john Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 Decent game. Some great performances in this England side, like the best in the tournament so far, especially Lallana and Rose. But they don't seem to have cracked the system. Not sure what was happening with Kane, he didn't seem like someone who was spearheading a 433. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 59 minutes ago, The Killer Snark said: Kane was pretty much terrible all match. Could not stay onside to save himself, could not take corners, and had the physical presence of a bobbleneck doll. He's looked decidedly jaded for the past three games. Vardy should lead the line against Wales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Antony Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 England's finishing was so bad especially and not surprisingly from Sterling and Lallana. Kane was pretty damn bad, Sturridge would be better suited but I suppose he doesn't take corners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 Lots of scenes of violence in Marseille - it's a shame, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 10 hours ago, StefCurry said: Hi to all. I can not understand how England missed the victory in the match against Russia. why Hodgson put away his best player Rooney? After that English team lost advantage and Russia deservedly scored a goal.. Because Rooney was visibly tired and couldn't keep up with play. I said before he was withdrawn that he was going to have to be substituted, and minutes later he was. 10 hours ago, Gylfi Gylfi Gylfi said: Ouch that was painful. One of the best England performances in the last 10 years and we still couldn't win it. Of course you couldn't win it, Iceland weren't playing. 9 hours ago, john said: Decent game. Some great performances in this England side, like the best in the tournament so far, especially Lallana and Rose. I thought Lallana flattered to deceive, as usual. In the end, what did he actually contribute? Rose was good, for sure, as was Dier (not just for the goal) and Alli: but in terms of the overall England performance, I thought Russia made them look good. Akinfeev and maybe Kokorin were the only saving graces for Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 7 minutes ago, Emre Mor-mont said: I thought Lallana flattered to deceive, as usual. In the end, what did he actually contribute? Yeah, I think he does a lot of good things with the ball, and is probably the safe option on the right. Though if you don't play him, who's on the right instead? Thought Kokorin was decent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Killer Snark Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 I have to say, as a neutral, I was much impressed by Rooney. His performance was a big improvement at any rate over this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mme Erzulie Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 Feel our (LFC fans') pain, England fans. Up 1-0 towards the end of the game with Roy at the helm? Take off the captain, put on a player who has played one competitive game all season, then take off your fastest player for your slowest player, leave three lightning quick attackers on the bench instead of taking off the obviously out-of-form, exhausted Kane, and watch as the match somehow, inexplicably implodes on itself. CRUEL FATE! Russia were woeful, England looked quite good from the midfield back. Lallana should maybe have scored, but he's extremely good in tight spaces, so often makes the right decisions in terms of when to hold the ball up and when to let it go. Much more effective and creative than Sterling, whose one-trick-pony act mixed with underwhelming passing, woeful finishing and poor decision-making makes for a sorry sight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Consigliere Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 I thought Hodgson's substitution decisions were quite poor. If it was a case of Rooney tiring then it would have been better for either Milner or Hendo to replace him. Both those players offer alot more defensively than Wilshere does. Vardy and Rashford should have come on for Kane and Lallana respectively thereby ensuring that there is still genuine pace up front which would have forced Russia to think twice about pushing up too much. Poor game management and naivety cost England. Also think that Drinkwater should have been in the squad in place of Wilshere. England have plenty of attacking options and Wilshere has not played enough this season to warrant a place. A ball winner in midfield would've been more useful to England than yet another attacking midfielder - one whose match fitness is questionable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolorous Gabe Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 I didn't think Hodgson's subs were bad decisions as such, but I felt there were others that should have been higher priority. I think Kane is great but he was the wrong choice for this game the way it went. The game was made for Vardy as soon as we went ahead and he should have replaced Kane instantly after Dier's goal. 9 minutes ago, Les Diables Rouges said: Also think that Drinkwater should have been in the squad in place of Wilshere. I agree with this. He would have been a better choice to bring on in those circumstances than Wilshere was. I must say I always very much enjoy watching Lallana and think he was unlucky. I do understand the criticism that he flatters to deceive though. So if we had Drinkwater, my ideal changes would have been Drinkwater for Rooney (assuming he came off due to tiredness), Vardy for Kane, and Milner for Alli or Lallana. I understand bringing Sterling off because he is incredibly frustrating but I think you need pace playing on the counter-attack. Given we didn't have Drinkwater, I'd rather have left Rooney on but if I had to make a change I'd have brought on a defender to sit in front of the back four, probably Stones (I'm assuming Henderson wasn't fit enough to play 20 minutes?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 5 hours ago, Les Diables Rouges said: . A ball winner in midfield would've been more useful to England than yet another attacking midfielder Maybe Drinkwater may have been a better option, but what does he give that Henderson/ Milner cannot do adequately? Also, lumping 4/5 midfielders as 'attackers' is a facile way of thinking about those players. Lallana, Sterling, Ali, Wilshere are all attack minded players, they are *very* different players though. If you think they're similar, then I'm afraid you haven't watched them for long enough. Hodgson mentioned he wanted variety in attack, and that's why he took all of those players. Furthermore, Wilshere offers that team something different compared to any of the other midfielders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Consigliere Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 7 minutes ago, Raja said: Maybe Drinkwater may have been a better option, but what does he give that Henderson/ Milner cannot do adequately? Also, lumping 4/5 midfielders as 'attackers' is a facile way of thinking about those players. Lallana, Sterling, Ali, Wilshere are all attack minded players, they are *very* different players though. If you think they're similar, then I'm afraid you haven't watched them for long enough. Hodgson mentioned he wanted variety in attack, and that's why he took all of those players. Furthermore, Wilshere offers that team something different compared to any of the other midfielders. Point is, Hodgson has selected a side heavy with attacking options. Could've used another defensive minded option in midfield. Wilshere has spent most of the season out with injury and does not warrant a place in the squad over Drinkwater at present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 5 minutes ago, Les Diables Rouges said: Point is, Hodgson has selected a side heavy with attacking options. Could've used another defensive minded option in midfield. Wilshere has spent most of the season out with injury and does not warrant a place in the squad over Drinkwater at present. Yeah, I disagree with all of that. Having Drinkwater, Dier, Milner and Henderson is wasting a squad space. And having him in the squad doesn't magically prevent that goal. He also was pretty woeful in the friendly they played before the tournament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Consigliere Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 4 minutes ago, Raja said: Yeah, I disagree with all of that. Having Drinkwater, Dier, Milner and Henderson is wasting a squad space. Then we will have to agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefCurry Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 Looking at the England team game you realize that the best midfielder is Wayne Rooney, who are striker. I think England will never get a second Lampard, Gerrard, Scholes, Beckham. What the mildfielders they've been for England... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefCurry Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 5 minutes ago, Răzvan Raț said: Rooney isn't very good in midfield at all, as evidenced by him being bang-average there for United in the majority of the games he's played the position. If England manage to qualify from their group, and draw someone decent, they'll be destroyed if he's still in the middle. This is England's main problem, there is no one centre midfielder in team who you can replace Rooney in his zone. I think Wazza showing his best. Most runs, he helps to defence and attack. We all saw what happened after Jack Wilshere's appearing on the field... The question arises. Why did Hodgson not take Drinkwater to the championship? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolorous Gabe Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 1 hour ago, Raja said: Yeah, I disagree with all of that. Having Drinkwater, Dier, Milner and Henderson is wasting a squad space. And having him in the squad doesn't magically prevent that goal. He also was pretty woeful in the friendly they played before the tournament. Milner shouldn't be classed amongst them in my opinion. Despite his protestations about playing wide, he is very uncomfortable playing through the middle. Just doesn't have the positional awareness and decision-making to be consistent. If you're going to bring Milner in the squad, it should be as a wide player. And I say that as a Milner fan (loved him at City) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 I thought his best games for Liverpool were in the middle towards the end of the season? Paging Soylent, lk et al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolorous Gabe Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 Fair enough if that's true. I'm going off watching him regularly for 5 years at City. I felt reinforced in the opinion by Russia's goal, in which he ill-advisedly rushed out and sold himself from a central position. You need a steadiness in a deep-lying central position that Milner doesn't have. His decision-making is too impulsive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mme Erzulie Posted June 12, 2016 Share Posted June 12, 2016 Nope, he's definitely best out wide. His crossing is actually quite good. Henderson is also not really a DM, so I don't see that Drinkwater would have been surplus to requirements in this squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.