Board index ‹ Other Sports ‹ Other Sports ‹ Football Chat Thread - Euro 2012 edition

Milner is in there for his workrate. Someone's got to do the running for that midfield, Gerrard and Parker get less and less mobile as the game goes on. Nice to see Walcott go at the defence for the 3rd, but let's not get carried away, I still think Chamberlain is a better all round player.

Saddened! wrote:

Tough decisions ahead for Hodgson. The fact we only need a draw could well cost England IMO, as he's likely to pick Milner, Parker and Gerrard again and make only one change, bringing Rooney in for one of the front two. I don't see why they don't abandon the width and go with Jones, Gerrard and Rooney in midfield and Carroll, Young and Wellbeck up front.
.

I was think something similar, 4-3-3, with Jones/Parker, and Gerrard as holding players with Young or even Milner in there in an attacking role, with Carroll up top with Rooney and Welbeck either side. I doubt he'll change the system too much though.

How is Carragher a bad pundit? Speaks sense and honesty. I understand it may be difficult to.understand him, but the way he reads the game and understands it is brilliant. He's a top pundit.

Wilbred T Pricklepop wrote:

But you must admit it was a good substitution from hodgson. Inspired even, it was an almost instant reaction to going 2-1 down.

All top quality manager make decisive game changing subs like that, don't they?

It was a good sub but I wouldn't call it inspired. Walcott is what he is, a speedster who thrives in open play, but struggles when facing players. His goal was a great hit but I was left astounded by the goalkeeper; what on earth was he thinking? The assist was class, something England have lacked all tournament. Roy done well there but England shouldn't have been in that situation in the first place. The first goal was unfortunate, but the second was disastrous, whilst England never defended with any conviction all night. Ibrahimovic was class.

Lord Tony Smith wrote:

How is Carragher a bad pundit? Speaks sense and honesty. I understand it may be difficult to.understand him, but the way he reads the game and understands it is brilliant. He's a top pundit.

The acsent though...

Lord Tony Smith wrote:

How is Carragher a bad pundit? Speaks sense and honesty. I understand it may be difficult to.understand him, but the way he reads the game and understands it is brilliant. He's a top pundit.

He might say the right things, I wouldn't know, I spend too much of the time he's on whincing at the harshness of his accent, or putting it on mute.

"Eeeeaaaaaaarrrrrrrrmmmmmm"

Saddened! wrote:

Lawrenson is as bitter as you. What's up with you at the moment? Time of the month? I half wish Liverpool win the league next season, just so you cheer up a bit. They should get rid of the LFC influence on the TV, Carragher is a terrible pundit and old Phil is just so negative. "Same old England", and "He [Walcott] has been living off the Croatia game for years, he's not good enough". Boom, eat that old man. They should get Stan Collymore on the BBC, passion and enthusiasm for the game and he also offers some insight having played the game in the last 20 years.

England were fine tonight, playing very positively when they finally got the ball off the Swedes. The only problem with tonight's performance was that they weren't able to keep the ball in midfield which meant they were always in danger of dropping too deep. England have many problems, but the main one for me is the centre of midfield. I thought Gerrard had a reasonable game tonight, but Parker, for all his effort, is extremely poor technically.

Milner continues to annoy me. He put in a couple of half decent crosses tonight, but is so far away from deserving an England shirt that it's not funny. Theo was sensational tonight when he came on, perhaps that is the right way to use him. Finally a player had the guts to go at someone.

Tough decisions ahead for Hodgson. The fact we only need a draw could well cost England IMO, as he's likely to pick Milner, Parker and Gerrard again and make only one change, bringing Rooney in for one of the front two. I don't see why they don't abandon the width and go with Jones, Gerrard and Rooney in midfield and Carroll, Young and Wellbeck up front.

Some more hideously obvious anti-England refereeing tonight. There seems to be two sets of rules, one for England and one for the non-English sides. There were some absolutely blatant examples again tonight. Like when Scott Parker was shoved in the back and pushed over the side line and a throw in to Sweden was given and when Lescott won a header cleanly and a free kick was given. I don't know what Gerrard has to do to get a free kick on the edge of the box. Perhaps his reputation for diving is going before him, but the one against France was a knee to the thigh and tonight there was another clear foul ignored.

Sorry Saddened, but England were not 'fine'. The full backs were wasteful and offered little going forward. Glen Johnson was poor and incapable of completing the most simple of one-twos; Ashley Cole offered very little offensively. The centre halves didn't handle Ibrahimovic all night, the game was far too 'open', if England want to compete, they have to show some sort of control and composure. The midfield can dictate a gameplan, whether it's counter-attacking or all-out possession, England's midfield looked lost and they never had a hold of the game all night.
Both wingers were poor and provided little for the two strikers. Young is quick but very little quality, similarly, Milner isn't quick but also offers very little quality.

I'm not being negative, I'm just not buying into all of the euphoria that surrounds England at a tournament. Because they haven't been beat, the media grows rapidly with optimism, flaws are ignored, positives are exaggerated and the end result is a totally deluded nation. For me, England look average at the moment, they managed three goals tonight but they're defending poorly and the midfield is struggling. The positive is that two strikers have scored and Rooney is to come back, and England only need a draw to go through, which is achievable with enough composure in a hostile fixture.

Pleased to have won, but after 2 games the player we are missing most at the moment isn't Lampard or Rooney but Jack Wilshire,somebody with a bit of composure and great passing in midfield.

Wilbred T Pricklepop wrote:

So

Despite having numerous players out through injury, despite missing our best player for the first 2 games with suspension, despite having a new manager only 3 weeks in the job, despite being in a group with the host nation, a team we've never beaten in a competitive fixture, and a team over 20 games unbeaten......

We are just a draw away from qualifying for the quarters with our best player to return.

That's not too shabby in anyones book.

Bang on mate

No wonder we have done nothing for so long, I wouldn't want to play football to represent a few select TOSSERS on here too.

Good result England, our starting right hand side needs changing !!!

I'd keep the same team but bring in Rooney for Carroll. A front three who play together every week sounds too good to not try. It's also a front three which has some speed because we can't play Young on the left and Walcott on the right but I expect we'll need to speed to play on the counter. Ukraine need to win, we don't so I'm pretty sure Hodgson will play for that because it makes perfect sense.