Will honestly be fuming if he gets in the squad didn't deserve a call up when he got one for the last friendlies and not done enough to get in squad. Rather have defoe, rashford, carroll or townsend over him. Whole article in mirror says townsend IS favourite to replace dat guy welbz but roy is considering lingard.
Will honestly be fuming if he gets in the squad didn't deserve a call up when he got one for the last friendlies and not done enough to get in squad. Rather have defoe, rashford, carroll or townsend over him. Whole article in mirror says townsend IS favourite to replace dat guy welbz but roy is considering lingard.
Defoe would be good or Carroll. Carroll gives something different. The whole England squad is built on pace and pace isn't enough when you come up against a good side. A good defender won't get done by pace.
Will honestly be fuming if he gets in the squad didn't deserve a call up when he got one for the last friendlies and not done enough to get in squad. Rather have defoe, rashford, carroll or townsend over him. Whole article in mirror says townsend IS favourite to replace dat guy welbz but roy is considering lingard.
Both Townsend and Lingard are quick and follow instructions. It's basically what Woy wants in his wide players.
Think that's incredibly harsh on Sterling. He's not been great at Man City but he is much better in a pressing, counter attacking team, the way Liverpool played for a year and a bit under Rodgers. England play more of that style, and Sterling does better with the ball in some space running at players.
The problem is there isn't really a like-for-like replacement for Wellbeck. Jamie Vardy could probably do a job there, but I don't know that he's tactically disciplined enough, and he doesn't have Wellbeck's size, which really helps for out balls.
The larger problem for me is that England may not beable to play the 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 that worked to well against Germany. I half expect Hodgson to take Delph instead. He can certainly do a job in CM or on the left of a midfield diamond, but I don't think that midfield diamond works all that well.
Will honestly be fuming if he gets in the squad didn't deserve a call up when he got one for the last friendlies and not done enough to get in squad. Rather have defoe, rashford, carroll or townsend over him. Whole article in mirror says townsend IS favourite to replace dat guy welbz but roy is considering lingard.
Both Townsend and Lingard are quick and follow instructions. It's basically what Woy wants in his wide players.
Think that's incredibly harsh on Sterling. He's not been great at Man City but he is much better in a pressing, counter attacking team, the way Liverpool played for a year and a bit under Rodgers. England play more of that style, and Sterling does better with the ball in some space running at players.
The problem is there isn't really a like-for-like replacement for Wellbeck. Jamie Vardy could probably do a job there, but I don't know that he's tactically disciplined enough, and he doesn't have Wellbeck's size, which really helps for out balls.
The larger problem for me is that England may not beable to play the 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 that worked to well against Germany. I half expect Hodgson to take Delph instead. He can certainly do a job in CM or on the left of a midfield diamond, but I don't think that midfield diamond works all that well.
I haven't mentioned Sterling mate he would make my 23 man squad undoubtedly. I'm a fan of his even if he has been off the ball recently having just come back from injury.
My 23 is now 22 with Welbeck almost certainly out and Townsend/Carroll/Defoe/Rashford, all deserve it a lot more than Lingard.
Delph would be just as underwhelming as Lingard if I'm honest. I reall think Welbeck is going to be a big miss he always does the business for England whether people rate him at club level or not.
Will honestly be fuming if he gets in the squad didn't deserve a call up when he got one for the last friendlies and not done enough to get in squad. Rather have defoe, rashford, carroll or townsend over him. Whole article in mirror says townsend IS favourite to replace dat guy welbz but roy is considering lingard.
Both Townsend and Lingard are quick and follow instructions. It's basically what Woy wants in his wide players.
Think that's incredibly harsh on Sterling. He's not been great at Man City but he is much better in a pressing, counter attacking team, the way Liverpool played for a year and a bit under Rodgers. England play more of that style, and Sterling does better with the ball in some space running at players.
The problem is there isn't really a like-for-like replacement for Wellbeck. Jamie Vardy could probably do a job there, but I don't know that he's tactically disciplined enough, and he doesn't have Wellbeck's size, which really helps for out balls.
The larger problem for me is that England may not beable to play the 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 that worked to well against Germany. I half expect Hodgson to take Delph instead. He can certainly do a job in CM or on the left of a midfield diamond, but I don't think that midfield diamond works all that well.
I haven't mentioned Sterling mate he would make my 23 man squad undoubtedly. I'm a fan of his even if he has been off the ball recently having just come back from injury.
My 23 is now 22 with Welbeck almost certainly out and Townsend/Carroll/Defoe/Rashford, all deserve it a lot more than Lingard.
Delph would be just as underwhelming as Lingard if I'm honest. I reall think Welbeck is going to be a big miss he always does the business for England whether people rate him at club level or not.
Sorry was referring to the comment above your re: Sterling.
The problem I see with Rashford is that he plays through the middle like Kane, Sturridge, Kane, Vardy, and Rooney. I don't think he adds anything England don't already have. Same with Defoe.
As for Carroll, he provides a plan b but I don't see England as having the wingers required to get crosses into him. And his workrate isn't good enough for pressing. And also, he'd have the same problem as the above.
By process of elimination I'd probably go with Townsend, even though he can be an absolutely infuriating player at club level. That said, he's done it for England, and playing him on the right would allow Sterling to play on the left where he looks more comfortable. And to be fair to Townsend, he has done it for England in the past, and he's a player who will get more time and space in a pressing game than he does at Newcastle where teams sit back and wait for him to cut onto his left and shoot.
Given the options, I think Nathan Redmond and Jordan Ibe should at least be considered. I think it makes more sense to take a natural winger than it does to take another center forward. Both can play on the right and offer some natural width, as well as pace in the last 20 minutes of matches.
The other question is if Jags is injured, who goes in his place? That might be one where Roy takes Delph instead of a natural replacement knowing Dier can slot in there, because really, what other center backs are there (no one say Shawcross, he's clearly nowhere near the level required).
Who I think Roy will pick: GK (3): Hart, Foster, Heaton
Will honestly be fuming if he gets in the squad didn't deserve a call up when he got one for the last friendlies and not done enough to get in squad. Rather have defoe, rashford, carroll or townsend over him. Whole article in mirror says townsend IS favourite to replace dat guy welbz but roy is considering lingard.
Both Townsend and Lingard are quick and follow instructions. It's basically what Woy wants in his wide players.
Think that's incredibly harsh on Sterling. He's not been great at Man City but he is much better in a pressing, counter attacking team, the way Liverpool played for a year and a bit under Rodgers. England play more of that style, and Sterling does better with the ball in some space running at players.
The problem is there isn't really a like-for-like replacement for Wellbeck. Jamie Vardy could probably do a job there, but I don't know that he's tactically disciplined enough, and he doesn't have Wellbeck's size, which really helps for out balls.
The larger problem for me is that England may not beable to play the 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 that worked to well against Germany. I half expect Hodgson to take Delph instead. He can certainly do a job in CM or on the left of a midfield diamond, but I don't think that midfield diamond works all that well.
I haven't mentioned Sterling mate he would make my 23 man squad undoubtedly. I'm a fan of his even if he has been off the ball recently having just come back from injury.
My 23 is now 22 with Welbeck almost certainly out and Townsend/Carroll/Defoe/Rashford, all deserve it a lot more than Lingard.
Delph would be just as underwhelming as Lingard if I'm honest. I reall think Welbeck is going to be a big miss he always does the business for England whether people rate him at club level or not.
Sorry was referring to the comment above your re: Sterling.
The problem I see with Rashford is that he plays through the middle like Kane, Sturridge, Kane, Vardy, and Rooney. I don't think he adds anything England don't already have. Same with Defoe.
As for Carroll, he provides a plan b but I don't see England as having the wingers required to get crosses into him. And his workrate isn't good enough for pressing. And also, he'd have the same problem as the above.
By process of elimination I'd probably go with Townsend, even though he can be an absolutely infuriating player at club level. That said, he's done it for England, and playing him on the right would allow Sterling to play on the left where he looks more comfortable. And to be fair to Townsend, he has done it for England in the past, and he's a player who will get more time and space in a pressing game than he does at Newcastle where teams sit back and wait for him to cut onto his left and shoot.
Given the options, I think Nathan Redmond and Jordan Ibe should at least be considered. I think it makes more sense to take a natural winger than it does to take another center forward. Both can play on the right and offer some natural width, as well as pace in the last 20 minutes of matches.
The other question is if Jags is injured, who goes in his place? That might be one where Roy takes Delph instead of a natural replacement knowing Dier can slot in there, because really, what other center backs are there (no one say Shawcross, he's clearly nowhere near the level required).
Who I think Roy will pick: GK (3): Hart, Foster, Heaton
Countries in red who didn't qualify, in blue who did
There's space for so many teams now it kinda makes a mockery or qualifying. Might as well just spin a bottle for 6 countries you might have thought would have qualified to have to sit it out for the next one....
Countries in red who didn't qualify, in blue who did
There's space for so many teams now it kinda makes a mockery or qualifying. Might as well just spin a bottle for 6 countries you might have thought would have qualified to have to sit it out for the next one....
Felt that way going in but qualifying was brilliant. Because there aren't any legendary international teams at the moment (and given the shift to club football, it might be a while before we see another one), I've changed my position and think it's great to have a drag down knock out all in tournament. I'm looking forward to Iceland springing a surprise or two. Same for Wales. Hungary aren't good, but they're bloody hard to beat. And on the bright side, Greece aren't there.
Euro 2008 was probably the best tournament of my lifetime, some great football, upsets, mental finishes, players coming from out of nowhere (Arshavin), and a genuinely class team. At the time, announcing they were gonna change it seemed crazy, but if the cavalier attitude from qualifying caries over then it should be good fun.
Countries in red who didn't qualify, in blue who did
There's space for so many teams now it kinda makes a mockery or qualifying. Might as well just spin a bottle for 6 countries you might have thought would have qualified to have to sit it out for the next one....
Also makes it less competitive once the finals are being played.
If Rashford is in the 23 I'll never support Hodgson again, he's what, 18? Half decent yes, but after seeing him play on tv and live at Spurs, getting taken off at half time cause he done naff all, he's nothing like what we need right now nor the level of international football.
There are much better options to take than Rashford. Carroll, Defoe, and Walcott to name a few.
Yes people will say Walcott hasn't played very well or whatever else, but he's had his problems and has done well for England in the past. He has experience and will add so much more to the dynamic of the team than Rashford could.
Same applies for Carroll, something different off the bench and a threat in the air, can come on and hold the ball up, bring others into play the way our current strikers can't. And then there is Defoe, a natural goal scorer proving how crucial he is even now with Sunderland's survival.
Although, I don't think I would take any, with none really playing a part in the qualifiers. But unless one of Wilshere or Henderson drops out and you stick one of them above to give the team something different.
Agree with most of what you have said @Sage. Good point on Rashford, he would be there to sit on the bench and not much else. I don't think Drinkwater will make it as we have 3 CM's in Dier, Wilshere and Henderson.
Can't edit my original post now for some reason so can't take out Welbeck but this is what I think the squad will be on Monday.
The rumor about Rashford is he'll be on the stand-by list, but will be bled like Shaw and Stones were before the 2014 World Cup, including making his debut in the friendlies.
I'm still not convinced that Rashford isn't anything more than a Frazier Campbell. He looks decent, but I feel like a lot of that is down to pace, and admittedly he's a decent finisher. You need only look at Defoe to know that's not enough in the modern game to play at the top level.
For those of you with Walker and Clyne in your squads, can I ask why? You have Stones and Dier who can also play at RB, why would you bring two designated RBs?
Agree with most of what you have said @Sage. Good point on Rashford, he would be there to sit on the bench and not much else. I don't think Drinkwater will make it as we have 3 CM's in Dier, Wilshere and Henderson.
Can't edit my original post now for some reason so can't take out Welbeck but this is what I think the squad will be on Monday.
Agree with most of what you have said @Sage. Good point on Rashford, he would be there to sit on the bench and not much else. I don't think Drinkwater will make it as we have 3 CM's in Dier, Wilshere and Henderson.
Can't edit my original post now for some reason so can't take out Welbeck but this is what I think the squad will be on Monday.
Just got a feeling Townsend will go, may well be wrong.
I agree too, although I really hope that Drinkwater goes, will be a catastrophe if he doesn't. Deserves it a hell of a lot more than Wilshere and Henderson for example and his relationship with Vardy could be very important in the Euro's.
Otherwise the main 21/22 of the squad picks itself in my opinion.
The rumor about Rashford is he'll be on the stand-by list, but will be bled like Shaw and Stones were before the 2014 World Cup, including making his debut in the friendlies.
I'm still not convinced that Rashford isn't anything more than a Frazier Campbell. He looks decent, but I feel like a lot of that is down to pace, and admittedly he's a decent finisher. You need only look at Defoe to know that's not enough in the modern game to play at the top level.
For those of you with Walker and Clyne in your squads, can I ask why? You have Stones and Dier who can also play at RB, why would you bring two designated RBs?
To answer the question about why two designated right backs..
Stones is young and has shown this season with his up and down form that he is prone to a mistake with his inexperience, sometimes "over-playing" but that will of course come with learning and age. He is also a much better centre half than right back, don't go ruin his career by sticking him at right back to get targeted by one of the top nations, for him to make a mistake and the media slate him for it. We have seen it so many times.
Dier has done a brilliant job in his role of defensive midfield this season for Spurs, with only taking Stones, Smalling and Cahill, he can drop back to centre half if needed, acting like the 4th centre half instead of bringing Jagielka. He hasn't played right back for a long time, not this season for Spurs I don't think when they have Walker and Trippier. Although not slow, his lack of pace could be at his disadvantage when coming up against someone quick like Martial for example.
It would be important to take both Clyne and Walker as forward thinking full backs are so important in the modern game, more so for England with the lack of natural wingers available and likely to go to the Euro's. If one was to get injured, it would be good to have a like for like to come in and not disrupt the dynamics of the team.
For these reasons, this is why I believe Roy will take both Clyne and Walker.
The rumor about Rashford is he'll be on the stand-by list, but will be bled like Shaw and Stones were before the 2014 World Cup, including making his debut in the friendlies.
I'm still not convinced that Rashford isn't anything more than a Frazier Campbell. He looks decent, but I feel like a lot of that is down to pace, and admittedly he's a decent finisher. You need only look at Defoe to know that's not enough in the modern game to play at the top level.
For those of you with Walker and Clyne in your squads, can I ask why? You have Stones and Dier who can also play at RB, why would you bring two designated RBs?
To answer the question about why two designated right backs..
Stones is young and has shown this season with his up and down form that he is prone to a mistake with his inexperience, sometimes "over-playing" but that will of course come with learning and age. He is also a much better centre half than right back, don't go ruin his career by sticking him at right back to get targeted by one of the top nations, for him to make a mistake and the media slate him for it. We have seen it so many times.
Dier has done a brilliant job in his role of defensive midfield this season for Spurs, with only taking Stones, Smalling and Cahill, he can drop back to centre half if needed, acting like the 4th centre half instead of bringing Jagielka. He hasn't played right back for a long time, not this season for Spurs I don't think when they have Walker and Trippier. Although not slow, his lack of pace could be at his disadvantage when coming up against someone quick like Martial for example.
It would be important to take both Clyne and Walker as forward thinking full backs are so important in the modern game, more so for England with the lack of natural wingers available and likely to go to the Euro's. If one was to get injured, it would be good to have a like for like to come in and not disrupt the dynamics of the team.
For these reasons, this is why I believe Roy will take both Clyne and Walker.
A well argued point. I also would have accepted "so we don't have to take Jagielka" .
I'd disagree on Stones, I think RB might be a nice change for him. He played there a lot when he was younger, and I don't think it's much of a stretch for him. Plus, that ball playing ability would be afforded a bit more leniency at RB. It's not as natural for Dier, as he played mostly through the middle for Sporting, but even Smalling has played there (and played well on a couple occasions I've seen). For a tournament that will probably last 3-6 matches, I think you need to be able to make do. One of the nice things about this England team is that they're young, there are a lot of technical players, and various players who can play in more than one position (which is often an offshoot of being a good technical player).
Going back to the ABJ (Anyone But Jags) argument, I'd be more tempted to use that spot for a chance on a young player or impact player. Looking at the team picked for the Toulan Tournament (U21 side), there isn't really one who screams out to be picked. There are two of three who are somewhat far along in their development, and maybe worth a punt with an eye to the future--Ward-Prowse, Redmond, Ibe, and Loftus-Cheek. W-P has had a very solid season, and L-C is probably the one with the biggest potential, but England already have enough/too many central midfielders. As for Ibe and Redmond, both are raw and given Townsend has done it for England (and is only 24), not sure either are worth getting in ahead of him. Were he fit, Joe Gomez would be an excellent option.
By sort of process of elimination, I'd probably take Townsend, because he can have an impact, he's a natural left footer who plays on the right, and he's done alright for England, especially in games where he comes on as a sub when the game is stretched. I'd NEVER start him, but for the "23rd man," or 20th outfield player, I think you could do a lot worse.
Probably already done this but: GK (3): Hart, Forster, Heaton
*(If Shaw is anywhere near fit I'd take a chance on him and bring Rose as well. Taking a chance on your reserve left back is a good place to take a chance)
Comments
Hart
Forster
Heaton
Walker
Clyne
Rose
Bertrand
Cahill
Stones
Smalling
Wilshire
Henderson
Drinkwater or Delph or Lallana
Milner
Sterling
Barkley
Dier
Alli
Townsend or Rashford or Lallana
Sturridge
Kane
Rooney
Vardy
Hope it's bollocks - he is crap.
Antonio scored another good goal last night, can play in more than one position and offers something different. Id even have Lennon ahead of Sterling.
Think that's incredibly harsh on Sterling. He's not been great at Man City but he is much better in a pressing, counter attacking team, the way Liverpool played for a year and a bit under Rodgers. England play more of that style, and Sterling does better with the ball in some space running at players.
The problem is there isn't really a like-for-like replacement for Wellbeck. Jamie Vardy could probably do a job there, but I don't know that he's tactically disciplined enough, and he doesn't have Wellbeck's size, which really helps for out balls.
The larger problem for me is that England may not beable to play the 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 that worked to well against Germany. I half expect Hodgson to take Delph instead. He can certainly do a job in CM or on the left of a midfield diamond, but I don't think that midfield diamond works all that well.
My 23 is now 22 with Welbeck almost certainly out and Townsend/Carroll/Defoe/Rashford, all deserve it a lot more than Lingard.
Delph would be just as underwhelming as Lingard if I'm honest. I reall think Welbeck is going to be a big miss he always does the business for England whether people rate him at club level or not.
The problem I see with Rashford is that he plays through the middle like Kane, Sturridge, Kane, Vardy, and Rooney. I don't think he adds anything England don't already have. Same with Defoe.
As for Carroll, he provides a plan b but I don't see England as having the wingers required to get crosses into him. And his workrate isn't good enough for pressing. And also, he'd have the same problem as the above.
By process of elimination I'd probably go with Townsend, even though he can be an absolutely infuriating player at club level. That said, he's done it for England, and playing him on the right would allow Sterling to play on the left where he looks more comfortable. And to be fair to Townsend, he has done it for England in the past, and he's a player who will get more time and space in a pressing game than he does at Newcastle where teams sit back and wait for him to cut onto his left and shoot.
Given the options, I think Nathan Redmond and Jordan Ibe should at least be considered. I think it makes more sense to take a natural winger than it does to take another center forward. Both can play on the right and offer some natural width, as well as pace in the last 20 minutes of matches.
The other question is if Jags is injured, who goes in his place? That might be one where Roy takes Delph instead of a natural replacement knowing Dier can slot in there, because really, what other center backs are there (no one say Shawcross, he's clearly nowhere near the level required).
Who I think Roy will pick:
GK (3): Hart, Foster, Heaton
Def (6): Clyne, Stones, Cahill, Smalling, Rose, Shaw
Mid (8): Drinkwater, Dier, Alli, Barkley, Milner, Henderson, Wilshere, Lallana
Fwd (5): Rooney, Vardy, Kane, Sturridge, Sterling
That's 22, my plus one is Jagielka if fit, and if not, 50/50 between Townsend and Delph.
If Jagielka and somehow, miraculously, Wellbeck were fit, I wonder who else would drop out. Possibly Drinkwater.
Might as well just spin a bottle for 6 countries you might have thought would have qualified to have to sit it out for the next one....
Euro 2008 was probably the best tournament of my lifetime, some great football, upsets, mental finishes, players coming from out of nowhere (Arshavin), and a genuinely class team. At the time, announcing they were gonna change it seemed crazy, but if the cavalier attitude from qualifying caries over then it should be good fun.
There are much better options to take than Rashford. Carroll, Defoe, and Walcott to name a few.
Yes people will say Walcott hasn't played very well or whatever else, but he's had his problems and has done well for England in the past. He has experience and will add so much more to the dynamic of the team than Rashford could.
Same applies for Carroll, something different off the bench and a threat in the air, can come on and hold the ball up, bring others into play the way our current strikers can't. And then there is Defoe, a natural goal scorer proving how crucial he is even now with Sunderland's survival.
Although, I don't think I would take any, with none really playing a part in the qualifiers. But unless one of Wilshere or Henderson drops out and you stick one of them above to give the team something different.
The squad I really hope Roy takes is:
Hart, Forster, Heaton
Clyne, Walker, Stones, Cahill, Smalling, Rose, Bertrand
Dier, Drinkwater, Milner, Barkley, Alli, Lallana, Wilshere, Henderson, Sterling
Kane, Vardy, Rooney, Sturridge
Reserve list of:
Foster, Jagielka, Cresswell, Walcott, Townsend, Carroll, Defoe
Team to play Russia:
Hart
Clyne Smalling Cahill Rose
Dier Drinkwater
Lallana Alli Sterling
Kane
Although it won't be, Rooney will unfortunately start.
Can't edit my original post now for some reason so can't take out Welbeck but this is what I think the squad will be on Monday.
GK: Hart, Forster, Heaton
DEF: Clyne, Walker, Stones, Cahill, Smalling, Rose, Bertrand
MID: Dier, Townsend, Milner, Barkley, Alli, Lallana, Wilshere, Henderson, Sterling
ATT Kane, Vardy, Rooney, Sturridge
Just got a feeling Townsend will go, may well be wrong.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/may/13/england-marcus-rashford-euro-2016
I'm still not convinced that Rashford isn't anything more than a Frazier Campbell. He looks decent, but I feel like a lot of that is down to pace, and admittedly he's a decent finisher. You need only look at Defoe to know that's not enough in the modern game to play at the top level.
For those of you with Walker and Clyne in your squads, can I ask why? You have Stones and Dier who can also play at RB, why would you bring two designated RBs?
Otherwise the main 21/22 of the squad picks itself in my opinion.
Stones is young and has shown this season with his up and down form that he is prone to a mistake with his inexperience, sometimes "over-playing" but that will of course come with learning and age. He is also a much better centre half than right back, don't go ruin his career by sticking him at right back to get targeted by one of the top nations, for him to make a mistake and the media slate him for it. We have seen it so many times.
Dier has done a brilliant job in his role of defensive midfield this season for Spurs, with only taking Stones, Smalling and Cahill, he can drop back to centre half if needed, acting like the 4th centre half instead of bringing Jagielka. He hasn't played right back for a long time, not this season for Spurs I don't think when they have Walker and Trippier. Although not slow, his lack of pace could be at his disadvantage when coming up against someone quick like Martial for example.
It would be important to take both Clyne and Walker as forward thinking full backs are so important in the modern game, more so for England with the lack of natural wingers available and likely to go to the Euro's. If one was to get injured, it would be good to have a like for like to come in and not disrupt the dynamics of the team.
For these reasons, this is why I believe Roy will take both Clyne and Walker.
I'd disagree on Stones, I think RB might be a nice change for him. He played there a lot when he was younger, and I don't think it's much of a stretch for him. Plus, that ball playing ability would be afforded a bit more leniency at RB. It's not as natural for Dier, as he played mostly through the middle for Sporting, but even Smalling has played there (and played well on a couple occasions I've seen). For a tournament that will probably last 3-6 matches, I think you need to be able to make do. One of the nice things about this England team is that they're young, there are a lot of technical players, and various players who can play in more than one position (which is often an offshoot of being a good technical player).
Going back to the ABJ (Anyone But Jags) argument, I'd be more tempted to use that spot for a chance on a young player or impact player. Looking at the team picked for the Toulan Tournament (U21 side), there isn't really one who screams out to be picked. There are two of three who are somewhat far along in their development, and maybe worth a punt with an eye to the future--Ward-Prowse, Redmond, Ibe, and Loftus-Cheek. W-P has had a very solid season, and L-C is probably the one with the biggest potential, but England already have enough/too many central midfielders. As for Ibe and Redmond, both are raw and given Townsend has done it for England (and is only 24), not sure either are worth getting in ahead of him. Were he fit, Joe Gomez would be an excellent option.
By sort of process of elimination, I'd probably take Townsend, because he can have an impact, he's a natural left footer who plays on the right, and he's done alright for England, especially in games where he comes on as a sub when the game is stretched. I'd NEVER start him, but for the "23rd man," or 20th outfield player, I think you could do a lot worse.
Probably already done this but:
GK (3): Hart, Forster, Heaton
DEF (6): Clyne, Stones, Cahill, Smalling, Bertrand, Rose*
*(If Shaw is anywhere near fit I'd take a chance on him and bring Rose as well. Taking a chance on your reserve left back is a good place to take a chance)
Mid (8): Dier, Drinkwater, Henderson, Wilshere, Barkley, Alli, Lallana, Milner
For (6): Sterling, Townsend, Rooney, Kane, Sturridge, Vardy