Slovakia v England, 20th June, 8pm

[Storzy]

Chelsea and Man United have 38 games to prove their quality, we only have three, and no-one was complaining anyway -- most people are just making observations about how our games have gone so far and why we shouldn't panic too much.

3 games?

Qualifying and friendles surely help you figure out your first team and how to breakdown sides. Fair on San Marino, but we played a couple of teams comparable to Russia etc..

 

[Jockney]

3 games?

Qualifying and friendles surely help you figure out your first team and how to breakdown sides. Fair on San Marino, but we played a couple of teams comparable to Russia etc..

We did break down those sides, but our finishing let us down. Are you honestly comparing qualifiers and friendlies to actual tournament finals?

 

[Storzy]

We did break down those sides, but our finishing let us down. Are you honestly comparing qualifiers and friendlies to actual tournament finals?

Qualifyers are competative football and friendlies are a chance to try out formations and different combinations.

We've come into this tournment with no idea of how were are going to play. The 4-3-3 is CLEARLY a last minute choice as you can tell by the squad that Roy took.

Our finishing hasn't been good, but I'm watching the Germany game and they've broken down this N.I team more than we managed in any single game. The problem is a combination of both.

 

[Jockney]

Qualifyers are competative football and friendlies are a chance to try out formations and different combinations.

We've come into this tournment with no idea of how were are going to play. The 4-3-3 is CLEARLY a last minute choice as you can tell by the squad that Roy took.

Our finishing hasn't been good, but I'm watching the Germany game and they've broken down this N.I team more than we managed in any single game. The problem is a combination of both.

The football has been good. The formation is imperfect, but our performances have been positive. Germany are a much, much better side than us with attacking talent we'd kill for and even if they were on our level direct comparisons are useless. Three games is a poor sample size for any sort of meaningful predictions of how we will fare in KO rounds. Roy is copping a lot of flak for some questionable decisions but isn't receiving any sort of praise for the quality of some of our football, our mentality or bringing the new generation through. You're right, though, he probably doesn't know what our best team is. I don't think a single person in this country does with any great degree of certainty, nor would they if they were involved on the coaching staff, because half of these players weren't even on the radar a year ago. They are still getting used to playing with each other.

 

[JimJams]

I'm not exactly sure how much credit Roy should get for bringing the new generation through. He has no choice in that matter. The likes of Lampard, Gerrard, Ashley Cole are long past their use by date. The only older generation players there could have been any argument to include really is Jagielka and Carrick. And neither have been key players for England and neither have had good seasons. It's not like Roy has made some sort of conscious decision to leave some of the senior players out for the youth. The senior players have all but retired from international football. He's taken the best (generally) of what's available, the fact most of them are young is by coincidence not design.

 

[Storzy]

The football has been good. The formation is imperfect, but our performances have been positive. Germany are a much, much better side than us with attacking talent we'd kill for and even if they were on our level direct comparisons are useless. Three games is a poor sample size for any sort of meaningful predictions of how we will fare in KO rounds. Roy is copping a lot of flak for some questionable decisions but isn't receiving any sort of praise for the quality of some of our football, our mentality or bringing the new generation through. You're right, though, he probably doesn't know what our best team is. I don't think a single person in this country does with any great degree of certainty, nor would they if they were involved on the coaching staff, because half of these players weren't even on the radar a year ago. They are still getting used to playing with each other.

He won't get praise for the football while the team is struggling to win games though, which maybe isn't entirely fair, but the nice football really only highlights the other problems.

I also don't give him much leeway on not knowing his best team, because the squad selection for the formation we are using is FUCKING AMATEUR. It's all well and good not knowing how to fit Vardy into the side, but another thing to bed in a whole new formation.

Also this new formation has nothing to do with Vardy. Ali, Dier or any other new player. It's all about Wayne Rooney and finding a position for him. He's had how many bloody years to do that.

EDIT: Also I wasn't comparing England's quality to Germanys'. It was all about highlighting how many chances they've created compared to us. That to me shows the issue comes beyond finishing and also includes creativity. We're fine for periods of the game, but struggle to keep the tempo going.

 

[G.B]

Not sure the football has been particularly good either. I assume, since people keep saying it over and over as if it matters at all, it's a reference to us dominating possession. Well, of course we are. We've played two really poor teams who were happy for us to have the ball but we've failed to break them down, nor craft many genuine chances. It's been very uninspiring to this point. The players don't look suited to the system, the squad isn't built around the use of this system, the front 3 don't seem to know what thy're supposed to be doing in possession and find themselves constantly passing backwards, it all looks rather disjointed and unorganised to this point.

I have faith in the players individual quality. I don't have faith in the managers ability to utilise their quality. It looks to me as though he's bottled 2 up front and found himself with a squad completely unsuited to what he's attempting to play right now. Honestly, if he was planning on playing a front 3, why did he bring 5 central strikers and 1 "genuine winger" who has always performed better as an attacking central midfielder?

 

[Pagnell]

We're through the group stages you miserable bunch of fuckers. Be cheerful and happy. Like me.

 

[johnnytodd]

We're through the group stages you miserable bunch of fuckers. Be cheerful and happy. Like me.

Star Trek announced a new film?

Geek !

 

[Veggie Legs]

Qualifyers are competative football and friendlies are a chance to try out formations and different combinations.

We've come into this tournment with no idea of how were are going to play. The 4-3-3 is CLEARLY a last minute choice as you can tell by the squad that Roy took.

As I recall we played 4-3-3 in most of the qualifiers, in no way was it a last minute choice.

 

[MJA]

As I recall we played 4-3-3 in most of the qualifiers, in no way was it a last minute choice.

That was when we had a fully fit Welbeck and a fully fit Sturridge available. You can't deny that that squad he's picked was based around playing narrow systems as we did during the warm up matches?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[JJH]

I cannot believe people are still defending him playing 4-3-3.

He picked a squad with ONE winger, he's playing a system to accomadate two. He's backtracked and gone completely against the squad he originally picked.

Hodgson went with a diamond until Rashford came on against Wales and we absolutely killed them with the full backs bombing on.

I've always defended Roy, but he's got right on my tits this tournament.

 

[Veggie Legs]

That was when we had a fully fit Welbeck and a fully fit Sturridge available. You can't deny that that squad he's picked was based around playing narrow systems as we did during the warm up matches?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

I don't think he's had much choice, there aren't many good wide players to choose from (I realise this is an argument in favour of playing a narrow system). Regardless of the reasons behind it, I'm much happier with England playing 4-3-3 rather than 4-4-2.

 

[TractorBoys]

I'm much happier with England playing 4-3-3 rather than 4-4-2.

This. All day long.

 

[MJA]

I don't think he's had much choice, there aren't many good wide players to choose from (I realise this is an argument in favour of playing a narrow system). Regardless of the reasons behind it, I'm much happier with England playing 4-3-3 rather than 4-4-2.

This. All day long.

So we don't have the players to make the '4-3-3' (it's 4-5-1 unless you play 3 actual strikers by the way) system work but you would both prefer to stick to it than use a system that we do have the players to suit?

 

[Carver]

Hodgson has fucked it up, I always knew the manager was the problem, we've got some good players but a shit and stubborn old senile manager!

1.He doesn't bring Drinkwater and Townsend, so takes shit players like Sterling, Henderson and Milner instead.

2.Does not bring Vardy on against Russia to finish them off.

3.Starts with underperforming Kane upfront on his own again against Wales.

4.Makes pointless changes to the team against Slovakia, dropping two of our best players in a game we had to win to have a better chance of going far in the tournament.

 

[Railway Blue]

Indeed apparently the Wales games was his 63rd game of the season after 56 the previous season including 3 games for the Under 21s last summer where spurs took him to Australia for a pointless friendly before it.

Unfortunately Spurs lack of depth risks ruining him by overplaying him like Liverpool did with Owen

Unless we're going to play Sturridge in the middle he shouldn't play. he's awful as a wide striker, he's incrredibly ball greedy and wasteful. other than the goal he barely managed to find an England player in the entire half. Just shows how 1 goal make people overlook how awful he was.

If he's going to be central striker fair enough but he shouldn't play anywhere else. We're missing having many players suited to playing the wider role. we should have taken Townsend when Welbeck wasn't fit.

I agree about Townsend. Our only winger is Stirling and he's rightly been dropped after a 3/10 performance. No other winger in squad.

 

[Pagnell]

Hodgson has fucked it up, I always knew the manager was the problem, we've got some good players but a shit and stubborn old senile manager!

1.He doesn't bring Drinkwater and Townsend, so takes shit players like Sterling, Henderson and Milner instead.

2.Does not bring Vardy on against Russia to finish them off.

3.Starts with underperforming Kane upfront on his own again against Wales.

4.Makes pointless changes to the team against Slovakia, dropping two of our best players in a game we had to win to have a better chance of going far in the tournament.

Milner's experience and form since Christmas justified him being included. And as much as I find Sterling's fee to Manchester City hilarious in hindsight, he really can't be defined as shit despite offering nothing so far this tournament. Henderson I agree with though. I wouldn't call him shit but, like Wilshere, he spent too much of last season injured to be included in the squad, and both are suffering for form and match sharpness as a result. There were better options to both of these players.

 

[Veggie Legs]

So we don't have the players to make the '4-3-3' (it's 4-5-1 unless you play 3 actual strikers by the way) system work but you would both prefer to stick to it than use a system that we do have the players to suit?

It's 4-3-3 if the wide players are playing as far forward as they obviously were, regardless of what you consider their natural position to be.

The team that started the first two games featured all players, with the exception of Rooney, playing in a position and a system that is familiar to them from club football. Playing a diamond midfield with Rooney at the tip suits him perfectly, but it means all the other attacking players have to play in a less familiar role. The former seems clearly better to me.

 

[MJA]

It's 4-3-3 if the wide players are playing as far forward as they obviously were, regardless of what you consider their natural position to be.

The team that started the first two games featured all players, with the exception of Rooney, playing in a position and a system that is familiar to them from club football. Playing a diamond midfield with Rooney at the tip suits him perfectly, but it means all the other attacking players have to play in a less familiar role. The latter seems clearly better to me.

I assume you meant the former as opposed to latter?
I would say the wide players getting furthest forward have been our full backs (all 4 of them have done this well) and I see no reason why they would stop doing this if we went into a diamond formation. The only difference with this would be the fact that we would have 2 actual goalscoring strikers waiting for the full backs ball into the box and also someone like Alli in behind them to make that late run into the box. I would then have Rooney with Lallana as the middle 2 - these can both offer an attacking threat whilst also helping defensively - with Dier protecting the back 4 and covering for our attacking full backs.

All Roy is doing at the minute is hiding behind a phantom 4-3-3 formation that doesn't even exist, what he is actually doing is playing a 4-5-1 system designed to first and foremost stop you from losing and hoping to nick the odd goal and unfortunately people are being duped by it

 

[Skinner]

1.He doesn't bring Drinkwater and Townsend, so takes shit players like Sterling, Henderson and Milner instead.

What difference would Drinkwater have made so far, seriously? He'd have been sat on the bench for all 270 minutes.

3.Starts with underperforming Kane upfront on his own again against Wales.

One poor game against Russia means Kane is out of form, seriously? How long does form last for in your eyes, twenty minutes?

4.Makes pointless changes to the team against Slovakia, dropping two of our best players in a game we had to win to have a better chance of going far in the tournament.

The changes didn't really have any negative effect on the result, if anything we played better before the players that played in the previous two came on. We created clear cut chances but our finishing cost us, again.

Vardy and Sturridge missed chances, were they pointless changes? Was it correct for them to replace an 'out of form' Kane? Are they now considered out of form?

Hodgson has fucked it up,

No he hasn't. Our finishing, or lack of, has. It's a tough draw on route but we're still in it so no point crying like little girls over it, not yet anyway.

 

[JimJams]

What difference would Drinkwater have made so far, seriously?

We'd have finished the group on 9 points with a +10 gd!

 

[Renegade]

1.He doesn't bring Drinkwater and Townsend, so takes shit players like Sterling, Henderson and Milner instead.



Hodgson did fuck up his selection by taking too many strikers and then playing 4-3-3, but let's not pretend Andros fucking Townsend would have made any difference. Sterling is a far better player than him in every way. England are really lacking in wingers and wing forwards, they shouldn't be playing 4-3-3, but Hodgson came to this realisation way too close to the tournament and has reverted to what he's comfortable using.

 

[johnnytodd]

All over-hyped players in this squad and simply not good enough, i would say team spirit is lowest in the touno too

bring on domestic season

 

[Skinner]

The injury to Welbeck was a massive loss

 

[MJA]

The injury to Welbeck was a massive loss

And the reason why we started to use the diamond formation, so why revert back when we are still without Welbeck?

 

[SALTIRE]

All over-hyped players in this squad and simply not good enough, i would say team spirit is lowest in the touno too

bring on domestic season

All over-hyped yet still no Everton players can get in that side, boom!

 

[johnnytodd]

All over-hyped yet still no Everton players can get in that side, boom!

They will be fresh for the title push !!!!!

 

[merseyboyred]

Not sure the football has been particularly good either. I assume, since people keep saying it over and over as if it matters at all, it's a reference to us dominating possession. Well, of course we are. We've played two really poor teams who were happy for us to have the ball but we've failed to break them down, nor craft many genuine chances. It's been very uninspiring to this point. The players don't look suited to the system, the squad isn't built around the use of this system, the front 3 don't seem to know what thy're supposed to be doing in possession and find themselves constantly passing backwards, it all looks rather disjointed and unorganised to this point.

I have faith in the players individual quality. I don't have faith in the managers ability to utilise their quality. It looks to me as though he's bottled 2 up front and found himself with a squad completely unsuited to what he's attempting to play right now. Honestly, if he was planning on playing a front 3, why did he bring 5 central strikers and 1 "genuine winger" who has always performed better as an attacking central midfielder?

This. We haven't yet seen much, if anything, of what England are like without the ball, we've not seen any team have a great period of possession against England and see how well they can resist that, or an opposition probing us and trying to break our defence down. What we did see of that v Russia wasn't the most encouraging. We've looked susceptible on the break from the little evidence we have of that currently too. Of the three goals scored, there's been a free kick, a fortuitous header from a Welsh defender to an offside striker and one that had some craft in it, but it was down to individual quality rather than appearing to be part of a plan.

Aside from that, there's hardly been much created against teams who are collectively of much inferior quality, and have allowed us all the time possible to create with minimal pressure on the ball. We've done well in possession yeah, but against teams who've allowed us it, they've been quite happy to let us play as there's been little to worry them. I also think the in game management in the two draws was very poor, and even the substitutions that won the Wales game seemed to be more of a forced move out of desperation than anything. I agree that it all seems a bit disjointed.

I don't think the squad is well set-up to employ a low tempo high possession game because of the personnel, but neither is the squad set up for this 4-3-3 yet the manager is persisting with it. Maybe I'm overly harsh, playing better sides where we won't see as much of the ball may well suit us better. But there's plenty of room for improvement and with the way the draw was set up even before the Spain result, it's hard to take many positives from 2nd considering the quality of opposition we've faced.

 

[johnnytodd]

This. We haven't yet seen much, if anything, of what England are like without the ball, we've not seen any team have a great period of possession against England and see how well they can resist that, or an opposition probing us and trying to break our defence down. What we did see of that v Russia wasn't the most encouraging. We've looked susceptible on the break from the little evidence we have of that currently too. Of the three goals scored, there's been a free kick, a fortuitous header from a Welsh defender to an offside striker and one that had some craft in it, but it was down to individual quality rather than appearing to be part of a plan.

Aside from that, there's hardly been much created against teams who are collectively of much inferior quality, and have allowed us all the time possible to create with minimal pressure on the ball. We've done well in possession yeah, but against teams who've allowed us it, they've been quite happy to let us play as there's been little to worry them. I also think the in game management in the two draws was very poor, and even the substitutions that won the Wales game seemed to be more of a forced move out of desperation than anything. I agree that it all seems a bit disjointed.

I don't think the squad is well set-up to employ a low tempo high possession game because of the personnel, but neither is the squad set up for this 4-3-3 yet the manager is persisting with it. Maybe I'm overly harsh, playing better sides where we won't see as much of the ball may well suit us better. But there's plenty of room for improvement and with the way the draw was set up even before the Spain result, it's hard to take many positives from 2nd considering the quality of opposition we've faced.

As interesting as a Hodgson interview.