England Thread

[LFCMarshall]

Yes but you fail to understand that if we play expansive football, we will not have a hope in **** of winning either. At least by playing reactive football we do have a chance, no matter how slim of...winning.

and how do you know this? we have a lot better squad than Belgium or Norway yet we still chose to play defensive..

After you have seen Hodgson take your team from top 8 at minimum to 18th in the league you will see why i hate this defensive mindset and why i dont rate him one bit...

 

[LFCMarshall]

Didnt Real Madrid score The most goals in history in La Liga, Win the most games?? Defensive?

The only team i saw them really play defence against was Barcelona... this is one opposition.. Hodgeson plays it against everyone

 

[GodCubed]

I know Real Madrid do counter-attack, but they are not set up only to do that is what I meant.

That's because they have the best squad in the world, period.

and how do you know this? we have a lot better squad than Belgium or Norway yet we still chose to play defensive..

We don't know this, but if you look at our previous attempts over the past, oh, FOUR DECADES - and in particular two years ago - you can see why people like me are apprehensive of England going out with their usual pompous patronising attitude towards other teams and getting creamed.

We chose to play defensively against Norway and Belgium. And we won. In the World Cup we chose to play offensively against Germany, and we got destroyed.

After you have seen Hodgson take your team from top 8 at minimum to 18th in the league you will see why i hate this defensive mindset and why i dont rate him one bit...

Nobody gives a **** about Liverpool when we're talking about the England team. Like many of your points, this is an entirely moot point.

 

[Alcaraz]

Which is totally irrelevant.



I don't care what you think of him personally, the point is you just listed some of the virtues which have led International teams in the past decade to overperform massively.



Whilst Alcaraz might be a bit harsh in labelling Dortmund a purely reactive side, you picked literally the worst example in the 5-2 against Bayern. In that match, they ripped the Munich defence apart on the counter after sitting deep and absorbing pressure, classic reactive football. Madrid are primarily reactive - like Dortmund, they're a bit too good and multitalented to be purely reactive - and your comment about them 'not counterattacking' is utter rubbish. They're one of the finest counterattacking sides the world has seen recently, and it's their main method of getting goals.

The crux of the matter is that unless you have a very technically proficient and well-gelled squad, its extremely hard to play purely expansive football and win. Only teams capable of doing that is Barcelona and Bayern Munich. Although as has been the case with Bayern, even they failed with it this season.

However by playing reactive football, you dont really need to have a great squad. As long as your players are disclipined and are reasonably competent, you have a decent chance of winning.

Obviously some squads like RM and Dortmund are too good to play reactive football. But you can certainly see elements of that in their game. With Chelsea and England however, we are not even that good and hence we must rely on purely reactive football in order to stand a chance of winning against technically proficient and possession-based teams like Belgium

Was just about to comment on the 5-2 win as well, Dortmund sat deep and let Bayern have the ball. Absorbed the pressure. Then they were phenomenal in transition. Kagawa would find the open spaces and initate the counter-attack. Bayern's players would be horrificially out of position and well they leaked goals

 

[GodCubed]

Didnt Real Madrid score The most goals in history in La Liga, Win the most games?? Defensive?

The only team i saw them really play defence against was Barcelona... this is one opposition.. Hodgeson plays it against everyone

Real Madrid scored the most history in La Liga because they would invite the opposition onto them, score two on the break, nick another when they were pushing for a goal that could get them into the game and then spend the next 50 minutes picking them apart at leisure. By the time they needed to do anything apart from play reactive football, they were already two or three up.

If Hodgson wins, I don't care how he plays. I've said this so many times already.

 

[LFCMarshall]

It seems we have 2 very english people in favour of Hodgsons tactics and 2 people who disagree completely with it, obviously not going to change each others mind

 

[Alcaraz]

Didnt Real Madrid score The most goals in history in La Liga, Win the most games?? Defensive?

The only team i saw them really play defence against was Barcelona... this is one opposition.. Hodgeson plays it against everyone

Reactive football does not mean Defensive football. Its more about sitting deep and hitting opponents on the counter. Teams like Chelsea take that to the extreme because they are simply not good enough and thus this is their only plausible chance of winning

 

[Alcaraz]

It seems we have 2 very english people in favour of Hodgsons tactics and 2 people who disagree completely with it, obviously not going to change each others mind

2 people who want England to put up a good showing at the Euro's and win instead of playing expansive football to suit the ego's of fans and get creamed

 

[GodCubed]

It seems we have 2 very english people in favour of Hodgsons tactics and 2 people who disagree completely with it, obviously not going to change each others mind

'Very English people'? What the **** is that meant to mean? I was born in England, but my footballing education has been incredibly European by most peoples' standards. Even if it wasn't, though, that is totally irrelevant (again) so long as the points I'm making are valid and justified. You're not going to change my mind because your opinions are based on archaic views and personal prejudices against Hodgson, that's all.

 

[sunilvk7]

I agree with what GC and Alcaraz is saying (Which even I posted yesterday) that England should play to their strengths.

But I dont agree with Madrid point, they were not reactive, they attacked relentlessly against all the opponents bar Barca. They dont let opponents keep the ball, they press very well.

Also I dont agree with England having better team that Belgium. Midfield of Fellaini, Dembele, Witsel is clearly better than midfield of Parker, Gerrard, Young. Very important position to dominate the games. And Central defense of Kompany and Verma is better than any combination England can offer. Not to forget Vertonghen is very capable LB who is also very good CB. Squad is very close but when you consider midfield talent I rate Belgians higher than England's.

 

[Jak]

Either way we play we're going to lose and will do well to get out of the group so the debate of how to play is irrelevant

 

[Alcaraz]

I agree with what GC and Alcaraz is saying (Which even I posted yesterday) that England should play to their strengths.

But I dont agree with Madrid point, they were not reactive, they attacked relentlessly against all the opponents bar Barca. They dont let opponents keep the ball, they press very well.

Also I dont agree with England having better team that Belgium. Midfield of Fellaini, Dembele, Witsel is clearly better than midfield of Parker, Gerrard, Young. Very important position to dominate the games. And Central defense of Kompany and Verma is better than any combination England can offer. Not to forget Vertonghen is very capable LB who is also very good CB. Squad is very close but when you consider midfield talent I rate Belgians higher than England's.

They have elements of reactive football in their game. But as you mentioned, when they were playing against a technically proficient and well-gelled side that relied totally on expansive football, even they retreated to playing pure reactive football. Despite the excellent squad they have

Plus due to the gulf in class between RM and other teams, I am not surprised they attacked relentlessly considering they could. With England, we cannot do that against even the likes of Belgium because we are simply not good enough and thus must rely on reactive football to stand a good chance of winning

 

[LFCMarshall]

'Very English people'? What the **** is that meant to mean? I was born in England, but my footballing education has been incredibly European by most peoples' standards. Even if it wasn't, though, that is totally irrelevant (again) so long as the points I'm making are valid and justified. You're not going to change my mind because your opinions are based on archaic views and personal prejudices against Hodgson, that's all.

2 very english as in it has been the mentality for a while of english people.. lets get stuck in, lets defend, lets counter ETC

rather than the passing game, the quick one two's .......

Its nothing against Hodgson personally, i was just making the point that he plays defensive at every club, and it does not improve any club greatly.. fulham Mid table, Liverpool 18th, West brom Mid table..

I agree with what GC and Alcaraz is saying (Which even I posted yesterday) that England should play to their strengths.

But I dont agree with Madrid point, they were not reactive, they attacked relentlessly against all the opponents bar Barca. They dont let opponents keep the ball, they press very well.

Also I dont agree with England having better team that Belgium. Midfield of Fellaini, Dembele, Witsel is clearly better than midfield of Parker, Gerrard, Young. Very important position to dominate the games. And Central defense of Kompany and Verma is better than any combination England can offer. Not to forget Vertonghen is very capable LB who is also very good CB. Squad is very close but when you consider midfield talent I rate Belgians higher than England's.

A team that were not even good enough to qualify for the Euro's... great individual players but as a team they are poor

 

[CJACKO11]

Am i the only one who thinks if Cahill misses the Euro's or any games in the competition then Joe Hart should take a huge ammount of the blame.

 

[sunilvk7]

They have elements of reactive football in their game. But as you mentioned, when they were playing against a technically proficient and well-gelled side that relied totally on expansive football, even they retreated to playing pure reactive football. Despite the excellent squad they have

Plus due to the gulf in class between RM and other teams, I am not surprised they attacked relentlessly considering they could. With England, we cannot do that against even the likes of Belgium because we are simply not good enough and thus must rely on reactive football to stand a good chance of winning

Yeah to play possession based football you need technically good players who can keep the ball better. Wilshere is England's biggest hope to play this type of football and also likes of Cleverley, Rodwell (hopefully he will have injury free season to prove his worth), Welbeck should step up. England's next generation players are capable of playing possession game but if I was English I would have been pleased to see Hodgson finally playing in the way that benefits England in Euro.

Whether he is capable to play fancy football or not is alltoghether different question but given the fact he had no time to prepare his team, its good to play the game that brings best out of most players. (Just like how RDM did with Chelsea)

 

[Quasit]

Am i the only one who thinks if Cahill misses the Euro's or any games in the competition then Joe Hart should take a huge ammount of the blame.

Why?

Was a **** move by Mertens.

 

[sunilvk7]

A team that were not even good enough to qualify for the Euro's... great individual players but as a team they are poor

England didn't qualify for Euro 08 but there were **** poor teams which were inferior than England.

Ireland qualified but I can say Ireland is not better than Belgium. (Even though they haven't lost a game in 2 years if I'm not wrong).

 

[zzeezzy]

Reactive football does not mean Defensive football. Its more about sitting deep and hitting opponents on the counter. Teams like Chelsea take that to the extreme because they are simply not good enough and thus this is their only plausible chance of winning

How do you describe Wigan beating Arsenal at the Emirates for example then this season? A lot of other top teams as well they beat this season, United at home etc.

Not to forget Norwich and Swansea who have poor squads on paper beat much better team this season, I am sorry this does not stick with me.

 

[Alcaraz]

Yeah to play possession based football you need technically good players who can keep the ball better. Wilshere is England's biggest hope to play this type of football and also likes of Cleverley, Rodwell (hopefully he will have injury free season to prove his worth), Welbeck should step up. England's next generation players are capable of playing possession game but if I was English I would have been pleased to see Hodgson finally playing in the way that benefits England in Euro.

Whether he is capable to play fancy football or not is alltoghether different question but given the fact he had no time to prepare his team, its good to play the game that brings best out of most players. (Just like how RDM did with Chelsea)

Exactly. Whether Hodgson can play expansive football or not is another matter. But as of now, he is playing to the strengths of the squad. Which is the most he can do considering he has had only 2 matches to prepare for the Euro's thanks to the FA

Their is a chance that England could have played expansive football against Norway and Belgium and won but since we are eventually going to be playing reactive football, we might as well play the same way in our warm-up games so that the players get used to the system

 

[LFCMarshall]

England didn't qualify for Euro 08 but there were **** poor teams which were inferior than England.

Ireland qualified but I can say Ireland is not better than Belgium. (Even though they haven't lost a game in 2 years if I'm not wrong).

fair enough. I cant remember Belgium every really competing competively in a tournament, i may be wrong i havent looked?