I thought Matt Lawtons' piece from todays' DM hit it on the head..................... If he deserves credit for the manner in which England played for the opening 45 minutes, and given how little preparation they had as an XI it was impressive, Hodgson also has to take some blame for their failure to score a second goal that would have almost certainly secured victory against a distinctly ordinary Russia side. England were crying out for some fresh impetus in attack, with Harry Kane and Raheem Sterling tiring every bit as much as Wayne Rooney in the latter stages of their opening Group B match. But instead of turning to Daniel Sturridge and Jamie Vardy, two players who might well have followed Eric Dier's superb free-kick with a goal of their own, he ignored his strikers and opted for players he thought would protect England's slender advantage. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...h-echoes-World-Cup-failure.html#ixzz4BPS5o8LM Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Had some time to digest the game and my thoughts are as follows; Although we played well and showed some promise, we didn't get the result. The entire focus should have been on getting the win. Russia's weaknesses were the lack of pace in Central Defence, Harry Kane has lots of qualities but explosive pace is not one of them. That game last night was crying out for a Vardy, Sturridge or even Rashford to start. At the very least this would have caused Russia to drop deeper to create space for the likes of Alli and Rooney to exploit. Didier Deschamps took off Griezemann and Pogba in their first game, arguably their two biggest stars, and they got the result. That's the difference at this level. Hodgson does not have the ability to read a game in real time (we're all smart in hindsight), and recognise what's going on.
But replaced with who? Pace out wide is lacking in the squad almost as much as cover for the central defenders. Either Walcott or Townsend should be there. Otherwise you're changing the formation to fit the players that are sat on the bench, and that rarely works.
You're not wrong Chaz, and the reason Rashford was presumably selected was that he could provide this outlet out wide as well as up front, otherwise why select him? Hodgson stated he wanted to 'go for it' and selects 5 Strikers yet played a system with only 1 of them upfront? Makes zero sense.
It was crying out for a double change up front. Vardy for Kane (who was clearly still at the hotel) and Rashford for either Sterling or Lallana. why is it that millions of fans can see that, but the one bloke who can actually do it remains blind to it all?
I mentioned the point after the Portugal game that Hodgson doesn't know his best system or team and it shows. At the very least you should know what system you'll play and select the squad appropriately around that. Our weakest area is our defence, and he relied on them to see out the game. It was foolish. The Russian's had to commit which means they'd have left spaces, something which Vardy, Sturridge or Rashford could have exploited as you've mentioned. When Managers panic, they revert to type, and Hodgson's type is unquestionably defensive/negative.
Townsend very unlucky not to be included in the final 23. Sterling was struggling and Vardy off the shoulder of Kane may have caused the Russians headaches. What we can all agree on is Hodgson's negative tactics cost us
I hope England can repeat their 1st half performance against Russia but add a better finisher for that type of fast football with the penetrative passing. Vardy, the Man U kid or Sturridge all look better alternatives than Kane to me. I'd replace Hart as well if we have a decent keeper in the squad, his distribution was Green like at his worst. I'd certainly keep Sterling in as he looks the one most able to be able to make runs into the box, where we could get a pen or pick up a goal even with his often panicked end product.
Kane has had one sub standard game. Roy won every single game in qualification. One undeserved equaliser and we are going all QPR on them.
It's not that - it's mainly about Roy's inability to see that Kane was so poor, and/or his inability to change the personnel to fix it.
Kane was sub standard against Portugal too. I know he's a good player but looks to be going through a form dip and doesn't have the electric speed Vardy and Rashford would give England, which, way we played 1st half, looked just what was needed for the striker role. Kane looks a better bet for a hold up role in a 4231 than the way we are playing now.
And why the fcuk does he take the corner kicks, he's a centre forward for fcuks sake, can't work that one out woy!
Lack of access to hair product replenishment.... which wasn't quite what I was expecting when Roy said that the squad was starting to gel...
