or 'negative' teams prevailing - see Uruguay at the WC and Copa America, Ghana at the WC, Zambia at the ACON, etc. We're far more likely to get further in the competition playing pragmatically than chucking people forward in disorganised waves.

Say what you like about our game versus Norway, but we won, and we won against a good team.

 

[Alcaraz]

Also I think Welbeck should be starting ahead of Caroll. Only thing is who will take the AMC slot behind him when Rooney is suspended. I would preferably go for Gerrard, give him a 'free' role to create and score goals which is what he excels at

Young perhaps? Cant think of others

 

[GodCubed]

Also I think Welbeck should be starting ahead of Caroll. Only thing is who will take the AMC slot behind him when Rooney is suspended. I would preferably go for Gerrard, give him a 'free' role to create and score goals which is what he excels at

Young perhaps? Cant think of others

I dislike Young as a second striker. Doesn't have the passing ability nor the tactical intelligence to function properly there. Gerrard is the only option really.

 

[LFCMarshall]

Roy's been appointed on a four year contract, so why don't we wait until he's more than a month into his tenure before we start bashing him for playing negative football? He's had so little time to effect the team's philosophy that we may as well mostly discount any changes he's made.

Who are you to say we don't 'need' to play like this? I'd argue we ****** well do. A depleted squad, a very recently appointed manager, and the global trend over the past five years in International football has been pragmatic or 'negative' teams prevailing - see Uruguay at the WC and Copa America, Ghana at the WC, Zambia at the ACON, etc. We're far more likely to get further in the competition playing pragmatically than chucking people forward in disorganised waves.

Say what you like about our game versus Norway, but we won, and we won against a good team.

God help us all.

 

[zzeezzy]

Roy's been appointed on a four year contract, so why don't we wait until he's more than a month into his tenure before we start bashing him for playing negative football? He's had so little time to effect the team's philosophy that we may as well mostly discount any changes he's made.

Who are you to say we don't 'need' to play like this? I'd argue we ****** well do. A depleted squad, a very recently appointed manager, and the global trend over the past five years in International football has been pragmatic or 'negative' teams prevailing - see Uruguay at the WC and Copa America, Ghana at the WC, Zambia at the ACON, etc. We're far more likely to get further in the competition playing pragmatically than chucking people forward in disorganised waves.

Say what you like about our game versus Norway, but we won, and we won against a good team.

'A depleted squad' pretty much sums it up, this should never of been the squad anyway so now of course we are limited, but lets be honest can you see in a month's time Roy suddenly playing more expansive or higher up, it does not matter who we have in the squad, he has always played like this, surely him seeing Carrick as a holding mid tells you enough?

 

[Alcaraz]

'A depleted squad' pretty much sums it up, this should never of been the squad anyway so now of course we are limited, but lets be honest can you see in a month's time Roy suddenly playing more expansive or higher up, it does not matter who we have in the squad, he has always played like this, surely him seeing Carrick as a holding mid tells you enough?

Thats a separate issue altogether. When the time comes and the squad is capable of more and he still plays this way, I will gladly join you in bashing him

 

[GodCubed]

'A depleted squad' pretty much sums it up, this should never of been the squad anyway so now of course we are limited, but lets be honest can you see in a month's time Roy suddenly playing more expansive or higher up, it does not matter who we have in the squad, he has always played like this, surely him seeing Carrick as a holding mid tells you enough?

You just ignored everything I said in favour of quoting three words. That's quite remarkable.

Who the **** else do we pick for the squad? The only really obvious person missed was Richards. Carrick has retired, and it's no fault of Hodgson's that he's been mistreated by a procession of England managers before him. As I said, who gives a **** about playing higher up? You've taken the weird leap in just blindly assuming expansive football = winning football, when all trends in the International game today point to the opposite being true.

Carrick is now beside the point. I spent quite a bit of time moping about him, but that's passed now. What Hodgson sees Carrick as is totally moot.

 

[Alcaraz]

I dislike Young as a second striker. Doesn't have the passing ability nor the tactical intelligence to function properly there. Gerrard is the only option really.

Assuming Gerrard continues to play in a double pivot, who do you see there?

Not that it will matter because they will hardly get the ball anyways