erm i'm not english but england were pretty bad... 1 goal in three games - never looked like they could turn a game around, really sloppy back 4.
only conclusion for england is it was really bad. Do not use the group as an excuse , if you play like england did, you will not get through any group at a world cup.
I tried to assess critically every action on the pitch and I think there were some positives - Foster, Shaw and Jones. I don't rate Jones but he impressed me. Smalling was a mixed bag but showed he could make the step. Wilshire and Lallana were decent too.
erm i'm not english but england were pretty bad... 1 goal in three games - never looked like they could turn a game around, really sloppy back 4.
only conclusion for england is it was really bad. Do not use the group as an excuse , if you play like england did, you will not get through any group at a world cup.
I'm not saying this because I'm angry or defensive, but Belgium were awful against Algeria and were fairly average against Russia, but they got through their group comfortably
btw - when the draw was made I said England would lose to Italy and Uruguay and draw with Costa Rica. I also said Italy would go out with England! Need to find that thread now!
btw - when the draw was made I said England would lose to Italy and Uruguay and draw with Costa Rica. I also said Italy would go out with England! Need to find that thread now!
erm i'm not english but england were pretty bad... 1 goal in three games - never looked like they could turn a game around, really sloppy back 4.
only conclusion for england is it was really bad. Do not use the group as an excuse , if you play like england did, you will not get through any group at a world cup.
I'm not saying this because I'm angry or defensive, but Belgium were awful against Algeria and were fairly average against Russia, but they got through their group comfortably
it's wasn't gallery play no - but they got the job done.
you honestly think this england squad would comfortably beat algeria - russia or belgium?
btw - when the draw was made I said England would lose to Italy and Uruguay and draw with Costa Rica. I also said Italy would go out with England! Need to find that thread now!
Thats how I saw it too. Told my work colleagues we wouldn't get out of the group. They thought I was a bit pessimistic.
Wilshire, Shelvey and Barkley in the middle is the future - Euro 2016. Can't see why we can't still use Gerrard from the bench - clearly has a desire to continue!
Seriously. You think Wilshire and Shelvey are our future? God help us.
erm i'm not english but england were pretty bad... 1 goal in three games - never looked like they could turn a game around, really sloppy back 4.
only conclusion for england is it was really bad. Do not use the group as an excuse , if you play like england did, you will not get through any group at a world cup.
I'm not saying this because I'm angry or defensive, but Belgium were awful against Algeria and were fairly average against Russia, but they got through their group comfortably
it's wasn't gallery play no - but they got the job done.
you honestly think this england squad would comfortably beat algeria - russia or belgium?
Probably not but neither did you. When I said got through comfortably I meant points wise. That game against Algeria was far from comfortable.
The question should be would Belgium have beaten Italy or Uruguay?
From what I've seen they wouldn't have done significantly better than England. Defensive errors and not a dangerous striker in sight.
The point being that you've not played well but got through your group. If you played like that in this group you wouldn't have.
Wilshire, Shelvey and Barkley in the middle is the future - Euro 2016. Can't see why we can't still use Gerrard from the bench - clearly has a desire to continue!
Seriously. You think Wilshire and Shelvey are our future? God help us.
So who do you think then? Shelvey is going to be a top top player!
Miserable end to a poor tournament but I expected little else to be honest. What bothers me more is the delusion that we have "an exciting group of young players" you can name them on the fingers of one hand! and even then not one of them is a decent defender. I have little or no hope for England all the while we are importing players from all over the place and paying average English players £50k a week. The rewards for mediocrity are staggering no wonder they have no motivation. Until there is a fundamental change to our game this will be the future for the England team.
Wilshire, Shelvey and Barkley in the middle is the future - Euro 2016. Can't see why we can't still use Gerrard from the bench - clearly has a desire to continue!
Seriously. You think Wilshire and Shelvey are our future? God help us.
So who do you think then? Shelvey is going to be a top top player!
Serious answer . I don't know. That's whats so depressing.
I know its like spitting on the Queen on here if you criticise Shelvey and you have the clan on your back if you do but he's not the future. If he was he would have been in this squad. As for Wilshire , even Arsenal fans will tell you he flatters to deceive and is just not good enough. Barkley certainly looks promising.
Absolute rubbish. Those poor defenders coming through( Shaw aside but even he is well overrated) proved how crap they really are. The centre forwards will have a job out scoring the goals conceded by that lot. Let's be honest, these young players are also overrated. Until we can get a sensible media in place that doesn't go overboard with the abilities of these players then this hype will continue. As for the group we were in, the only team of note in there turned out to be Costa Rica! The fact they beat Uruguay and Italy so easily shows how poor those teams were , and we lost to both of them. We couldn't even beat Costa Rica ourselves and they didn't even try very hard, strolling around avoiding injury for the most part. Is this the worst England have ever done at the group stage? No amount of re-hyping these players up with talk of "we played well, we were unlucky" etc will change the fact that the other teams have more ability than us, regardless of what the media and the advertising tells us. There are no excuses, they were all better than England and we did well to get our point.
No, he can be criticised as he often makes errors that can cost his team. I see a player at the moment who can win and lose you games - he can lose you a goal and get you it back in the same match. But it is because, IMO, he is trying to affect games. I think this courage allied to his ability is exciting. I'd have him in the England squad now as he would be a good sub to use if you are chasing a game. But I expect the errors to diminish with experience and him to be a starter for England who could eclipse Gerrard. I look at Sterling and see a player who had a great season for Liverpool but remember Lennon looking amazing - everybody assumes he will get better and better and he may - but I am more excited about Shelvey. Not beacuse he played for us - but from what I have seen.
I tried to assess critically every action on the pitch and I think there were some positives - Foster, Shaw and Jones. I don't rate Jones but he impressed me. Smalling was a mixed bag but showed he could make the step. Wilshire and Lallana were decent too.
Wilshire looks absolutely petrified to get another injury, doesn't help when you play the sort of position/game that he does.
Well two things knocked us out early from this one - accepting we wouldn't have won it anyway. Defensively we were poor - every goal conceeded was poor and offensively we lacked that killer striker- We needed a Balotelli or a Suarez (with no teeth) rather than a Sturridge. Not saying Sturridge doesn't have potential but the Costa Rica game showed his lack of that killer sharpness that he needs to work on and may find - or we need to find somebody who has it. In terms of actual play - England probably played as well or better than all of their opponents in every match - not by much granted- but small things were the difference/
To actually win a competition, well grass roots issues need to be addressed - but accepting where we are with our football - this campaign was below par and Hodgson should go for it!
Nobody is saying that England were knocked out because of bad luck - they were simply short of the talent required.
However, think back to our reaching the QFs in 2002 and 2006, on both occasions we had very large slices of luck go our way.
In 2002 in probably our best tournament win of modern times we beat the Argies 1-0 from a blatant dive from Owen and we cleared about three off the line from the Argies, the rub of the green went our way.
In 2006 we played a series of dreadfully weak teams (Ecuador and Trinidad) and just scraped past them to the QFs - did we really play much better than we did here against much stronger opponents?
Let's not even start with 2010 where we were diabolical against the Yanks and then even worse against Algeria before scraping past the mighty Slovenia!
In this tournament the key moments have simply not gone our way, we have contributed to that in a lot of ways, but the margins are just so tight.
It would not surprise me in the slightest to see this England side do quite well over the next four year cycle but they must shed the skin of the past - and that might even include the Granny shagger himself.
Wilshire, Shelvey and Barkley in the middle is the future - Euro 2016. Can't see why we can't still use Gerrard from the bench - clearly has a desire to continue!
Seriously. You think Wilshire and Shelvey are our future? God help us.
Agreed . Wilshire might not be fully fit but he has massively disappointed .Why take a player who has hardly played in the last 3 months? does he also live in a cul de sac ?
Are people really suprised? We don't have a world class striker which as we see repeatedly can make all the difference at this level. We have some decent creative players but they are young and inexperienced. We don't have any world class defenders and the ones we have (probably quite rightly) gone with are again young and inexperienced, only 1 has played international tournament football before. And yes the little bits of luck didn't go our way but they aren't reasons. Want the Euro qualifiers to start now and see how we progress (or don't!).
This tournament actually reminds me a lot of Euro 1988 where we battered the Irish and somehow lost 1-0 and went toe-to-toe with the Dutch - we probably gave them their hardest game all tournament - but were beaten by the class of Van Basten.
The team were condemned as no-hopers but within two years we were one penalty kick away from the World Cup Final.
Comments
Of course he was never going to offer his resignation from his £3.5million a year job.
only conclusion for england is it was really bad. Do not use the group as an excuse , if you play like england did, you will not get through any group at a world cup.
you honestly think this england squad would comfortably beat algeria - russia or belgium?
The question should be would Belgium have beaten Italy or Uruguay?
From what I've seen they wouldn't have done significantly better than England. Defensive errors and not a dangerous striker in sight.
The point being that you've not played well but got through your group. If you played like that in this group you wouldn't have.
Belgium couldn't have got that group. They could have got Costa Rica, either England/Italy and one other non-seeded non-European team.
I know its like spitting on the Queen on here if you criticise Shelvey and you have the clan on your back if you do but he's not the future. If he was he would have been in this squad.
As for Wilshire , even Arsenal fans will tell you he flatters to deceive and is just not good enough.
Barkley certainly looks promising.
As for the group we were in, the only team of note in there turned out to be Costa Rica!
The fact they beat Uruguay and Italy so easily shows how poor those teams were , and we lost to both of them. We couldn't even beat Costa Rica ourselves and they didn't even try very hard, strolling around avoiding injury for the most part.
Is this the worst England have ever done at the group stage? No amount of re-hyping these players up with talk of "we played well, we were unlucky" etc will change the fact that the other teams have more ability than us, regardless of what the media and the advertising tells us.
There are no excuses, they were all better than England and we did well to get our point.
To actually win a competition, well grass roots issues need to be addressed - but accepting where we are with our football - this campaign was below par and Hodgson should go for it!
However, think back to our reaching the QFs in 2002 and 2006, on both occasions we had very large slices of luck go our way.
In 2002 in probably our best tournament win of modern times we beat the Argies 1-0 from a blatant dive from Owen and we cleared about three off the line from the Argies, the rub of the green went our way.
In 2006 we played a series of dreadfully weak teams (Ecuador and Trinidad) and just scraped past them to the QFs - did we really play much better than we did here against much stronger opponents?
Let's not even start with 2010 where we were diabolical against the Yanks and then even worse against Algeria before scraping past the mighty Slovenia!
In this tournament the key moments have simply not gone our way, we have contributed to that in a lot of ways, but the margins are just so tight.
It would not surprise me in the slightest to see this England side do quite well over the next four year cycle but they must shed the skin of the past - and that might even include the Granny shagger himself.
The team were condemned as no-hopers but within two years we were one penalty kick away from the World Cup Final.