I would of liked us to set tone for future: Hart Johnson Jag Cahill Shaw Wiltshire Gerrard (we need an experienced leader for euros, despite all calls for youth) Milner Sterling (free role) Sturridge Rooney (replace with welbeck at half time)
It can be a rebuilding exercise but personally, rebuild by giving some fresh blood a crack on a huge stage like the WC and give them a taste of things to come. There is benefit to playing Rooney but not as much as trying something new.
I wouldn't argue with that and personally I wouldn't play Lampard, I was just pointing out why we are. As for Costa Rica, individually their squad is not as good as ours, but as a team they look far better. We simply don't look like a team, we look like a bunch of individuals who've never played together.
Now you mention it, you're right. He just needed to do something that worked, that was it! And against Uruguay he should have made sure someone marked Suarez out of the game and instructed Rooney to score four instead of just the one. Perhaps in the cup final Bruce should have done something that worked, then we'd have won. If it was as simple as just instructing them to win he'd have done that. Problem is Italy were also trying to win and also had a game plan. Only one of them can ever work and we lost the game, but it wasn't for want of trying and we weren't comprehensively beaten.
We aren't that bad. All the foreign pundits watching our games have agreed that we played well and got beat. It happens. The problems England had in the final third are the exact same problems City have most weeks, yet most of us agree that they play very well as a team. We're also realistic with our expectations though.
That has to be the daftest reply you've ever made. You're way better than that mate. Fact is Hodgson couldn't rectify a glaringly obvious problem. I'm not saying he could have foreseen the way the first half would pan out but every man and his dog could see that fairly drastic measures were needed and his response wasn't astute enough to rectify the issue. It wasn't even that hard to sort. That's just one example of his ineptitude IMO.
This. Every tournament we look like this. It doesn't matter whether other international teams are rated as better than us or worse than us - regardless the team we play against always looks better organised in the way they play as a team. We look like 11 individuals making it up as we go along. It has happened for the last 25 years and it's a joke. With the power of the premier league I can't see it changing any time soon unfortunately
I dont think he is to be honest its just a fixed view and he repeats and repeats. It was a stupid plan of Hodgsons as you say yet he cant see that, it was a plan granted but it was never going to work. If Hogson had instructed Sturridge to lead the line and harass the last man, and cover their RB all the way to the edge of our box PLT seems to think that was a plan but Sturridge ****ed it and was too lazy.
It isn't a daft reply. You made a point which was crap, I've explained why and you just dismiss it. How exactly would you have sorted it? I'd have thought swapping a winger that wasn't giving enough support defensively for one who was, ensuring that the defensive one was on the side we needed him, was a good idea. It can't work every time though and there are sometimes individual errors you can't legislate for. Hodgson can only do tactics and instructions, he can't run on and give Baines more support himself. He could have been negative and played a flat midfield 5 which I'm sure would have restricted the space in front of our fullbacks, but then everyone would have moaned it was too defensive. Every tournament there's this ridiculous inquest into the manager, when will it end? How many managers before we start to wonder if maybe the problem is something else? When City lose the majority are composed and can understand that the other side might have played well, and our lads tried but their best wasn't good enough. How come people can't see it the same way when England lose, and instead have this desperate need for a scapegoat?
How on Earth can you say whether something was a plan not followed or one never made? Without discussing it with the management we'll never know that. I've not said frig all about Sturridge anyway. I've been going on about Welbeck not following the fullback all week. That's obviously why he was put there. The problem was their right side running at Baines all the time with no one stopping it. Rooney didn't stop it first half so he put Welbeck there, it worked mostly apart from the lapse early on where they scored. What can you do about that tactically? Welbeck was either lazy, exhausted or not concentrating. What would you have done? You can't predict a player's every action.
Thing is PLT it sounds like you've bought into the whole 'we expected to be crap and we were so that's ok' thing. What's wrong with wanting the manager of our national team to inspire them, to get them to raise their game and to address glaring issues supporters and pundits alike can see. We see these players play brilliantly week in week out against quality opposition........so what went wrong?
The clock is ticking for Hodgson, it's just a matter of time now, that being the case, the sooner he goes the better. Though there isn't an obvious replacement. Unless Guus Hiddink isn't busy...
He started with Rooney out of position and when that didn't work he stuck another player there who, granted, plays there from time to time for his club but isn't what you'd call a natural in that position. You ask what I'd have done? I'd have put Milner in to offer the required amount of cover and if that meant going 5 across the middle so be it. The golden rule in competition football is don't lose your first game. I would honestly have been delighted if Woy had shored things up and got us a point to kick off with. As for restricting the space in front of the full backs? Did you watch the game? Baines was constantly pinned back, he wasn't an attacking outlet all game, restricting the space in front of him wouldn't have made a jot of difference.
Christ why don't people read the points being made instead of just assuming "this guy isn't 100% negative about England so he must be a deluded **** who thinks we're ace". You mention pundits, well how many of them, the experts, have said anything about England being **** in this tournament? From what I've seen they've all (including notably people like Henry and Seedorf who know what they're on about and aren't biased) been sympathetic saying we've played well and just been undone with some poor defending at bad times. 2 years ago we couldn't get hold of the ball. Gerrard and Parker played CM and the cover was Henderson who was nowhere near as good as he is now. To the point that even though Gerrard and Parker were clearly completely burnt out, he wasn't really used. We were seriously outplayed by Italy and hung on defensively, hardly having an attack for the second half or ET. This time around we lost but we gave them a game; we had the ball and the second half was in fact one big England attack. To reiterate I do not think we're perfect and I'm perfectly aware that we didn't create enough in that second half. But we were a lot better than 2 years ago where there were hardly any England attacks. The progress is there. Yes results wise we've been worse but anyone who watches football should be able to see past the usual knickerwetting 'scandal' stuff and see that we've played well, we've dominated 1 and a half games. We need a better defence realistically, and we also need to learn to open teams up better. Maybe it's a playmaker we need. That's the sort of thing we should be talking about instead of all this they don't care, the manager's ****, Rooney's *****, etc. You can play well and lose, just like City did a lot of times last season. *And admittedly, even I got caught up in it after the Italy game and said some ridiculous stuff about him.
That's fine but if he did that plenty of people (maybe not you) would have moaned. Everyone wanted an attacking style with the young players getting a chance and it happened. It didn't work and we maybe could have scraped through by being more negative but the country would have moaned about that when we eventually got knocked out. Like in 2010 and 2012. The thing about the space in front of the fullbacks; I'm on about when we were defending. Their right side were running at Baines constantly with not enough opposition from our left winger.
I never suggested you think we're ace, I suggested that you appear to have settled for what just happened and don't feel it appropriate to challenge a manager who guided us to 2 defeats in a WC he's had years to prepare for with a fully fit squad at his disposal. And at HT in the Italy game, every pundit and person I was watching with said Baines was exposed and was getting battered. What happens, a slight change in personnel on the left and minutes into the second half, boom, we're 2-1 down to a goal where Baines was exposed. It's not exactly rocket science. You think it's unfair to get on Roy's back a bit? Really?
