Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
The Auld Enemy vs England | 7:45pm KO - Live on C4 | Match Thread
Comments
-
Feels like Nketiah might be Kane's back up soon.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Rashford is not a central striker though. He's generally been poor there for United. He's far more comfortable and effective coming in from the left.Dazzler21 said:
Rashford comes inside, Winger steps up. Short term solution until one does come through.CAFCsayer said:
Fair comment if you take Kane out of the picture... we need a young striker to come through, as we literally have no alternative at the momentpalarsehater said:
fair commentcafcfan1990 said:
Plenty of time yet. The only concern is Kane but the midfield is so young and the defence on paper won’t be worse either. This group should be better in 2028 than in 2024.palarsehater said:Philips gets a call up at playing a grand total of 6 mins this season for his club.
think southgate gets to euros at least a semi final or needs to go.
i do fear that we probably should of been euro 2021 champs and also got to a world cup final and we are going to see the end of the best players england have had for a long time0 -
I didn’t expect the gulf between the teams to be quite as wide as it appeared on the night. I’ve always cut Southgate some slack and his shortcomings should not detract from the progress England have made from the shambles that he took on. However, last night was proof of any was needed that he is not making full use of the tools in his box. Quite why he felt the need to go into last night’s game with two holding midfielders against a barely perceptible Scottish offensive threat is open to question. Persisting with it when it became obvious after 15 minutes that Scotland had nothing to offer was negligent. Maddison for Phillips and that could have been an utter massacre. Seven or eight would have been on the cards. As it transpired, Scotland had ten minutes where with a bit of luck we could have been level which would have been an utter travesty as England should have been five or six up by the time good old Arry gave us an unexpected leg up.1
-
He went into the game with two holding mids because he didn’t want to underestimate a Scottish side, well up for it and who have won 5/5 from their group games, including beating Spain 2-0. He clearly wanted to protect the internationally inexperienced centre back pairing of Geuhi and Dunk. I mean we won the game comfortably, and apart from a slack 10 min period, he got it tactically spot on.Sillybilly said:I didn’t expect the gulf between the teams to be quite as wide as it appeared on the night. I’ve always cut Southgate some slack and his shortcomings should not detract from the progress England have made from the shambles that he took on. However, last night was proof of any was needed that he is not making full use of the tools in his box. Quite why he felt the need to go into last night’s game with two holding midfielders against a barely perceptible Scottish offensive threat is open to question. Persisting with it when it became obvious after 15 minutes that Scotland had nothing to offer was negligent. Maddison for Phillips and that could have been an utter massacre. Seven or eight would have been on the cards. As it transpired, Scotland had ten minutes where with a bit of luck we could have been level which would have been an utter travesty as England should have been five or six up by the time good old Arry gave us an unexpected leg up.15 -
Special mention for Dunk. Think he's a quality player4
-
Objectively he’s been a great servant to England over the years. Part of the reason for our recent (relative) success.lancashire lad said:
no not lazy but how I see him when he plays for England, but then he doesn't play for a club does he?ValleyGary said:
Just not true tho is it. Seen many driving runs from him in a major tournament. Lazy assessment.lancashire lad said:
and passes backwardsValleyGary said:The maguire stuff is tiresome. Always turns up in an England shirt.And yet he struggles at club level. Bizarre.0 -
Think the West Ham move that he turned down would have been a good one - regular football, less pressure, chance to get some confidence back.JamesSeed said:
Objectively he’s been a great servant to England over the years. Part of the reason for our recent (relative) success.lancashire lad said:
no not lazy but how I see him when he plays for England, but then he doesn't play for a club does he?ValleyGary said:
Just not true tho is it. Seen many driving runs from him in a major tournament. Lazy assessment.lancashire lad said:
and passes backwardsValleyGary said:The maguire stuff is tiresome. Always turns up in an England shirt.And yet he struggles at club level. Bizarre.
Shame from an England perspective that it didn't happen.5 -
Bit of a conspiracy that as a Palace legend, he rarely calls up Brighton players. Dunk can't be a periphery player any longer now, looked so assured and comfortable, hopefully many more appearances to come although he's getting on a bit!Gribbo said:Special mention for Dunk. Think he's a quality player0 -
The strongest team doesn’t always win a tournament. Luck can play a part; a sending off, a freak goal against the run of play, a shocking ref, illness or injury to key players. If we’re slightly the best team in the tournament we’ll be favourites, but nowhere near odds on.ValleyGary said:Ive never really put pressure on an England side but If we don’t win the Euros it’ll be a massive failure. Apart from France, Spain, Portugal, then opposition looks weak.I just checked; we’re currently joint favourites with France at 9/2. So can’t see not winning the tournament as a massive failure. It’d be very disappointing, of course though.3 -
Southgate picking players at big clubs who aren't playing, just encourages players to stay there on their big wages, as they know they'll still be picked for England.North Lower Neil said:
Think the West Ham move that he turned down would have been a good one - regular football, less pressure, chance to get some confidence back.JamesSeed said:
Objectively he’s been a great servant to England over the years. Part of the reason for our recent (relative) success.lancashire lad said:
no not lazy but how I see him when he plays for England, but then he doesn't play for a club does he?ValleyGary said:
Just not true tho is it. Seen many driving runs from him in a major tournament. Lazy assessment.lancashire lad said:
and passes backwardsValleyGary said:The maguire stuff is tiresome. Always turns up in an England shirt.And yet he struggles at club level. Bizarre.
Shame from an England perspective that it didn't happen.1 -
I am finding it hard to see beyond that point on Saturday when he was looking at the goal with only the keeper between him and the net... and he passed it left.Sillybilly said:I didn’t expect the gulf between the teams to be quite as wide as it appeared on the night. I’ve always cut Southgate some slack and his shortcomings should not detract from the progress England have made from the shambles that he took on. However, last night was proof of any was needed that he is not making full use of the tools in his box. Quite why he felt the need to go into last night’s game with two holding midfielders against a barely perceptible Scottish offensive threat is open to question. Persisting with it when it became obvious after 15 minutes that Scotland had nothing to offer was negligent. Maddison for Phillips and that could have been an utter massacre. Seven or eight would have been on the cards. As it transpired, Scotland had ten minutes where with a bit of luck we could have been level which would have been an utter travesty as England should have been five or six up by the time good old Arry gave us an unexpected leg up.
A Charlton moment.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
I don't even think it's a big club thing - Henderson isn't at a big club anymore for example. He just has players he knows/trusts and he sticks with them arguably way too long.killerandflash said:
Southgate picking players at big clubs who aren't playing, just encourages players to stay there on their big wages, as they know they'll still be picked for England.North Lower Neil said:
Think the West Ham move that he turned down would have been a good one - regular football, less pressure, chance to get some confidence back.JamesSeed said:
Objectively he’s been a great servant to England over the years. Part of the reason for our recent (relative) success.lancashire lad said:
no not lazy but how I see him when he plays for England, but then he doesn't play for a club does he?ValleyGary said:
Just not true tho is it. Seen many driving runs from him in a major tournament. Lazy assessment.lancashire lad said:
and passes backwardsValleyGary said:The maguire stuff is tiresome. Always turns up in an England shirt.And yet he struggles at club level. Bizarre.
Shame from an England perspective that it didn't happen.
Agree with the rest though, if Southgate has dropped Maguire as a result of not playing he'd have been more likely to move.0 -
I personally don't think England would've come into it with Maguire.
It was rumoured that he told Man U if they paid up the difference on his contract then he would go to West ham. But they wouldn't so he stayed.
0 -
So more interested in money than playing regularly?Chris_from_Sidcup said:I personally don't think England would've come into it with Maguire.
It was rumoured that he told Man U if they paid up the difference on his contract then he would go to West ham. But they wouldn't so he stayed.0 -
Well given the amount of money in question that's not entirely unreasonable to be fair. Especially if he could be reasonably assured of still playing for England anyway.PrincessFiona said:
So more interested in money than playing regularly?Chris_from_Sidcup said:I personally don't think England would've come into it with Maguire.
It was rumoured that he told Man U if they paid up the difference on his contract then he would go to West ham. But they wouldn't so he stayed.2 -
Never get when players get criticised for not leaving clubs when on good contracts. It's the club's fault that they gave the contract out. No one in normal life would willing take a pay cut for the sake of it.8
-
Not sure I agree with it being reasonable.thenewbie said:
Well given the amount of money in question that's not entirely unreasonable to be fair. Especially if he could be reasonably assured of still playing for England anyway.PrincessFiona said:
So more interested in money than playing regularly?Chris_from_Sidcup said:I personally don't think England would've come into it with Maguire.
It was rumoured that he told Man U if they paid up the difference on his contract then he would go to West ham. But they wouldn't so he stayed.0 -
Pelling1993 said:
Tend to agree, but then you have to live with the consequences which in this case is probably remaining dropped at United, and potentially England.Never get when players get criticised for not leaving clubs when on good contracts. It's the club's fault that they gave the contract out. No one in normal life would willing take a pay cut for the sake of it.
The unfortunate thing last night is given it was a friendly there wasn't really any need to bring him on - Guehi would have benefitted from staying on, or he could have taken a look at Tomori.
Maguire had 90mins v Ukraine, and Southgate knows he likes him, so what benefit was there to playing him?
6 -
Absolutely, he shouldn't be anywhere near the England sideNorth Lower Neil said:Pelling1993 said:
Tend to agree, but then you have to live with the consequences which in this case is probably remaining dropped at United, and potentially England.Never get when players get criticised for not leaving clubs when on good contracts. It's the club's fault that they gave the contract out. No one in normal life would willing take a pay cut for the sake of it.
The unfortunate thing last night is given it was a friendly there wasn't really any need to bring him on - Guehi would have benefitted from staying on, or he could have taken a look at Tomori.
Maguire had 90mins v Ukraine, and Southgate knows he likes him, so what benefit was there to playing him?3 -
He is entitled to enjoy his contract and not play regular football, and watch the Euros on TV next summer.Pelling1993 said:Never get when players get criticised for not leaving clubs when on good contracts. It's the club's fault that they gave the contract out. No one in normal life would willing take a pay cut for the sake of it.
That's what should happen.3 -
I thought Scotland who's form had been so impressive would exploit Trippier at LB as he is so right footed. The goal came from that side but TBF to Trippier he is a good pro but when he got forward I was wishing it was Chilwell or a fit Shaw to go on the outside and cross with their strong left feet.
I wasn't too bothered with the under par performance in Poland as I can remember when we seemed to win every Qualifying game under Roy Hodgson but still messed up in tournaments.
Stones, Shaw, James, TAA, Pickford, Chilwell, Maddison, Grealish etc tells you we have a strong squad and Southgate knows that we have the depth to play different formations. Quality teams can play fast or slow depending what tempo they require during a match.
We are a better squad now than our final of Euro's and semi final of WC.
We just need the importance ingredients of luck and being injury free for the couple of irreplaceable's.
0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Why not? If he is still under contract for whatever amount a week then it's perfectly understandable that maybe he'd like to continue being paid that much rather than take a cut.PrincessFiona said:
Not sure I agree with it being reasonable.thenewbie said:
Well given the amount of money in question that's not entirely unreasonable to be fair. Especially if he could be reasonably assured of still playing for England anyway.PrincessFiona said:
So more interested in money than playing regularly?Chris_from_Sidcup said:I personally don't think England would've come into it with Maguire.
It was rumoured that he told Man U if they paid up the difference on his contract then he would go to West ham. But they wouldn't so he stayed.
It's not necessarily the decision that someone else would make, maybe other players would value game time over finances but I can't say I wouldn't do the same as Maguire in his place.0 -
It's not all about money. And as others have said his ENG place is at risk. So to me, money is more important to him than playing regular football and for ENG. He'd hardly be on a pittance at West Hamthenewbie said:
Why not? If he is still under contract for whatever amount a week then it's perfectly understandable that maybe he'd like to continue being paid that much rather than take a cut.PrincessFiona said:
Not sure I agree with it being reasonable.thenewbie said:
Well given the amount of money in question that's not entirely unreasonable to be fair. Especially if he could be reasonably assured of still playing for England anyway.PrincessFiona said:
So more interested in money than playing regularly?Chris_from_Sidcup said:I personally don't think England would've come into it with Maguire.
It was rumoured that he told Man U if they paid up the difference on his contract then he would go to West ham. But they wouldn't so he stayed.
It's not necessarily the decision that someone else would make, maybe other players would value game time over finances but I can't say I wouldn't do the same as Maguire in his place.1 -
With Martinez and Varane's injury problems, I think Maguire will still get a fair chunk of footie at United, although ETH seems a bit stubborn with players so might prefer Evans.0
-
Yeah that's fair. But I can also see why he might think that the money IS more important. I don't necessarily agree with it. But I understand it.PrincessFiona said:
It's not all about money. And as others have said his ENG place is at risk. So to me, money is more important to him than playing regular football and for ENG. He'd hardly be on a pittance at West Hamthenewbie said:
Why not? If he is still under contract for whatever amount a week then it's perfectly understandable that maybe he'd like to continue being paid that much rather than take a cut.PrincessFiona said:
Not sure I agree with it being reasonable.thenewbie said:
Well given the amount of money in question that's not entirely unreasonable to be fair. Especially if he could be reasonably assured of still playing for England anyway.PrincessFiona said:
So more interested in money than playing regularly?Chris_from_Sidcup said:I personally don't think England would've come into it with Maguire.
It was rumoured that he told Man U if they paid up the difference on his contract then he would go to West ham. But they wouldn't so he stayed.
It's not necessarily the decision that someone else would make, maybe other players would value game time over finances but I can't say I wouldn't do the same as Maguire in his place.0 -
And he may back himself to win his place back at United, and keep playing for England.thenewbie said:
Yeah that's fair. But I can also see why he might think that the money IS more important. I don't necessarily agree with it. But I understand it.PrincessFiona said:
It's not all about money. And as others have said his ENG place is at risk. So to me, money is more important to him than playing regular football and for ENG. He'd hardly be on a pittance at West Hamthenewbie said:
Why not? If he is still under contract for whatever amount a week then it's perfectly understandable that maybe he'd like to continue being paid that much rather than take a cut.PrincessFiona said:
Not sure I agree with it being reasonable.thenewbie said:
Well given the amount of money in question that's not entirely unreasonable to be fair. Especially if he could be reasonably assured of still playing for England anyway.PrincessFiona said:
So more interested in money than playing regularly?Chris_from_Sidcup said:I personally don't think England would've come into it with Maguire.
It was rumoured that he told Man U if they paid up the difference on his contract then he would go to West ham. But they wouldn't so he stayed.
It's not necessarily the decision that someone else would make, maybe other players would value game time over finances but I can't say I wouldn't do the same as Maguire in his place.
I don't think he will, but he may well not see it that way.1 -
I will consider it a failure unless we win our next 8 games.4
-
I really like maguire for england, but last night he looked pretty bereft of confidence, especially after the own goal. I think we’ve got better options in central defence now, tbh.0
-
Own goal aside, Maguire was absolutely fine without doing anything spectacular. Compare him to the man he replaced - which one is Maguire?
Touches: 45 or 42
Acc Passes: 37/41 or 39/41
Acc Long Balls: 4/6 or 3/4
Aerial Duels Won: 3/3 or 1/1
Clearances: 2 or 04 -
Doesn't help not playing regularly!kentaddick said:I really like maguire for england, but last night he looked pretty bereft of confidence, especially after the own goal. I think we’ve got better options in central defence now, tbh.0 -
One on the left is Maguire? - Scotland were more of a threat in the second half, so makes more sense he had more touchesCallumcafc said:Own goal aside, Maguire was absolutely fine without doing anything spectacular. Compare him to the man he replaced - which one is Maguire?
Touches: 45 or 42
Acc Passes: 37/41 or 39/41
Acc Long Balls: 4/6 or 3/4
Aerial Duels Won: 3/3 or 1/1
Clearances: 2 or 00
