Euro 2012 Match Discussion Thread
- Thread starter CJACKO11
- Start date
- Replies 1K
- Views 106K
slbenficacoach
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,587
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
There was no chance of JT and Rio being in that same squad, not a chance in ****. He had to pick one over the other and if Ferdinand had managed to do better than that he would have won world player of the year lol. On the Rooney thing he was very poor against Ukraine too not just tonight.
slbenficacoach
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,587
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
[video=youtube;3R9JSf6N_Hs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3R9JSf6N_Hs[/video]
And history repeats itself. Another Panenka penalty.
And history repeats itself. Another Panenka penalty.
juventus1980
Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2011
- Messages
- 149
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Played much better than you, shows you how bad England are.
Been a while since you saw my incessant semi-ranting...
Bit of a waste of a tournament for England for me, we got Jones 0 minutes in a tournament we introduced Chamberlain by have him mark his fullback and spend most of his time 10 yards from Ashley Cole. Not sure what the point of it all was, we were underwhelming throughout and at the end we haven't given the youngsters any freedom or much tournament experience whatsoever. As others have said Young had a bad tournament but to be fair at United he plays more advanced than a 442 LM and he doesn't spend most of his energy tracking the opposition fullbacks, for Young to be effective you need him in and around the opposition 18 yard box. I didn't see Downing whatsoever, surely it would have been smarter to take an impact substitute like Sturridge or Johnson?
After the World Cup I thought that was the idea, to freshen up the team and change from the already proven useless vs other teams - Germany 2010 - 442? I do not have a clue why that conversation has been forgotten and we hire the most predictable and 442 man in football as the national coach. What's Wilshere going to do coming into this system, sit in the centre and act as an off the ball runner just like Henderson was asked to do?
I mean I'll not vent on Hodgson too much I mean it was the FA that appointed him for 4 years and trusted him with Chamberlain/Wilshere/Walker etc. Just do not see any real difference between the way we set out this tournament and in South Africa, the only difference I see is a solid GK and a bit of luck.
I wasn't worried about this tournament but I would have preferred seeing England freshen things up more than bringing in Parker who should have been at the World Cup anyway. I'm just puzzled how the conversation we had post World Cup has been dissolved into lets play for results and ignore the 42% possession average which probably went sub 40 after tonights game.
Wasn't that the whole idea to produce more technical players and try to pass and move more which you really can not do in a 4-4-2. I'm just perplexed, what have we accomplished from the tournament? Maybe had a good look at Parker, established Lescott's a decent defender and discovered Johnson can defend a bit but besides that not much else.
To do what the Germans did a few years ago you need a brave FA and a brave manager to change the system/philosophy/players in a short period but 2 years on I'm not seeing any real progress in the England National Team whatsoever.
Italy are a good team but before kickoff you knew Hodgsons 442 was going to get dominated by the Italian midfielders who's narrow diamond would over run the English CM's I just don't think that's progress or a good sign considering there's another 2 tournaments of this.
I'm not angry by this tournament performance because it's what you would expect from Hodgson, 442 ride your luck football, I'm just left rather underwhelmed and perplexed to put it mildly.
Bit of a waste of a tournament for England for me, we got Jones 0 minutes in a tournament we introduced Chamberlain by have him mark his fullback and spend most of his time 10 yards from Ashley Cole. Not sure what the point of it all was, we were underwhelming throughout and at the end we haven't given the youngsters any freedom or much tournament experience whatsoever. As others have said Young had a bad tournament but to be fair at United he plays more advanced than a 442 LM and he doesn't spend most of his energy tracking the opposition fullbacks, for Young to be effective you need him in and around the opposition 18 yard box. I didn't see Downing whatsoever, surely it would have been smarter to take an impact substitute like Sturridge or Johnson?
After the World Cup I thought that was the idea, to freshen up the team and change from the already proven useless vs other teams - Germany 2010 - 442? I do not have a clue why that conversation has been forgotten and we hire the most predictable and 442 man in football as the national coach. What's Wilshere going to do coming into this system, sit in the centre and act as an off the ball runner just like Henderson was asked to do?
I mean I'll not vent on Hodgson too much I mean it was the FA that appointed him for 4 years and trusted him with Chamberlain/Wilshere/Walker etc. Just do not see any real difference between the way we set out this tournament and in South Africa, the only difference I see is a solid GK and a bit of luck.
I wasn't worried about this tournament but I would have preferred seeing England freshen things up more than bringing in Parker who should have been at the World Cup anyway. I'm just puzzled how the conversation we had post World Cup has been dissolved into lets play for results and ignore the 42% possession average which probably went sub 40 after tonights game.
Wasn't that the whole idea to produce more technical players and try to pass and move more which you really can not do in a 4-4-2. I'm just perplexed, what have we accomplished from the tournament? Maybe had a good look at Parker, established Lescott's a decent defender and discovered Johnson can defend a bit but besides that not much else.
To do what the Germans did a few years ago you need a brave FA and a brave manager to change the system/philosophy/players in a short period but 2 years on I'm not seeing any real progress in the England National Team whatsoever.
Italy are a good team but before kickoff you knew Hodgsons 442 was going to get dominated by the Italian midfielders who's narrow diamond would over run the English CM's I just don't think that's progress or a good sign considering there's another 2 tournaments of this.
I'm not angry by this tournament performance because it's what you would expect from Hodgson, 442 ride your luck football, I'm just left rather underwhelmed and perplexed to put it mildly.
Surprised Ash Young took a pen after the tournament he's had, been terrible. Ash Cole doesn't usually miss but it was the same pen as the CL, Gigi would of done his homework.
When we attacked in the first 15mins, Italy didn't know what to do. They got a bit of the ball and we sat back for the rest, the game was there for the taking if we attacked a bit more..
When we attacked in the first 15mins, Italy didn't know what to do. They got a bit of the ball and we sat back for the rest, the game was there for the taking if we attacked a bit more..
slbenficacoach
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,587
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
That penalty from Zidane was incredible!
We wearn't bad, we were playing to our strengths and for 120 minutes it worked.
Although I'm obviously upset, 1/4 finals is what I predicted from England so I wasn't surprised.
Our performances this tournament have actually impressed me due to the defensive side of things - it has been a while since the players have defended with so much vigour. Now the team just needs to improve in regards to attacking play.
Our performances this tournament have actually impressed me due to the defensive side of things - it has been a while since the players have defended with so much vigour. Now the team just needs to improve in regards to attacking play.
we rode our luck massively, Italy should have won by 2 or 3 no questions
Neither were Italy "poor" as was suggested before by someone. Italy was much better and with better finishing could have won more comfortably.
I never said they were poor, they were the better side its easy to see that. It was poor finishing and great defending limiting them to shots from distance.
He was PK taker at Villa.
Also there seems to be a lot of racist **** going round on Twitter aimed at Young and Cole which really is low. All these panorama programmes forcing you not to travel to Ukraine and Poland because of this very matter really do need to look closer to home.
mccollio09
Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2010
- Messages
- 1,670
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Don't have much to say about the game or tournament. We got to quarter finals as expected. Soon as we played a decent team we lost, as expected. We went out on penalties, as per usual.
Neither did we impress nor did we disappoint. Exactly as expected. Great tournaments for Gerrard, Johnson, Lescott and Hart. Shocker for Young and arguably Rooney. Welbeck was solid and gives hope, going to be a very good complete player, hope he can bulk up.
Not much else to add, although for tonight at least, Pirlo made Xavi look like the second best midfielder in the world.
Neither did we impress nor did we disappoint. Exactly as expected. Great tournaments for Gerrard, Johnson, Lescott and Hart. Shocker for Young and arguably Rooney. Welbeck was solid and gives hope, going to be a very good complete player, hope he can bulk up.
Not much else to add, although for tonight at least, Pirlo made Xavi look like the second best midfielder in the world.