Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
We’ve had fabulous players in the past and not done as well
We’ve had fabulous players in the past and not done as wellHe has done well, but we are capable of so much better
Yes, really.Really?
He’s done what only 1 manager in our history has managed while having McGuire and Pickford as key members of his squad.
That is true. We too defensive under Capello and Ericksson tooWe’ve had fabulous players in the past and not done as well
That's the reason why we play defensively. If we had prime Ferdinand, Cole and Terry at the back then we would be able to be more adventurous but if we played Keegan ball with this lot then we'd be ripped apart at the back.Yes, really.
Look at Mount and Saka for their clubs.
Quite often the biggest attacking threat.
We have some fabulous attacking talent and real skill in our ranks, but play too defensively and our defence clearly isn't good enough.
I didn't. I thought he was an excellent manager.This all reminds me of watching the Italia 90 documentaries and seeing the press rip into Air Bobby for no other reason than the grass is always greener.
Yes and I get why we play both Rice and Phillips. It makes sense.That's the reason why we play defensively. If we had prime Ferdinand, Cole and Terry at the back then we would be able to be more adventurous but if we played Keegan ball with this lot then we'd be ripped apart at the back.
Much better than barely scraping a group of USA, Algeria and Tunisia then getting battered by Germany.Just my opinion, but I think we've been really lucky in the last 2 tournaments with the draw. When you look at the world cup, yes we got to the semi finals, but when you look at the opposition, surly we would have expected no less and maybe more? We lost in the group to Belgium which ironically turned into a good result, as it left us playing Columbia in the last 16 and Sweden in the quarters. We then lost to Croatia in the semi after being 1 - 0 up at half time and lost to Belgium again in the 3rd place game. Of the 7 games we played we lost 3. Again, in the Euros we had a decent draw. We topped a poor group scoring 2 goals in 3 games. Yes, the Germany result was good, but moving on would we not have been more surprised to lose to Ukraine or Denmark who we met in the quarters and semis? Italy were there for the taking, but for me our tactics were so negative. I'm sure most will disagree with my opinion, but that's the beauty of sport.
Who have we lost to in the past ? We have shown ourselves able to lose to any country at major finals in the past it’s a good thing we’ve beaten teams we should beat I thinkJust my opinion, but I think we've been really lucky in the last 2 tournaments with the draw. When you look at the world cup, yes we got to the semi finals, but when you look at the opposition, surly we would have expected no less and maybe more? We lost in the group to Belgium which ironically turned into a good result, as it left us playing Columbia in the last 16 and Sweden in the quarters. We then lost to Croatia in the semi after being 1 - 0 up at half time and lost to Belgium again in the 3rd place game. Of the 7 games we played we lost 3. Again, in the Euros we had a decent draw. We topped a poor group scoring 2 goals in 3 games. Yes, the Germany result was good, but moving on would we not have been more surprised to lose to Ukraine or Denmark who we met in the quarters and semis? Italy were there for the taking, but for me our tactics were so negative. I'm sure most will disagree with my opinion, but that's the beauty of sport.
Just me being facetious, but would that be USA, Algeria and SloveniaMuch better than barely scraping a group of USA, Algeria and Tunisia then getting battered by Germany.
To be fair you are right in what you say in that over the years England have it in them to lose to anyone. That doesn't make our results of beating teams we probably should any better, it just highlights that maybe England have underachieved over the years. We had the 'golden generation' who didn't perform. I just feel with Southgate, he goes into each game with the same mentality of let's not lose regardless of the opposition. To a degree I can understand this mentality, but surly as a game develops and evolves so should we? If we had been bolder in the Euros I really think we would have beaten Italy.Who have we lost to in the past ? We have shown ourselves able to lose to any country at major finals in the past it’s a good thing we’ve beaten teams we should beat I think
The road not travelled though we may have been soundly beaten but yep I agreeTo be fair you are right in what you say in that over the years England have it in them to lose to anyone. That doesn't make our results of beating teams we probably should any better, it just highlights that maybe England have underachieved over the years. We had the 'golden generation' who didn't perform. I just feel with Southgate, he goes into each game with the same mentality of let's not lose regardless of the opposition. To a degree I can understand this mentality, but surly as a game develops and evolves so should we? If we had been bolder in the Euros I really think we would have beaten Italy.
Hopefully for Italy we go to 5 at the back. We’re so much better with that formation. They looked awful last week at Wembley. Baffling what a difference a few months make.
343 all day. I think generally that’s the direction football is going in now anyway. But can we stop playing full backs/wing backs on their wrong side.
Much better than barely scraping a group of USA, Algeria and Tunisia then getting battered by Germany.
343 all day. I think generally that’s the direction football is going in now anyway. But can we stop playing full backs/wing backs on their wrong side.
We don't have any decent LBs/LWBs fit, that's the problem.
Was thinking less of the current games and more back to the Euros when Trippier was inexplicably picked.
He certainly made a big mistake against Italy. They were there for the taking.I don’t get the argument that we had easy draws. I’m the World Cup we were supposed to play Germany and Argentina… wasn’t our fault Germany didn’t get out of a group with Sweden. I’m sure Argentina had an easy draw and struggled
likewise in the euros. Holland should have been our semi final opponent - they got beat by the Czech Republic. We played the draw we did becuase the supposed better sides lost to the teams we played.
with Southgate he’s done great - but should
Have done better. Croatia, Holland and Italy he made the same mistakes of playing too negatively. We sat on slender leads until the inevitable happens. Look at his midfield. Mount, Rice Phillips…. We’re a much more creative side with Bellingham, Foden, Sterling, Saka and Grealish.
the midfield should easily start as Rice, Bellingham, Grealish, Foden, Saka. But Southgate is too frightened to try that
I think you can play Phillips or Rice, there’s no need for 2 holding midfielders, it just stifles our actual strength and that is that we finally have extremely talented creative players.He certainly made a big mistake against Italy. They were there for the taking.
As I said before, I am fine with Phillips and Rice, but then if you also play Mount in a subdued role too, you are negating so much forward play.
I’m ok with Bellingham being used sparingly at the moment. He’s 18 and we have overused players early on in the past. I find when there are the two sitting it makes us less defensive if anything. When the ball leaves their box having two there means more often than not we can push back into their box. Similar to when an NFL team uses two Quarterbacks. It creates confusion and gives them more potential situations to cover. It also should be noted that when we’ve gone with 4 at the back it didn’t work. Hungary at Wembley springs to mind.All down to the players he picks in that formation though. I’ve got no issue with five at the back if he plays wing backs in the the wide roles as you say Andy. Also if you play five, plus Rice and Phillips, then Mount in your front three, there’s a lack of creativity/flair in the team*
This is where it becomes a bit of a concern for me and I quite like Southgate as a manager
Of course I want our front three to work back when necessary but they should be in the team first and foremost to focus on creating and scoring goals
* You also probably don’t get Bellingham in that formation which is a real shame
I’m ok with Bellingham being used sparingly at the moment. He’s 18 and we have overused players early on in the past. I find when there are the two sitting it makes us less defensive if anything. When the ball leaves their box having two there means more often than not we can push back into their box. Similar to when an NFL team uses two Quarterbacks. It creates confusion and gives them more potential situations to cover. It also should be noted that when we’ve gone with 4 at the back it didn’t work. Hungary at Wembley springs to mind.
I do like the idea of Grealish being fresh off the bench with 20-30 minutes to go. That is probably a more effective way to use him as the combination of his fresh legs coupled with a tiring defence can cause more problems in that shorter period than him playing for the opening 60-70.
Just noticed, not one left footed outfield player in the side tonight.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?