Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
England Squad (v Republic of Ireland/Belgium/Iceland from p29)
Comments
-
In principle the idea of playing 3 CBs because no 2 are good enough makes sense.
But all it actually does is highlight the problem, especially when (with the exception of Coady) they usually all play in a 2 at club level.
Most international teams play with 3 in the middle, there is good reason for that.
This 343 is fine against a certain level of opposition when we can afford just the 1 holding midfielder.
When we are up against a stronger nation and need to play 2 defensive midfielders along side the 3 centre backs and 2 full/wing back we are basically playing with 8 players in our own half for the majority of the match, leaving the front 3 isolated.
Whichever 3 we play up front will be more than a match for every single national team.
We should be building the team around our strengths, not forcing players in to patch our weaknesses.4 -
Disappointing result off the back of a slightly deflected goal and a terrible free kick decision. I think the way we're set up if we concede that early it's always going to be a struggle, and against a team with the quality of Belgium even more so. We played well though, probably better than we did last time when we played them and beat them, so there's still encouraging signs against the world number one team. We certainly weren't outclassed. We're in a bit of a muddle at the back though. We're overloaded with quality right backs but are struggling to find even one really good quality centre half and you can feel how vulnerable we look as a result. Not really much we can do about that except hope that someone at least hits decent form ahead of the real tournament like Maguire did in the World Cup. I'm not convinced by Rice and I would like to see us stick someone a bit more creative in the midfield in his place, preferably Mount who is better in central midfield and offers workrate alongside creativity.One thing I do find quite funny is people looking at the talent we have available and saying 'sod it, let's just throw them all in, with the quality we have they're too good not to play', which is the exact opposite of what people say when looking back on the old days of us trying to force Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard into a midfield where they didn't fit. There's got to be balance; you can't just throw in an attacking line-up of players with zero workrate because in the modern game you'll get picked apart. I'm not convinced that Southgate has got it fully figured out either, but there's time to try and find a balance where we make the most of our attacking talent while protecting our sub-par back line.4
-
<Insert generic comment about Southgate not being good enough>1
-
Garrymanilow said:One thing I do find quite funny is people looking at the talent we have available and saying 'sod it, let's just throw them all in, with the quality we have they're too good not to play', which is the exact opposite of what people say when looking back on the old days of us trying to force Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard into a midfield where they didn't fit. There's got to be balance; you can't just throw in an attacking line-up of players with zero workrate because in the modern game you'll get picked apart. I'm not convinced that Southgate has got it fully figured out either, but there's time to try and find a balance where we make the most of our attacking talent while protecting our sub-par back line.
That is true, but at the moment it appears it is he's just trying to fit players into his system, which isn't really working either rather than having to bench talent to get into a working system.
At moment it feels like we are going to be awful at the back regardless, so might as well embrace it and try and reduce some pressure off them by scoring ourselves rather than clogging up with bad defenders.
0 -
No one is saying throw them all in. But if you went with a midfield/attack of:Garrymanilow said:Disappointing result off the back of a slightly deflected goal and a terrible free kick decision. I think the way we're set up if we concede that early it's always going to be a struggle, and against a team with the quality of Belgium even more so. We played well though, probably better than we did last time when we played them and beat them, so there's still encouraging signs against the world number one team. We certainly weren't outclassed. We're in a bit of a muddle at the back though. We're overloaded with quality right backs but are struggling to find even one really good quality centre half and you can feel how vulnerable we look as a result. Not really much we can do about that except hope that someone at least hits decent form ahead of the real tournament like Maguire did in the World Cup. I'm not convinced by Rice and I would like to see us stick someone a bit more creative in the midfield in his place, preferably Mount who is better in central midfield and offers workrate alongside creativity.One thing I do find quite funny is people looking at the talent we have available and saying 'sod it, let's just throw them all in, with the quality we have they're too good not to play', which is the exact opposite of what people say when looking back on the old days of us trying to force Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard into a midfield where they didn't fit. There's got to be balance; you can't just throw in an attacking line-up of players with zero workrate because in the modern game you'll get picked apart. I'm not convinced that Southgate has got it fully figured out either, but there's time to try and find a balance where we make the most of our attacking talent while protecting our sub-par back line.
Henderson (Rice/Phillips)
Foden (Phillips/Ward-Prowse)
Grealish (Mount/Barkley)
Sterling (Sancho/Greenwood) Rashford (Barnes/Hudson-Odoi)
Kane (Calvert-Lewin/Abraham)
First team with subs in brackets.
We have enough options and many are inter-changeable. Grealish can go wide. Sancho can play either wing, Sterling can go left or up front, Rashford could go up front etc. There's a lot of options.
On top of that we have a number of good right backs and Chilwell is guaranteed to start at LB if fit. Just need to find 2 decent centre backs and we're in a good place.1 -
Except I think that line-up would qualify as throwing them all in. That's Henderson, Foden, Grealish, Sterling, Rashford Kane. If you think you're worried about our defence now, just wait until they're all on together. You have one midfielder there who will run and defend, and that's Henderson. Foden is a creative attacking midfielder who drives into the box, and Grealish, Sterling and Rashford aren't going to provide the tracking you need to stop the midfield being overrun. All you have to do to beat that team is overload the middle; Henderson can't carry it all, Foden and Grealish aren't going to provide anything like enough support to stop him getting overrun and then you get a free run at our subpar centre halves. Add to that the fact you would completely blunt the attacking quality of the fullbacks by requiring them to constantly be on the back foot and you're reliant entirely on hoping your excellent attackers score more than the opposition do. You're Peterborough. I'm not saying it definitely wouldn't work, and I'm sure it would murder weaker opposition, but it's a line-up asking for trouble against stronger teams. I can see why Southgate is trying to develop a system where we protect our weaknesses but there's elements to improve on within it. We do need to start seeing our wingbacks as attacking players as well.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
No one is saying throw them all in. But if you went with a midfield/attack of:Garrymanilow said:Disappointing result off the back of a slightly deflected goal and a terrible free kick decision. I think the way we're set up if we concede that early it's always going to be a struggle, and against a team with the quality of Belgium even more so. We played well though, probably better than we did last time when we played them and beat them, so there's still encouraging signs against the world number one team. We certainly weren't outclassed. We're in a bit of a muddle at the back though. We're overloaded with quality right backs but are struggling to find even one really good quality centre half and you can feel how vulnerable we look as a result. Not really much we can do about that except hope that someone at least hits decent form ahead of the real tournament like Maguire did in the World Cup. I'm not convinced by Rice and I would like to see us stick someone a bit more creative in the midfield in his place, preferably Mount who is better in central midfield and offers workrate alongside creativity.One thing I do find quite funny is people looking at the talent we have available and saying 'sod it, let's just throw them all in, with the quality we have they're too good not to play', which is the exact opposite of what people say when looking back on the old days of us trying to force Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard into a midfield where they didn't fit. There's got to be balance; you can't just throw in an attacking line-up of players with zero workrate because in the modern game you'll get picked apart. I'm not convinced that Southgate has got it fully figured out either, but there's time to try and find a balance where we make the most of our attacking talent while protecting our sub-par back line.
Henderson (Rice/Phillips)
Foden (Phillips/Ward-Prowse)
Grealish (Mount/Barkley)
Sterling (Sancho/Greenwood) Rashford (Barnes/Hudson-Odoi)
Kane (Calvert-Lewin/Abraham)
First team with subs in brackets.
We have enough options and many are inter-changeable. Grealish can go wide. Sancho can play either wing, Sterling can go left or up front, Rashford could go up front etc. There's a lot of options.
On top of that we have a number of good right backs and Chilwell is guaranteed to start at LB if fit. Just need to find 2 decent centre backs and we're in a good place.
1 -
Foden is a ball player. Winks could play in there. Phillips too. JUST NOT RICE OR DIER WHO CANNOT PLAY FOOTBALL, AREN'T QUICK ENOUGH AND SHOULD BE NOWHERE NEAR THE BLOODY TEAM!Garrymanilow said:
Except I think that line-up would qualify as throwing them all in. That's Henderson, Foden, Grealish, Sterling, Rashford Kane. If you think you're worried about our defence now, just wait until they're all on together. You have one midfielder there who will run and defend, and that's Henderson. Foden is a creative attacking midfielder who drives into the box, and Grealish, Sterling and Rashford aren't going to provide the tracking you need to stop the midfield being overrun. All you have to do to beat that team is overload the middle; Henderson can't carry it all, Foden and Grealish aren't going to provide anything like enough support to stop him getting overrun and then you get a free run at our subpar centre halves. Add to that the fact you would completely blunt the attacking quality of the fullbacks by requiring them to constantly be on the back foot and you're reliant entirely on hoping your excellent attackers score more than the opposition do. You're Peterborough. I'm not saying it definitely wouldn't work, and I'm sure it would murder weaker opposition, but it's a line-up asking for trouble against stronger teams. I can see why Southgate is trying to develop a system where we protect our weaknesses but there's elements to improve on within it. We do need to start seeing our wingbacks as attacking players as well.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
No one is saying throw them all in. But if you went with a midfield/attack of:Garrymanilow said:Disappointing result off the back of a slightly deflected goal and a terrible free kick decision. I think the way we're set up if we concede that early it's always going to be a struggle, and against a team with the quality of Belgium even more so. We played well though, probably better than we did last time when we played them and beat them, so there's still encouraging signs against the world number one team. We certainly weren't outclassed. We're in a bit of a muddle at the back though. We're overloaded with quality right backs but are struggling to find even one really good quality centre half and you can feel how vulnerable we look as a result. Not really much we can do about that except hope that someone at least hits decent form ahead of the real tournament like Maguire did in the World Cup. I'm not convinced by Rice and I would like to see us stick someone a bit more creative in the midfield in his place, preferably Mount who is better in central midfield and offers workrate alongside creativity.One thing I do find quite funny is people looking at the talent we have available and saying 'sod it, let's just throw them all in, with the quality we have they're too good not to play', which is the exact opposite of what people say when looking back on the old days of us trying to force Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard into a midfield where they didn't fit. There's got to be balance; you can't just throw in an attacking line-up of players with zero workrate because in the modern game you'll get picked apart. I'm not convinced that Southgate has got it fully figured out either, but there's time to try and find a balance where we make the most of our attacking talent while protecting our sub-par back line.
Henderson (Rice/Phillips)
Foden (Phillips/Ward-Prowse)
Grealish (Mount/Barkley)
Sterling (Sancho/Greenwood) Rashford (Barnes/Hudson-Odoi)
Kane (Calvert-Lewin/Abraham)
First team with subs in brackets.
We have enough options and many are inter-changeable. Grealish can go wide. Sancho can play either wing, Sterling can go left or up front, Rashford could go up front etc. There's a lot of options.
On top of that we have a number of good right backs and Chilwell is guaranteed to start at LB if fit. Just need to find 2 decent centre backs and we're in a good place.
I think Henderson, Grealish and Foden would be a quality 3
Add to
Kane
Sterling
Rashford/Sancho
It works for Man City, it works for Liverpool, it works for Barcelona and France. We don't have Kante, but nobody else does so embrace it and keep the bloody ball in their half...
Play TAA, Chilwell, Maguire and Coady. oh and Pope. NOT Pickford.
We can't beat the top teams being defensive, so why are not trying something different? We are set up to LOSE as I have said before against these teams, so why not set up to WIN?1 -
It seems rash but I think we’d be better off trying to outscore opponents than playing a formation with 8 defensive minded players.
I’ll cut Southgate some slack in the sense that a 424 or whatever he could play may seem unorthodox, but at the end of the day Klopp used it in Liverpool’s most important fixture.
Its about having that courage to accept we will concede, and trusting we can outscore sides, that Southgate sadly lacks.
As a country we’ve consistently tried to play 4231, 442 etc and match up against the best sides. 352 is a bit different but ultimately doesn’t feel like a winning formation for this side.
I’d rather see us knocked out the Euros at the Quarters playing to win, than trying to limp to a final through 1-0’s and set pieces.2 -
Mount has showed that he can play in the midfield 3 for Chelsea as well as in the attacking 3 in their 433 formation
What has gone wrong with John Stones? He should have been the 1st choice CB for England, but since joining City he's gone backwards, still making the same mistakes he made when younger.1 -
I thought the quality of England's players overall was quite a bit better than Belgium's. Grealish was the best player on the pitch and I am glad that Southgate has been dragged to the point of realising this. At least I hope he has. He surely doesn't dare to drop him. But if you play Henderson, who is top notch, you don't need another defensive midfielder. We didn't test the keeper enough and with the quality we were showing, it just needed a bit of tinkering.3
- Sponsored links:
-
But we don't beat good teams when we are set up defensively - IF we want to win the Euros, we need to attack with more than 3 isolated playersLaddick01 said:It seems rash but I think we’d be better off trying to outscore opponents than playing a formation with 8 defensive minded players.
I’ll cut Southgate some slack in the sense that a 424 or whatever he could play may seem unorthodox, but at the end of the day Klopp used it in Liverpool’s most important fixture.
Its about having that courage to accept we will concede, and trusting we can outscore sides, that Southgate sadly lacks.
As a country we’ve consistently tried to play 4231, 442 etc and match up against the best sides. 352 is a bit different but ultimately doesn’t feel like a winning formation for this side.
I’d rather see us knocked out the Euros at the Quarters playing to win, than trying to limp to a final through 1-0’s and set pieces.0 -
If Southgate is a clever manager, and he may well be. He may want to evolve the team into an attacking system that it catches teams on the hop nearer the Euros. To do that he has to make us believe he is too inflexible and negative. I hope that is the case and he isn't really.2
-
For me I think we need to look at the available players and why they're not clicking on the pitch.
I also question Southgate's player selection, no longer are players getting into the side on form (Grealish aside) they're getting chosen for who they play for... That's a massive mistake IMO.
I have seen enough England managers underperform by selecting big club players whilst there are other quality players available and this is no different. What I have seen from Southgate is a regression, like someone has reined him in a bit.
We played some okay stuff, it was our better looking in-form players that failed though last night and I can't hold that against Southgate. In fact I think the main negative was that substitution.
Small changes will reap big rewards with the quality available. It might also show some of the big club prima donnas that they will only get in the side on merit and form.1 -
Kane nearly scored. Grealish was the best player on the pitch. Who are our other in form players?Dazzler21 said:For me I think we need to look at the available players and why they're not clicking on the pitch.
I also question Southgate's player selection, no longer are players getting into the side on form (Grealish aside) they're getting chosen for who they play for... That's a massive mistake IMO.
I have seen enough England managers underperform by selecting big club players whilst there are other quality players available and this is no different. What I have seen from Southgate is a regression, like someone has reined him in a bit.
We played some okay stuff, it was our better looking in-form players that failed though last night and I can't hold that against Southgate. In fact I think the main negative was that substitution.
Small changes will reap big rewards with the quality available. It might also show some of the big club prima donnas that they will only get in the side on merit and form.
Chilwell looked ok until injured. Our centre halves are woefully out of form. Henderson was solid.
Dier, Rice poor. They've been poor in the PL. Trippier - no idea - not been watching La Ligua, but he's behind a very in form Rhys James and out of form TAA.
Sancho isn't in great form - can't play 2 games due to fitness.
Mount - he's been ok for Chelsea and England but he's round peg in square hole.
Pickford was average - he's been average for a while.
Which players are in form who didn't perform? I'm confused.0 -
Dont think we have the players for 3 at the back right now, a ball playing CB to step into mid and pass and the wingbacks - Stones has pretty much disappeared and Gomez with injuries, TAA form etc.
Dont think we NEED to play 3CB, looking at past England squads for WC and Euros:
2010
Dawson
Terry
Upson
Carragher
King
2012
Terry
Jones
Lescott
Jagielka
2014
Cahill
Jagielka
Smalling
Jones
2016
Cahill
Smalling
Stones
Dier (Midfield covering both)
2018
Stones
Maguire
Cahill
Jones
We were hardly getting slaughtered with this bunch...
Other than the 3CB system I still think Southgate doesnt know what he wants anymore, Solid 1-0 winners all the way to the final? a more flowing team feeding 3/4 attackers? So we're getting two clear halves in the team, defence and attack with little transition between the two.
1 -
England manager in loses plot shocker - that starting line up was abysmal and the only change he made at half time was Henderson for winks - i'm sorry, that is lost the plot material. The whole world knows you can't play 3 up top if none of them have pace. And 2 defensive robots in midfield won't see a lot of chances made. When will we just go out to win a game instead of this anti football defensive rubbish? Utter tripe.
1 -
I looked at Pickford's dive for their second and my initial thought was that was a great dive in terms of athletic ability. But then you think the ball wasn't top corner, it only had to clear the wall so there is a question mark about his positioning and organisational skills.
The first goal he nearly got to it and had he done so after that deflection, it would have been save of the season. Maybe save of quite a few seasons. But he seems to be missing something. Call it a goal keeping instinct. He has the ability, he just needs to develop the brains.0 -
https://www.skysports.com/football/england-vs-belgium/423949supaclive said:
But we don't beat good teams when we are set up defensively - IF we want to win the Euros, we need to attack with more than 3 isolated playersLaddick01 said:It seems rash but I think we’d be better off trying to outscore opponents than playing a formation with 8 defensive minded players.
I’ll cut Southgate some slack in the sense that a 424 or whatever he could play may seem unorthodox, but at the end of the day Klopp used it in Liverpool’s most important fixture.
Its about having that courage to accept we will concede, and trusting we can outscore sides, that Southgate sadly lacks.
As a country we’ve consistently tried to play 4231, 442 etc and match up against the best sides. 352 is a bit different but ultimately doesn’t feel like a winning formation for this side.
I’d rather see us knocked out the Euros at the Quarters playing to win, than trying to limp to a final through 1-0’s and set pieces.
0 -
Consistently....Garrymanilow said:
https://www.skysports.com/football/england-vs-belgium/423949supaclive said:
But we don't beat good teams when we are set up defensively - IF we want to win the Euros, we need to attack with more than 3 isolated playersLaddick01 said:It seems rash but I think we’d be better off trying to outscore opponents than playing a formation with 8 defensive minded players.
I’ll cut Southgate some slack in the sense that a 424 or whatever he could play may seem unorthodox, but at the end of the day Klopp used it in Liverpool’s most important fixture.
Its about having that courage to accept we will concede, and trusting we can outscore sides, that Southgate sadly lacks.
As a country we’ve consistently tried to play 4231, 442 etc and match up against the best sides. 352 is a bit different but ultimately doesn’t feel like a winning formation for this side.
I’d rather see us knocked out the Euros at the Quarters playing to win, than trying to limp to a final through 1-0’s and set pieces.1 -
Shocker world no.4 team doesn't consistently beat other top 10 sides...
Just a reminder of the world rankings...Rank Change Team Points 1 
Belgium1765 2 
France1752 3 
Brazil1725 4 
England1669 5 
Portugal1661 6 
1
Spain1639 7 
1
Uruguay1637 8 1
Argentina1636 9 1
Croatia1634 10 
Colombia1631 11 
Mexico1625 12 
Italy1612 13 3
Denmark1610 14 
Germany1607 15 2
Netherlands1596 16 1
Switzerland1589 17 
Chile1570 18 1
Poland1568 19 1
Sweden1558 20 1
Wales1550 1 - Sponsored links:
-
BUTkillerandflash said:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54932312Republic of Ireland midfielder Alan Browne has tested positive for coronavirus having played against England on Thursday.Preston's Browne, 25, played the full 90 minutes of his side's 3-0 defeat at Wembley Stadium.The Football Association of Ireland said he had "no close contacts" and all other players and staff have tested negative.
Now McClean and Doherty have tested positive after Ireland's game against Wales yesterday. Did they really catch it independently of Brown having it on Thursday?0 -
My son said exactly the same about the second goalMuttleyCAFC said:I looked at Pickford's dive for their second and my initial thought was that was a great dive in terms of athletic ability. But then you think the ball wasn't top corner, it only had to clear the wall so there is a question mark about his positioning and organisational skills.
The first goal he nearly got to it and had he done so after that deflection, it would have been save of the season. Maybe save of quite a few seasons. But he seems to be missing something. Call it a goal keeping instinct. He has the ability, he just needs to develop the brains.0 -
In Grealish, we actually have a player/midfielder who enjoys being in possession of the ball. Always positive, looking to pass forward or beat players. Nightmare for defenders in the penalty area because he’s got such good feet.
He’s been the positive for me.2 -
We've not played Uruguay | Argentina | Portugal yet apart from France we've got a result against the other six since the World CupDazzler21 said:Shocker world no.4 team doesn't consistently beat other top 10 sides...
Just a reminder of the world rankings...Rank Change Team Points 1 Belgium1765 2 France1752 3 Brazil1725 4 England1669 5 Portugal1661 6 1 Spain1639 7 1 Uruguay1637 8 1 Argentina1636 9 1 Croatia1634 10 Colombia1631 11 Mexico1625 12 Italy1612 13 3 Denmark1610 14 Germany1607 15 2 Netherlands1596 16 1 Switzerland1589 17 Chile1570 18 1 Poland1568 19 1 Sweden1558 20 1 Wales1550
Beat Belgium | Spain | Croatia | Colombia of late and got a draw against Brazil
Belgium (x3) | France | Spain | Croatia are the only top ten teams to have beaten us3 -
Why are they testing after the games & not before?killerandflash said:
BUTkillerandflash said:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54932312Republic of Ireland midfielder Alan Browne has tested positive for coronavirus having played against England on Thursday.Preston's Browne, 25, played the full 90 minutes of his side's 3-0 defeat at Wembley Stadium.The Football Association of Ireland said he had "no close contacts" and all other players and staff have tested negative.
Now McClean and Doherty have tested positive after Ireland's game against Wales yesterday. Did they really catch it independently of Brown having it on Thursday?0 -
4 wins, 1 draw and 6 defeats against teams in the top 10. Not hardly stellar is it and won't win us a major tournament. So why not try a more attacking and balanced team than 7 at the back and three forwards stuck on their own with wing backs crossing the ball being our only route of attack.ForeverAddickted said:
We've not played Uruguay | Argentina | Portugal yet apart from France we've got a result against the other six since the World CupDazzler21 said:Shocker world no.4 team doesn't consistently beat other top 10 sides...
Just a reminder of the world rankings...Rank Change Team Points 1 Belgium1765 2 France1752 3 Brazil1725 4 England1669 5 Portugal1661 6 1 Spain1639 7 1 Uruguay1637 8 1 Argentina1636 9 1 Croatia1634 10 Colombia1631 11 Mexico1625 12 Italy1612 13 3 Denmark1610 14 Germany1607 15 2 Netherlands1596 16 1 Switzerland1589 17 Chile1570 18 1 Poland1568 19 1 Sweden1558 20 1 Wales1550
Beat Belgium | Spain | Croatia | Colombia of late and got a draw against Brazil
Belgium (x3) | France | Spain | Croatia are the only top ten teams to have beaten us
What is wrong in some "competitive," games before the Euros trying a more attacking formation. If we lose 7-2 Southgate can say I tried it and it didn't work???!
SURELY you try it?
I mean Grealish. Surely you try him. Oh... eventually!
0 -
But how many big teams will we need to face at a Major Tournament?supaclive said:
4 wins, 1 draw and 6 defeats against teams in the top 10. Not hardly stellar is it and won't win us a major tournament. So why not try a more attacking and balanced team than 7 at the back and three forwards stuck on their own with wing backs crossing the ball being our only route of attack.ForeverAddickted said:
We've not played Uruguay | Argentina | Portugal yet apart from France we've got a result against the other six since the World CupDazzler21 said:Shocker world no.4 team doesn't consistently beat other top 10 sides...
Just a reminder of the world rankings...Rank Change Team Points 1 Belgium1765 2 France1752 3 Brazil1725 4 England1669 5 Portugal1661 6 1 Spain1639 7 1 Uruguay1637 8 1 Argentina1636 9 1 Croatia1634 10 Colombia1631 11 Mexico1625 12 Italy1612 13 3 Denmark1610 14 Germany1607 15 2 Netherlands1596 16 1 Switzerland1589 17 Chile1570 18 1 Poland1568 19 1 Sweden1558 20 1 Wales1550
Beat Belgium | Spain | Croatia | Colombia of late and got a draw against Brazil
Belgium (x3) | France | Spain | Croatia are the only top ten teams to have beaten us
What is wrong in some "competitive," games before the Euros trying a more attacking formation. If we lose 7-2 Southgate can say I tried it and it didn't work???!
SURELY you try it?
I mean Grealish. Surely you try him. Oh... eventually!
Euro 2021:
Group Stages: Scotland | Croatia | Czech Republic
Second Round: Win Group D and we'll face one of France | Germany | Portugal, come second in Group D and we'll likely play Spain
Then we're likely to face a big team in the Quarters | Semi-Finals | Final
So to win the Euros we only really need to beat four big teams
Or we can take the risk and do a Portugal and draw every game and rely on penalty shootouts, maybe not that big a risk seeing we've won every shootout under Southgate0 -
In the current formation and set up we lose in the Second Round either way.ForeverAddickted said:
But how many big teams will we need to face at a Major Tournament?supaclive said:
4 wins, 1 draw and 6 defeats against teams in the top 10. Not hardly stellar is it and won't win us a major tournament. So why not try a more attacking and balanced team than 7 at the back and three forwards stuck on their own with wing backs crossing the ball being our only route of attack.ForeverAddickted said:
We've not played Uruguay | Argentina | Portugal yet apart from France we've got a result against the other six since the World CupDazzler21 said:Shocker world no.4 team doesn't consistently beat other top 10 sides...
Just a reminder of the world rankings...Rank Change Team Points 1 Belgium1765 2 France1752 3 Brazil1725 4 England1669 5 Portugal1661 6 1 Spain1639 7 1 Uruguay1637 8 1 Argentina1636 9 1 Croatia1634 10 Colombia1631 11 Mexico1625 12 Italy1612 13 3 Denmark1610 14 Germany1607 15 2 Netherlands1596 16 1 Switzerland1589 17 Chile1570 18 1 Poland1568 19 1 Sweden1558 20 1 Wales1550
Beat Belgium | Spain | Croatia | Colombia of late and got a draw against Brazil
Belgium (x3) | France | Spain | Croatia are the only top ten teams to have beaten us
What is wrong in some "competitive," games before the Euros trying a more attacking formation. If we lose 7-2 Southgate can say I tried it and it didn't work???!
SURELY you try it?
I mean Grealish. Surely you try him. Oh... eventually!
Euro 2021:
Group Stages: Scotland | Croatia | Czech Republic
Second Round: Win Group D and we'll face one of France | Germany | Portugal, come second in Group D and we'll likely play Spain
Then we're likely to face a big team in the Quarters | Semi-Finals | Final
So to win the Euros we only really need to beat four big teams
Or we can take the risk and do a Portugal and draw every game and rely on penalty shootouts, maybe not that big a risk seeing we've won every shootout under Southgate
0 -
Possibly but then England can be very much like supporting Charlton at timessupaclive said:
In the current formation and set up we lose in the Second Round either way.ForeverAddickted said:
But how many big teams will we need to face at a Major Tournament?supaclive said:
4 wins, 1 draw and 6 defeats against teams in the top 10. Not hardly stellar is it and won't win us a major tournament. So why not try a more attacking and balanced team than 7 at the back and three forwards stuck on their own with wing backs crossing the ball being our only route of attack.ForeverAddickted said:
We've not played Uruguay | Argentina | Portugal yet apart from France we've got a result against the other six since the World CupDazzler21 said:Shocker world no.4 team doesn't consistently beat other top 10 sides...
Just a reminder of the world rankings...Rank Change Team Points 1 Belgium1765 2 France1752 3 Brazil1725 4 England1669 5 Portugal1661 6 1 Spain1639 7 1 Uruguay1637 8 1 Argentina1636 9 1 Croatia1634 10 Colombia1631 11 Mexico1625 12 Italy1612 13 3 Denmark1610 14 Germany1607 15 2 Netherlands1596 16 1 Switzerland1589 17 Chile1570 18 1 Poland1568 19 1 Sweden1558 20 1 Wales1550
Beat Belgium | Spain | Croatia | Colombia of late and got a draw against Brazil
Belgium (x3) | France | Spain | Croatia are the only top ten teams to have beaten us
What is wrong in some "competitive," games before the Euros trying a more attacking formation. If we lose 7-2 Southgate can say I tried it and it didn't work???!
SURELY you try it?
I mean Grealish. Surely you try him. Oh... eventually!
Euro 2021:
Group Stages: Scotland | Croatia | Czech Republic
Second Round: Win Group D and we'll face one of France | Germany | Portugal, come second in Group D and we'll likely play Spain
Then we're likely to face a big team in the Quarters | Semi-Finals | Final
So to win the Euros we only really need to beat four big teams
Or we can take the risk and do a Portugal and draw every game and rely on penalty shootouts, maybe not that big a risk seeing we've won every shootout under Southgate
The games you expect us to win, we struggle... the games you expect us to lose we can often do quite well in0 -
Would certainly rather finish second and play Spain. They're obviously still a good side but nowhere near as good as they were.supaclive said:
In the current formation and set up we lose in the Second Round either way.ForeverAddickted said:
But how many big teams will we need to face at a Major Tournament?supaclive said:
4 wins, 1 draw and 6 defeats against teams in the top 10. Not hardly stellar is it and won't win us a major tournament. So why not try a more attacking and balanced team than 7 at the back and three forwards stuck on their own with wing backs crossing the ball being our only route of attack.ForeverAddickted said:
We've not played Uruguay | Argentina | Portugal yet apart from France we've got a result against the other six since the World CupDazzler21 said:Shocker world no.4 team doesn't consistently beat other top 10 sides...
Just a reminder of the world rankings...Rank Change Team Points 1 Belgium1765 2 France1752 3 Brazil1725 4 England1669 5 Portugal1661 6 1 Spain1639 7 1 Uruguay1637 8 1 Argentina1636 9 1 Croatia1634 10 Colombia1631 11 Mexico1625 12 Italy1612 13 3 Denmark1610 14 Germany1607 15 2 Netherlands1596 16 1 Switzerland1589 17 Chile1570 18 1 Poland1568 19 1 Sweden1558 20 1 Wales1550
Beat Belgium | Spain | Croatia | Colombia of late and got a draw against Brazil
Belgium (x3) | France | Spain | Croatia are the only top ten teams to have beaten us
What is wrong in some "competitive," games before the Euros trying a more attacking formation. If we lose 7-2 Southgate can say I tried it and it didn't work???!
SURELY you try it?
I mean Grealish. Surely you try him. Oh... eventually!
Euro 2021:
Group Stages: Scotland | Croatia | Czech Republic
Second Round: Win Group D and we'll face one of France | Germany | Portugal, come second in Group D and we'll likely play Spain
Then we're likely to face a big team in the Quarters | Semi-Finals | Final
So to win the Euros we only really need to beat four big teams
Or we can take the risk and do a Portugal and draw every game and rely on penalty shootouts, maybe not that big a risk seeing we've won every shootout under Southgate
0
