I thought the only way it works in tennis is that you have to win by two points. I don't see how this makes much difference.
It's said that the team taking the first penalty has an advantage, because it puts more pressure on the second team (as they are usually trailing). This way neither side is behind more than the other side (theory).
"Why England Lose" goes into this in detail, I want to say it's like 60/40 advantage for the team who goes first.
The 2 Man city kids, Sancho and Foden look like big talents. The question is obviously whether they'll ever actually get a chance at City.
In fact, if they can excel at club level and clearly also on a european level, yet don't get a first team chance at City then you'd have to question why City even bother with a youth team.
Then again Chelsea have won the FA youth cup 4 years running, yet who has made it to the first team?
We seem to be pretty successful at youth level which questions the coaching debate we continually have. The problem is the transition from youth to senior. If the big clubs swallow up all the talent then they spend their development years in the u21 league that's not competitive enough. Add in the poor managers we've had at senior level and it goes a small way explaining why we are shite in major tournaments.
That youth level success is relatively recent though. I think England have won this tournament a couple times in the last maybe decade.
To your larger point, I certainly agree. It seems that there is nowhere near enough focus on coaching and developing players from the ages of 18-21. The U23 league isn't great, and loaning players out can work, but it means that the coaching and amount of playing time players get is not in the hands of their parent club (by-and-large). I don't have any great answers to the problem.
The 2 Man city kids, Sancho and Foden look like big talents. The question is obviously whether they'll ever actually get a chance at City
I want to say Foden has already made the bench a couple times, and is highly rated. City seem to increasingly be taking the Chelsea approach of loaning players out to Holland or Spain. They haven't brought a first team regular through since...Kasper Schmiechel maybe (not counting Iheanacho who joined at like 16). He wasn't a regular for them though. To be fair, he, and Ben Mee and Kieren Trippier have had good careers away from City but they seem to be in that Chelsea territory of having the quality of the first team improving and the quality of the youth academy products takes a while to catch up (if at all).
you can see a real difference in play compared to the younger ones in the U17s yesterday. better movement, defensive tracking/positioning and strength. shows what a couple of years development can achieve. problem we have is then the next step of development. other countries seem to catch up and then pass us.
This was our first WIN in the competition since 1997... We've been been in the U20 World Cup FIVE times since then as well, dont count our chickens just yet
I didn't watch it, but seems convincing. Just checked stats : Argentina 1st/ England 2nd 59% Ball Possession 41% 22 Goal Attempts 7 5 Shots on Goal 3 14 Shots off Goal 3 3 Blocked Shots 1 12 Free Kicks 10 9 Corner Kicks 2 1 Offsides 1 31 Throw-in 18 0 Goalkeeper Saves 5 9 Fouls 11 1 Red Cards 0 2 Yellow Cards 0
Seems a bit against the run of play, not going to complain but doesnt seem like a 3-0nil win
I watched first 5 mins of game and the Argies looked way above our lot passing it around for fun and I thought we'd get hammered !! Did anyone see the whole game ?
I didn't watch it, but seems convincing. Just checked stats : Argentina 1st/ England 2nd 59% Ball Possession 41% 22 Goal Attempts 7 5 Shots on Goal 3 14 Shots off Goal 3 3 Blocked Shots 1 12 Free Kicks 10 9 Corner Kicks 2 1 Offsides 1 31 Throw-in 18 0 Goalkeeper Saves 5 9 Fouls 11 1 Red Cards 0 2 Yellow Cards 0
Seems a bit against the run of play, not going to complain but doesnt seem like a 3-0nil win
I watched first 5 mins of game and the Argies looked way above our lot passing it around for fun and I thought we'd get hammered !! Did anyone see the whole game ?
I watched the majority of it, for most of the game argentina were the better team, they played some lovely football but their finishing was poor. We scored two well worked goals and the argies couldnt reply. Then they got a red card for a nasty elbow and a late penalty gave the scoreline a generous look.
I got original information from FA site, typical FA, does not know what is happenning
I started writing something on Saturday, just realized I forgot to post it. Woops.
Konsa was listed as in the matchday squad on our coverage, but on the couple cutaways to the bench I didn't see him. To be fair, in a tournament they usually just list every player in the squad as being "on the bench," and I don't know that there is the level of specificity that would say "not yet arrived" or "unavailable." I would be quite surprised if he was there and ready to play given the lengthy flight presumably from Toulon, plus the time difference. Given when he was announced as being called up, he would have had to leave basically straight away.
I watched the whole match. First 30 minutes Argentina looked far superior, and it felt like England have again gone to a tournament, played with two flat banks of four, can't get the ball, can't keep the ball, and are going to pay for that yet again. Argentina had a handful of chances, a couple really good ones. England did alright to soak up the pressure and contain them to shots from 20+ yards, where Argentina didn't look particularly dangerous. But it still felt all too familiar.
That said, the goal came completely against the run of play, but it was two moments of quality, one for the cross, one for the goal and completely changed things. England continued to sit deep but they started getting better pressure on the ball in the final third and Argentina really started to look like they lacked quality in that area.
Second half was more even, and England had the better of the chances. Argentina continued to have a lot of the ball even after going down to ten men, but they seemed to lack ideas in the final third.
Glad they're trying video replay. My concern with it is 1) amount of time it takes, and 2) that things in slow motion can look far worse than they do in real time. Martinez's elbow was definitely up and flailing, but I thought it looked far worse and more intentional in slow motion than it did in real time.
This is a very good England side, and this win should see them through the knockout stages. There are a lot of lads who won the U-17 European Championships in 2014 who are in this squad. One notable absence is Joe Gomez. I personally would have taken him, he surely has the ability to be in this squad, but I suspect his lack of matches over the past 18 months did him in.
Stand-outs good: Calvert-Lewin, Dowell, Clarke-Salter (reads the game well), Kenny, Solanke (he's incredibly gifted, didn't have many chances to show it but had some lovely touches and that penalty, woof)
Stand-outs not so good: Onomah, Cook--to be fair, both are more attack minded and were asked to play centrally in a midfield four, something I doubt they've done much of. That said, Cook was a bit all over the place, but Onomah, who played a few times for Spurs this year and is highly rated, was absolutely dreadful. Can barely remember him completing a pass.
Four changes. Happy to see Lookman start. Guinea are the minnows of the group. With games three days apart now is a good time to rotate. Being able to bring in Lookman, Ojo, and Maitland-Niles shows the quality in depth of this team. I'd have liked to have seen Konsa get his first start for England at any level, but if all goes according to plan (watch England lose 2-0 now), hoping he'll be brought on to get some valuable experience (to be fair he still may be very jet lagged from a lot of travel). Still think with his ability to break up play he has a role to play in that central midfield that England lack otherwise.
Comments
In fact, if they can excel at club level and clearly also on a european level, yet don't get a first team chance at City then you'd have to question why City even bother with a youth team.
Then again Chelsea have won the FA youth cup 4 years running, yet who has made it to the first team?
To your larger point, I certainly agree. It seems that there is nowhere near enough focus on coaching and developing players from the ages of 18-21. The U23 league isn't great, and loaning players out can work, but it means that the coaching and amount of playing time players get is not in the hands of their parent club (by-and-large). I don't have any great answers to the problem.
3 points and a clean sheet.
Stuff those argies
59% Ball Possession 41%
22 Goal Attempts 7
5 Shots on Goal 3
14 Shots off Goal 3
3 Blocked Shots 1
12 Free Kicks 10
9 Corner Kicks 2
1 Offsides 1
31 Throw-in 18
0 Goalkeeper Saves 5
9 Fouls 11
1 Red Cards 0
2 Yellow Cards 0
Seems a bit against the run of play, not going to complain but doesnt seem like a 3-0nil win
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/England_national_under-20_football_team#FIFA_U-20_World_Cup
Did anyone see the whole game ?
Team A | Team B | Team B | Team A | Team A etc...
Konsa was listed as in the matchday squad on our coverage, but on the couple cutaways to the bench I didn't see him. To be fair, in a tournament they usually just list every player in the squad as being "on the bench," and I don't know that there is the level of specificity that would say "not yet arrived" or "unavailable." I would be quite surprised if he was there and ready to play given the lengthy flight presumably from Toulon, plus the time difference. Given when he was announced as being called up, he would have had to leave basically straight away.
I watched the whole match. First 30 minutes Argentina looked far superior, and it felt like England have again gone to a tournament, played with two flat banks of four, can't get the ball, can't keep the ball, and are going to pay for that yet again. Argentina had a handful of chances, a couple really good ones. England did alright to soak up the pressure and contain them to shots from 20+ yards, where Argentina didn't look particularly dangerous. But it still felt all too familiar.
That said, the goal came completely against the run of play, but it was two moments of quality, one for the cross, one for the goal and completely changed things. England continued to sit deep but they started getting better pressure on the ball in the final third and Argentina really started to look like they lacked quality in that area.
Second half was more even, and England had the better of the chances. Argentina continued to have a lot of the ball even after going down to ten men, but they seemed to lack ideas in the final third.
Glad they're trying video replay. My concern with it is 1) amount of time it takes, and 2) that things in slow motion can look far worse than they do in real time. Martinez's elbow was definitely up and flailing, but I thought it looked far worse and more intentional in slow motion than it did in real time.
This is a very good England side, and this win should see them through the knockout stages. There are a lot of lads who won the U-17 European Championships in 2014 who are in this squad. One notable absence is Joe Gomez. I personally would have taken him, he surely has the ability to be in this squad, but I suspect his lack of matches over the past 18 months did him in.
Stand-outs good: Calvert-Lewin, Dowell, Clarke-Salter (reads the game well), Kenny, Solanke (he's incredibly gifted, didn't have many chances to show it but had some lovely touches and that penalty, woof)
Stand-outs not so good: Onomah, Cook--to be fair, both are more attack minded and were asked to play centrally in a midfield four, something I doubt they've done much of. That said, Cook was a bit all over the place, but Onomah, who played a few times for Spurs this year and is highly rated, was absolutely dreadful. Can barely remember him completing a pass.