Football 18/19

[zahidf]

1 hour ago, Gucci Piggy said:

I don't think Southgate wants to risk him before he bangs the winner in the final.

southgate has said he is sticling with his first 11 accept in cases of injury

[kaosmark2]

15 minutes ago, zahidf said:

southgate has said he is sticling with his first 11 accept in cases of injury

accept what?

[zahidf]

14 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

accept what?

except in cases of injury

[dentalplan]

2 hours ago, Gucci Piggy said:

I don't think Southgate wants to risk him before he bangs the winner in the final.

I know you're probably memeing but, seeing as he's quite handy in big games, it could be an inspired touch for Southgate to start bringing putting him in instead of Rashford and Vardy from now on. I am pretty sure he's got more shots away in 10 minutes than Vardy has in 2+ hours at the tournament.

edit: saying that, Vardy plays very well against big teams so he might start looking his usual self if he features and is fit.

Edited July 9, 2018 by dentalplan

[thetime]

Non EU player.

Edited July 9, 2018 by thetime

[thetime]

9 hours ago, zahidf said:

How odd

 

Non eu player.

[eFestivals]

I have a fiver for the first person to see Dele Alli run.

 

[JoeyT]

I'm not sure how many more England games my liver can handle.

Having my missus find me asleep on the toilet holding a donor kebab when she got home Saturday night is something she won't be letting me forget in a hurry.

[Sandy one]

Ok so England have the best chance ever since 1990. ......the teams before were prima donnas I say. All hype and couldn't live up to it. 

This team have been the underdogs really and that's working well for them. No exceptions often has a good psychological effect on sportsman.

[eFestivals]

14 minutes ago, Sandy one said:

Ok so England have the best chance ever since 1990. ......the teams before were prima donnas I say. All hype and couldn't live up to it. 

This team have been the underdogs really and that's working well for them. No exceptions often has a good psychological effect on sportsman.

and yet it's the exact-same turgid England as it's been for 30+ years, and suddenly everyone's forgotten about how important it was to face to the weaker teams.

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

and yet it's the exact-same turgid England as it's been for 30+ years, and suddenly everyone's forgotten about how important it was to face to the weaker teams.

Dunno ask Germany and Spain about how easy it is to beat the 'weaker' teams...

[Hugh Jass]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

and yet it's the exact-same turgid England as it's been for 30+ years, and suddenly everyone's forgotten about how important it was to face to the weaker teams.

Oh come on, this team may not be perfect but they are a world away from the bloated mess that was 06 or 10.

These players actually function as a team rather than 11 individuals thrown together and hoping someone will create something. They appear to have a plan and actually try to retain the ball rather than just humping it forward... actually I'll rephrase that. They're the first England team in years who don't look like they're afraid of the ball.

[thetime]

12 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

Oh come on, this team may not be perfect but they are a world away from the bloated mess that was 06 or 10.

These players actually function as a team rather than 11 individuals thrown together and hoping someone will create something. They appear to have a plan and actually try to retain the ball rather than just humping it forward... actually I'll rephrase that. They're the first England team in years who don't look like they're afraid of the ball.

That’s a bit harsh, they were knocked out by Portugal and Germany in 06 and 10. England have played one decent team so far and lost, they should be in the Semi Final in what’s been a fortunate draw. 

Proof of how far they have come will be on Wednesday and maybe Sunday. England have done well with the cards that have been handed to them. 

 

[Hugh Jass]

2 minutes ago, thetime said:

That’s a bit harsh, they were knocked out by Portugal and Germany in 06 and 10.

 

Yes but they also failed to qualify for a tournament in between those as well. Besides, we were humped by Germany having been terrible throughout the tournament up to that point.

We weren't hugely impressive leading up to Portugal in 06 either.

[eFestivals]

24 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

Oh come on, this team may not be perfect but they are a world away from the bloated mess that was 06 or 10.

Really? Was there even a shot on goal on Saturday? I can't remember one (unless you count Sterling's dance-abouts, or headers from lumped-in balls).

 

Quote

These players actually function as a team rather than 11 individuals thrown together and hoping someone will create something.

Hmmm. How many times did Walker bottle-out with crossing it on Saturday? 4? 5? 6, was it? 

I'm not particularly having a go at Walker as others have been doing the same, but he's a great example.

There's been the occasional better player from the team but nothing stand-out.

 

Quote

They appear to have a plan and actually try to retain the ball rather than just humping it forward... actually I'll rephrase that. They're the first England team in years who don't look like they're afraid of the ball.

Which actually just ends up as even fewer chances (tho I don't reckon the past lumped it forward any more than now does - they're similarly timid).

Edited July 9, 2018 by eFestivals

[thetime]

4 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

Yes but they also failed to qualify for a tournament in between those as well. Besides, we were humped by Germany having been terrible throughout the tournament up to that point.

We weren't hugely impressive leading up to Portugal in 06 either.

I’ve watched 2 England games (Belgium and Columbia), they wasn’t impressive against them either.

Not knocking England, you can only beat what’s in front of you. The most important aspect of the the run has been the draw, nothing else. 

[zahidf]

5 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Really? Was there even a shot on goal on Saturday? I can't remember one (unless you count Sterling's dance-abouts, or headers from lumped-in balls).

 

Hmmm. How many times did Walker bottle-out with crossing it on Saturday? 4? 5? 6, was it? 

I'm not particularly having a go at Walker as others have been doing the same, but he's a great example.

There's been the occasional better player from the team but nothing stand-out.

 

Which actually just ends up as even fewer chances (tho I don't reckon the past lumped it forward any more than now does - they're similarly timid).

Bloody hell we were lucky to scrape by on 'checks note' 2-0.

And you didnt think colombia and sweden were that terrible when you predicted a last 16 exit!:-)

[Hugh Jass]

5 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Really? Was there even a shot on goal on Saturday? I can't remember one (unless you count Sterling's dance-abouts, or headers from lumped-in balls).

 

Hmmm. How many times did Walker bottle-out with crossing it on Saturday? 4? 5? 6, was it? 

I'm not particularly having a go at Walker as others have been doing the same, but he's a great example.

There's been the occasional better player from the team but nothing stand-out.

 

Which actually just ends up as even fewer chances (tho I don't reckon the past lumped it forward any more than now does - they're similarly timid).

So goals from corners and crosses don't count now?

I noticed Trippier and Walker stop and think against crossing a few times on Saturday. My take was that they had been instructed against it due top the height of the Swedish defenders rather than any lack of "bottle". Again, that shows a willingness to stop and think, if there's no obvious advantage or opportunity to come from crossing them why just hump it in there?

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

So goals from corners and crosses don't count now?

I noticed Trippier and Walker stop and think against crossing a few times on Saturday. My take was that they had been instructed against it due top the height of the Swedish defenders rather than any lack of "bottle". Again, that shows a willingness to stop and think, if there's no obvious advantage or opportunity to come from crossing them why just hump it in there?

Southgate said that post match i think. The Swedish defenders were much taller so no point in crosses into the box.

 

Also, its a 2-0 win. The plan worked.

[Hugh Jass]

20 minutes ago, thetime said:

I’ve watched 2 England games (Belgium and Columbia), they wasn’t impressive against them either.

Not knocking England, you can only beat what’s in front of you. The most important aspect of the the run has been the draw, nothing else. 

I'm not sure you can draw too many conclusions from the Belgium game given the number of changes made and the lack of stakes in that match, it was a glorified friendly in the end (although it would be ironic if after all that talk of "easy runs" and not wanting to win both sides met in the final).

I thought we largely did ok against Colombia, they were a horrible, negative, cynical side and we were seconds away from grinding a result out against them. We were in control for the vast majority of the game, were rattled after the goal for the first half of ET but recovered again and were looking the better side again going into penalties. I would certainly refute any suggestion that we looked poor.

[eFestivals]

16 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

So goals from corners and crosses don't count now?

they count, they don't - when that's all it is - show particularly great footballing by the team during the match. I'm not criticising the result, I've merely pointed out that we've not shown anything special.

 

16 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

I noticed Trippier and Walker stop and think against crossing a few times on Saturday. My take was that they had been instructed against it due top the height of the Swedish defenders rather than any lack of "bottle". Again, that shows a willingness to stop and think, if there's no obvious advantage or opportunity to come from crossing them why just hump it in there?

they crossed at other times, so if they had those instructions they were going against it at times.

They're in the semis and the worst result will be the same as 1990 - which is a great thing - but let's not kid ourselves that it's suddenly a hugely-better England.

[eFestivals]

anyway, I reckon if we get the final and win, the winning goal will be scored by Henderson.

Bet there's great odds on that.

[Hugh Jass]

9 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

they crossed at other times, so if they had those instructions they were going against it at times.

I doubt the instructions were "never cross it", more "if there's no clear opportunity then don't". Every time Walker/Trippier got the ball they stopped, looked up and decided whether it was worth it or not. Seems like intelligent play to me.

[Gucci Piggy]

10 hours ago, zahidf said:

southgate has said he is sticling with his first 11 accept in cases of injury

I was just making a joke about Danny Welbeck scoring a World Cup winning goal. I don't actually think he's avoiding risking him

9 hours ago, dentalplan said:

I know you're probably memeing but, seeing as he's quite handy in big games, it could be an inspired touch for Southgate to start bringing putting him in instead of Rashford and Vardy from now on. I am pretty sure he's got more shots away in 10 minutes than Vardy has in 2+ hours at the tournament.

edit: saying that, Vardy plays very well against big teams so he might start looking his usual self if he features and is fit.

Yeah I was joking but I actually wouldn't mind him being brought on. I certainly think he's a useful player and definitely should be in the squad.

Problem with Vardy, for me, is if he's on the bench I don't see much use for him. Like you say, he plays well against big teams (as they don't sit back and they allow space in behind), but we're only likely to bring on a striker when we need a goal, so the opposition probably won't be sitting back. I guess maybe if we're drawing with France/Belgium in the final and it's getting late in the game with them pushing for a winner then that'd work.

I actually wanted us to bring him on when we went a goal up against Colombia so he could punish them when they went searching for an equaliser.

35 minutes ago, thetime said:

I’ve watched 2 England games (Belgium and Columbia), they wasn’t impressive against them either.

Not knocking England, you can only beat what’s in front of you. The most important aspect of the the run has been the draw, nothing else. 

I wouldn't have expected previous England teams (as in like the last 12 years) to get through that Colombia match or to dispatch Sweden with such little bother. Or to beat Panama with the ease we did, or to create such a ridiculous amount of chances against Tunisia.

The draw we've had has obviously been beneficial and we would probably be out by now if we'd played a top team, but I still think this team has been way more impressive than any other England team I can remember at a World Cup (which begins with 2006; all I remember about 2002 is Ronaldinho's goal against us).

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, Hugh Jass said:

I doubt the instructions were "never cross it", more "if there's no clear opportunity then don't". Every time Walker/Trippier got the ball they stopped, looked up and decided whether it was worth it or not. Seems like intelligent play to me.

the crosses they made (or tried to) were no different to the ones they didn't.

But anyway, if they can keep fluking it, good luck to them. Even better if they do actually play well. Not seen it yet tho.