England Discussion | Finish 4th

Kag said:
Funny how deep the anti-English rhetoric runs in that some people can't even admit England played very well for the first half hour. Lingard should have scored at least two, possibly three. We were the better side by just about every metric.

Again, the second half was poor and the penalty (which was dubious) knocked the wind out of the side, but there's very little reason to be negative outside of bitterness or agenda.

As for the team, I'd bring in Rashford for Sterling against Panama. Sterling has fluffed his lines in recent weeks and I think Rashford merits a shot at it, especially against weaker opposition. I'd also swap out Young for Rose, a change I would have made prior to yesterday's team. It's already been said but on numerous occasions the ball was there to be whipped in first time and Young had to check back. It causes an imbalance.
Click to expand...

The problem is expectations for me. They played a relatively poor game last night and the media /pundits all unanimously praise and say that they played well. I think it goes to the players heads and is the reason why they never really do anything of note because they end up believing that the level of performance that the put in is good enough.

Small time mentality just wont get us anywhere. We need to think that it can always be better, whatever the result.

I don’t think all the bigger teams would be satisfied, to the extent that people seem to be with England after scraping a win against opponents like Tunisia.
 
Good performance and great to see an England team playing with such confidence. Not many sideways passes in that game from us last night. If we can finish better and not only rely on arry we could go far. Southgate's got it right no doubt about that!
 
FootballHQ said:
Maguire was fine.

Was very surprised Cahill didn't start though. Think he will be needed in knock outs as England lack an experienced voice in there with the three they had last night.
Click to expand...
Agree with this. Maguire gave the ball away cheaply on a few occasions but that's acceptable because the manager is encouraging the defenders to play out from the back and take risks. I would put Cahill in for the knockout games too because I really don't trust our back three. Stones can be very shaky at times and Walker is not a natural centre back. Need somebody in there who is solid defensively.
 
Think Belgium’s attack will destroy England’s defence if they get their finger out.

Definitely nothing to suggest they’ll get further than the first knockout round.
 
K2K said:
I think Tunisia are tricky customers. Especially because they are very skilled in the dark arts.

I think the group stages have been harder this year, look at how many big teams are struggling. I expect a number of shocks in this round.
Click to expand...

We had Italy and Uruguay last time so definitely easier for us.

Having looked our group is definitely one of the easiest.

Mexico Germany wasn't that much of a shock, they're a decent team.

Panama are the weakest team, on paper at least. Tunisia also in the bottom 5 or so.
 
Mb194dc said:
We had Italy and Uruguay last time so definitely easier for us.

Having looked our group is definitely one of the easiest.

Mexico Germany wasn't that much of a shock, they're a decent team.

Panama are the weakest team, on paper at least. Tunisia also in the bottom 5 or so.
Click to expand...
Tunisia are Africa's number 2 ranked side.

Italy and Uruguay are big names but Italy were woeful in the last two world cups .

This group isn't that easy imo and England will have done well to get out of it .
 
K2K said:
Tunisia are Africa's number 2 ranked side.

Italy and Uruguay are big names but Italy were woeful in the last two world cups .

This group isn't that easy imo and England will have done well to get out of it .
Click to expand...

Really? This group is a bye except for Belgium.

Look who Tunisia have been playing:

https://us.soccerway.com/teams/tunisia/tunisia/2211/matches/

They lost 3-1 to the basque country FFS and 2-0 To Bukina Faso within the last couple of years. LMAO.

Panama are even more of a shower:

https://us.soccerway.com/teams/panama/panama/1618/matches/

They lost 6-0 to Switzerland

They have 1 win in their last 8 games, against the might Trinidad and Tobago.
 
Mb194dc said:
Really? This group is a bye except for Belgium.

Look who Tunisia have been playing:

https://us.soccerway.com/teams/tunisia/tunisia/2211/matches/

They lost 3-1 to the basque country FFS and 2-0 To Bukina Faso within the last couple of years. LMAO.
Click to expand...

Do you know what Tunisia side played in those games?

We know that in their World Cup warm ups they drew with Portugal and Turkey and Spain needed a late winner to get past them.

Not saying they are a great side or anything but they aren't awful.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
Do you know what Tunisia side played in those games?

We know that in their World Cup warm ups they drew with Portugal and Turkey and Spain needed a late winner to get past them.

Not saying they are a great side or anything but they aren't awful.
Click to expand...

The Burkina Faso game was at the ACON.

They arn't a pub team, they're a championship level team imo, hard working but with little quality.

We should be beating them.

No way Italy and Uruguay teams / squads from 2014 are even close to being worse than Tunisia and Panama in this world cup.
 
Getting out of the group is absolutely the minimum expectation that anyone should have.

Tunisia are not on England’s level.
 
Berbaclass said:
Getting out of the group is absolutely the minimum expectation that anyone should have.

Tunisia are not on England’s level.
Click to expand...

Maybe not but there are no easy games at this level (bar possibly Panama!) and it's the first time England have won an opening game in years so it is a very big result.
 
balaks said:
Maybe not but there are no easy games at this level (bar possibly Panama!) and it's the first time England have won an opening game in years so it is a very big result.
Click to expand...

I don’t think what any England team have or have not done in the past is relevant though.

It’s only a big result if you think we should struggle to beat teams like Tunisia. It’s an expected result and one which was a struggle to achieve.
 
Berbaclass said:
I don’t think what any England team have or have not done in the past is relevant though.

It’s only a big result if you think we should struggle to beat teams like Tunisia. It’s an expected result and one which was a struggle to achieve.
Click to expand...

I was expecting England to struggle to beat Tunisia if I'm honest so I was impressed with the result. You got beat by Iceland the last time you played a tournament match let's not forget. I think it was a very good result.
 
balaks said:
I was expecting England to struggle to beat Tunisia if I'm honest so I was impressed with the result. You got beat by Iceland the last time you played a tournament match let's not forget. I think it was a very good result.
Click to expand...
That’s exactly what is wrong. It’s a mentally problem.
 
Berbaclass said:
That’s exactly what is wrong. It’s a mentally problem.
Click to expand...
I'm not an England supporter. Any of the teams in the tournament would class an opening win as a big success - the pressure the players are under is enormous and the first game is absolutely vital nomatter who you are playing it is not easy.
 
balaks said:
I'm not an England supporter. Any of the teams in the tournament would class an opening win as a big success - the pressure the players are under is enormous and the first game is absolutely vital nomatter who you are playing it is not easy.
Click to expand...

This England side is the least experienced in the tournament measured by international caps too. I thought they started confidently but wobbled a bit after the penalty. To come back to win and take the pressure off a bit for the next two games will have been great for the sides confidence.
 
I think the biggest worry was a draw against Tunisia puts the final game against Belgium as being vital. We want to go into that having qualified and potentially having a must win against Belgium is not wanted, therefore yesterday's result was extremely important.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
This England side is the least experienced in the tournament measured by international caps too. I thought they started confidently but wobbled a bit after the penalty. To come back to win and take the pressure off a bit for the next two games will have been great for the sides confidence.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It doesn't matter how the win was achieved, whether through a dominating performance for 90 minutes or a goal off someone's ass after not having a single shot on target all match, a win in the first game of a competition where you can go out after 3 is huge.

Not because we're e going to win but I think and hope it will give the players a lot of confidence.

The fact that we played well, have a clear system in place (whatever you may think of that system) and dominated the first half so much are all positive signs.

Walker with a ridiculous brain fart but otherwise OK.
Tripper motm imo.
Maguire quite impressed with as all round performance.
Young mostly good imo but it's a problem to have the lb checking in all the time.

Henderson OK.
Alli was good until he got injured, vital in those two early chances we should havd out away. Not sure why he didn't go off earlier.
Lingard wasteful but full of energy and makes great runs.
Sterling poor.
Kane clinical.

All in all, I was impressed. Team just needs to be a bit more resilient if things go against them.
 
Just heard Sterling making an excuse for that chance he missed. Missed chance aside he doesn’t fit in this system. His not a striker.
 
africanspur said:
Agreed. It doesn't matter how the win was achieved, whether through a dominating performance for 90 minutes or a goal off someone's ass after not having a single shot on target all match, a win in the first game of a competition where you can go out after 3 is huge.

Not because we're e going to win but I think and hope it will give the players a lot of confidence.

The fact that we played well, have a clear system in place (whatever you may think of that system) and dominated the first half so much are all positive signs.

Walker with a ridiculous brain fart but otherwise OK.
Tripper motm imo.
Maguire quite impressed with as all round performance.
Young mostly good imo but it's a problem to have the lb checking in all the time.

Henderson OK.
Alli was good until he got injured, vital in those two early chances we should havd out away. Not sure why he didn't go off earlier.
Lingard wasteful but full of energy and makes great runs.
Sterling poor.
Kane clinical.

All in all, I was impressed. Team just needs to be a bit more resilient if things go against them.
Click to expand...

I agree with pretty much everything you say except I think it would be an idea to drop Walker. He showed that he's no centre back in that situation and could be exposed against better sides. Putting one of the regular centre backs should make us more secure.

The argument then would be if you put Walker on a RWB but I think Trippier has a lot more quality on the ball and that is key for our strength at set pieces. Bringing Rashford/Sterling and Walker on against tired legs would be a great weapon too.
 
The game highlighted why I'm not one of those who thinks Kyle walker is a great defender... and out centre backs are a joke too. I was impressed with both Tunisia's keepers. The save before our first goal was top-class. I also thought Loftus-Check looked good: he's far stronger than I though and looked really calm. need to see him against top opposition
 
I would put Loftus-Cheek in for Henderson and Vardy for Sterling against Panama. We don't need an anchorman on Sunday - RLC has more flair to his game and gets about more. Vardy on the end of some of the balls yesterday would be deadly too. Vardy always attacks on the shoulder of defenders which is a different proposition to the others who want it to feet.

Should beat Panama whatever the team with no disrespect to them however this game is a ideal set-up for players to get some confidence and rhythm. Team needs to win with some style going into Belgium.
 
Kag said:
Funny how deep the anti-English rhetoric runs in that some people can't even admit England played very well for the first half hour. Lingard should have scored at least two, possibly three. We were the better side by just about every metric.

Again, the second half was poor and the penalty (which was dubious) knocked the wind out of the side, but there's very little reason to be negative outside of bitterness or agenda.
Click to expand...

If this was written on a Liverpool forum...!

The reality is, England played alright for some of the first half, and did nothing in the second half. They played with plenty of energy and closed down well - great - and they're clearly organised and have a plan - again great, rarely a given in international football - but there wasn't a whole lot of quality and incision.

There's lots to be positive about - they should beat Panama easily and qualify from the group - but I think the expectations should be much higher. England were one of my picks to win the thing - struggling against an untalented and not particularly organised Tunisia isn't worthy of the praise the performance has gotten. In my opinion obviously.
 
My verdict player wise

Pickford - fine. didn't have a lot to do.
Trippier - decent game, not really tested. Needs to influence going forward better
Young - Started well, faded. Decent enough, but Rose would be a much better shout
Maguire - Solid, good range of passing. Comfy on the ball. Minor errors but a good game
Stones - Solid. Didn't have a lot to do. Easy nights work
Walker - Not a CB and it showed. Poor passing on times and sloppy error for the pen. Would be better at RWB
Henderson - Average. Gave the simple ball as always, never a danger to the opposition. Highlighted the complete lack of a quality CM within the squad
Lingard - Poor overall, couldn't make the impact required against relatively weak opposition. Good workrate, movement, busy but ultimately no purpose to his performance
Sterling - See lingard. Disappointing. Hasn't Pep made him world class according to some? Was awol
Alli - Had a knock, didn't influence the game. Should have come off sooner.
Kane - Workhorse. Got the goals. Held the ball up well and should have had a pen. Good nights work.

Team wise:

The formartion is right, just needs minor twinges.

Walker was poor, I'd put him to RWB as he is by far the best RWB in the squad. Cahill/Jones could sit in the middle and Stones could play off the right to utilise his passing.

Henderson - stats show he has a god like performance, but he's all sideways and safe. Workrate was fine etc, just doesn't drive on or hit telling passes forward. A real area England lack quality in.

Lingard/Sterling = equally as poor as each other.

Would like to see Loftus cheek and Rashford play and I'd give Delph Hendersons role against Panama. Southgate wont of course, it'll be much the same team bar Alli I'd have thought.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I agree with pretty much everything you say except I think it would be an idea to drop Walker. He showed that he's no centre back in that situation and could be exposed against better sides. Putting one of the regular centre backs should make us more secure.

The argument then would be if you put Walker on a RWB but I think Trippier has a lot more quality on the ball and that is key for our strength at set pieces. Bringing Rashford/Sterling and Walker on against tired legs would be a great weapon too.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be averse to dropping Walker for Cahill, certainly against better teams. I understand what Southgate is trying to do and fair play to him but against better teams, I'm not sure the other defenders are good enough to make up for Walker playing cb.

And agreed with the second paragraph as well. I think Walker is better defensively overall, especially with his athleticism but Trippier is a better presence in the attacking third imo. Two good options and like you said, even if walker is benched, we do have a lot of very speedy options from the bench, which is always good.
 
Berbaclass said:
The problem is expectations for me. They played a relatively poor game last night and the media /pundits all unanimously praise and say that they played well. I think it goes to the players heads and is the reason why they never really do anything of note because they end up believing that the level of performance that the put in is good enough.

Small time mentality just wont get us anywhere. We need to think that it can always be better, whatever the result.

I don’t think all the bigger teams would be satisfied, to the extent that people seem to be with England after scraping a win against opponents like Tunisia.
Click to expand...

We didn't play poor at all. We played well for the first half and struggled during the second half for several reasons. And we still won, in a weekend that many of our rivals did not. It's hardly a unanimous outpouring of jubilation; merely a recognition that progress is visible and we're actually attempting to play a little bit of football for the first time in well over a decade.

The person with expectation problems seems to be you. What exactly do you expect to see given the players available? I'm sure the players expect to go quite far and will be hopeful that they improve in the games ahead. That's all they can do. Nobody is saying that we're brilliant and that everything his hunky dory. It's just nice to be optimistic about watching England for a change.
 
Kag said:
We didn't play poor at all. We played well for the first half and struggled during the second half for several reasons. And we still won, in a weekend that many of our rivals did not. It's hardly a unanimous outpouring of jubilation; merely a recognition that progress is visible and we're actually attempting to play a little bit of football for the first time in well over a decade.

The person with expectation problems seems to be you. What exactly do you expect to see given the players available? I'm sure the players expect to go quite far and will be hopeful that they improve in the games ahead. That's all they can do. Nobody is saying that we're brilliant and that everything his hunky dory. It's just nice to be optimistic about watching England for a change.
Click to expand...

The Colombia side that many home nation posters have been proclaiming will knock us out if we run into them in the second round lost to Japan today as well.

edit: both the teams people have been saying will knock us out if we get through have been beaten.
 
Last edited:
The way things stand England (if they come 2nd) would have a potential second round opponent of Colombia, Japan, Senegal and Poland - all winnable games and then a potential quarter final opponent of Mexico, Switzerland or Serbia.

That's actually a very decent path to a first semi-final in 28 years. Compare that to winning the group and then you are on the side of the draw most likely with Brazil, Germany, France and either Portugal or Spain.
 
Minimalist said:
… Definitely nothing to suggest they’ll get further than the first knockout round.
Click to expand...

Say what? In that first knock out round they'll be up against either Senegal, Japan, Poland or Columbia - why wouldn't you fancy England against any of these?
 
The players should practice shooting because they are woeful in front of goal. What do Sterling and Lingard do in training? We have no chance in a penalty shootout. Jumping ahead to the second round: I would be happy with 0-0 then winning on penalies just to experience victory in one.

I do think the team is wrong. Sterling is not a striker, why is he up front? Start with Rashford. Also, Rose over Young.
 
Kag said:
We didn't play poor at all. We played well for the first half and struggled during the second half for several reasons. And we still won, in a weekend that many of our rivals did not. It's hardly a unanimous outpouring of jubilation; merely a recognition that progress is visible and we're actually attempting to play a little bit of football for the first time in well over a decade.

The person with expectation problems seems to be you. What exactly do you expect to see given the players available? I'm sure the players expect to go quite far and will be hopeful that they improve in the games ahead. That's all they can do. Nobody is saying that we're brilliant and that everything his hunky dory. It's just nice to be optimistic about watching England for a change.
Click to expand...
Well said. There isn’t much more to it. Onwards and upwards to Panama!
 
balaks said:
Maybe not but there are no easy games at this level (bar possibly Panama!) and it's the first time England have won an opening game in years so it is a very big result.
Click to expand...
Exactly. People should not downplay how important the victory was.
 
Kag said:
We didn't play poor at all. We played well for the first half and struggled during the second half for several reasons. And we still won, in a weekend that many of our rivals did not. It's hardly a unanimous outpouring of jubilation; merely a recognition that progress is visible and we're actually attempting to play a little bit of football for the first time in well over a decade.

The person with expectation problems seems to be you. What exactly do you expect to see given the players available? I'm sure the players expect to go quite far and will be hopeful that they improve in the games ahead. That's all they can do. Nobody is saying that we're brilliant and that everything his hunky dory. It's just nice to be optimistic about watching England for a change.
Click to expand...
Well said!
 
Again, with the negativity. England were fantastic during spells last night. Completely dominated that match. Jesse had 2 great chances, and Sterling had one too. Those go in the back of the net, and we’re talking about England winning 5-1.

I wouldn’t change a single thing. I don’t want to gamble on rusty Rose as anything but a sub, dropping Lingard or Sterling is madness at this point, and I’d be thinking about Dier against Belgium to stack the midfield.

The main thing is to get 2 goals up on Panama, then go to the bench to bring on more difference makers, Vardy, etc. and run up the goal difference.

Some of this is the exact same crap that gets spouted during the last two debacles. “Chop and change, make bold decisions.” I hope Gareth sticks to his guns on this. Don’t panic, go with the plan. Tweak it for Belgium a bit because they’re a different beast and use the 3rd match to prepare for the knockouts against the better sides.
 
Inter Yer Nan said:
The way things stand England (if they come 2nd) would have a potential second round opponent of Colombia, Japan, Senegal and Poland - all winnable games and then a potential quarter final opponent of Mexico, Switzerland or Serbia.

That's actually a very decent path to a first semi-final in 28 years. Compare that to winning the group and then you are on the side of the draw most likely with Brazil, Germany, France and either Portugal or Spain.
Click to expand...

Is this right … that it'll be better for England to come 2nd than to win the group? If so, then Belgium will have the same realisation and both teams will be doing their best to lose to the other in the final group game :lol:
 
GlastonSpur said:
Is this right … that it'll be better for England to come 2nd than to win the group? If so, then Belgium will have the same realisation and both teams will be doing their best to lose to the other in the final group game :lol:
Click to expand...
Much better coming 2nd since Mexico beat Germany.

It's always difficult making such prognostications at this stage but potentially Germany vs. Brazil in last 16 could take out so much from both that the winner would be ripe for the picking for a fast side like Belgium IMO.

I'd expect Belgium again to outscore England in the next games leaving an interesting final game. Losing is definitely better but can almost see both sides playing out a dull draw with their second strings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.