Must admit I have been impressed with Henderson’s performances. Think he is a large part of this statistic someone quoted that we are the best at winning ball back in opponents half. Also he has had to be a bit more positive with his passing than he needs to be at Liverpool as we have essentially a runner alongside him in central midfield.
Slated Henderson earlier in the tournament for his sideways and backwards passing but he is growing in stature and he has been good so far in both knockout fixtures. Not going to slate Sterling either - he's been saving his goals for the final. Come on the BOYS!!!
Had Rashford or RLC been on the pitch, our chances of beating Sweden would have been reduced. With Vardy, the whole dynamic would have been changed. Could conceivably have been better or could have been worse. I don't think anyone has gone so far, though, as to say that Sterling is indispensable, merely that he has put in good performances.
You must hang out with fast women. I do have to concede that Rashford has a far better knowledge of inorganic proxies and lipid distribution.
You have to admire a player who is played “up front” and who is able to retain his place after not having scored for his team for over 30months but runs fast, is a nuisance and his team mates like him.
Well, that's not even been suggested... Let's not try and wriggle away from the original point of contention. You think Sterling gave a poor performance against Sweden. Your evidence for this is that he missed some chances. You choose to ignore the rest of his play, that's your blindness not Sterling's inadequacy.
Problem is that your arguement that he’s had a good game because of the effect of the rest of his play isn’t accepted by some including me. His inability to score (not just in this game) is a major issue for a striker/attacker. Other parts of his play include running up blind alleys and regularly losing the ball. Contrast this to Kane who regularly can draw a foul and win a free kick if he’s up a blind alley. Sterling doesn’t win headers and he doesn’t win many tackles. He also doesn’t play others in often enough. So what are we left with? He runs a lot, he’s a nuisance and his team mates like him. Not enough for me to be in the England team.
I think at the very least (and I'm middling as regards his performances) he also puts doubts into defenders, makes space for other players and regularly offers an outlet as a willing runner. When actually playing football what annoys me the most is when my team-mates don't move into space and try to give me options for passes - Sterling seems to constantly be looking to ask questions of the defence and give his fellow players options, this creates openings for the team and induces fouls/ mistakes from the opposition. That is what helps us gain and retain possession in the opposition half and is what his fellow players and his manager see in him. Yes he could do with a goal but I ignore assists almost entirely as a stat as it gives the false impression that only one player has created the opportunity which his rarely the case.
I agree with just about all you put. My issue is to be in the England team, in the position he plays, that is simply not enough. I would, as manager, expect that and goals. My gripe with Sterling isn’t just the Sweden game or even the World Cup Finals games, it’s his long period without goals. I think I read the other day he has 2 goals in 42 games for England the vast majority of which, I guess, he has started. I accept he does get into the “right” positions but he just doesn’t take the chances that come his way. Combine that with the fact he makes Pingel (the original “Jigsaw”) look like a clinical finisher and that record is not good enough. Other players such as Rashford may not have his speed or something else he has but they would score more goals. We presently have an England team surpassing everyone’s expectations but that doesn’t mean it can’t be improved. That’s all I want.
Promise you Sterling is going to get the opener on Wednesday and bag a brace in the final. All the bad press he's getting (and rightly so - he's been awful) will be forgotten. Just hope he uses the leg with the tattoo on it to "shoot" his teammates as they run to him, and fall like domino's, for scoring the winner in the 93rd min vs Belgium (3-2)
All I can say is I’m as fickle as any other football fan and I will rename my new car after him if he does.
If he scores the winner in the world cup final I'll rename my penis and scream "Raheem" every time I climax. My wife will simply have to get used to it.
Sterling for me looks at his most dangerous/useful for England where is running at a defender one on one wide on the left or down the left channel. He pushes the defence back and put us on the front foot. Centrally and in the box he isn't so **** hot to be honest. You take him out of the team though and I'm not sure anyone else is going to do that for the team.
The only time he looks dangerous to me is when they show a close up of that tattoo on his leg. I expect he will start on Wednesday though as Southgate won't change a winning team. Just hope he gets a confidence boosting run or goal early on and then performs as he hasn't done it yet. I haven't been impressed with either him or Walker yet and they have both been coached by supposedly the greatest coach ever for the last year.
The lack of understanding of how important Sterling is to the way England play is pretty bewildering. It would nice if there was more end product but he is crucial to how we’ve performed. He carries long distances and creates a lot space. To suggest changing it isn’t even madness, it’s just pure stupidity. Kane will score against Croatia and will probably do so because of Sterling creating space for him. No reason at all to change a single player. We are here because of these lads people need to just get behind them.
Good approach there Pouchy if someone disagrees call him names. Others carry the ball long distances and others can create space. These skills are not exclusive to Sterling. Others can also score goals something Sterling hasn't done too well for England for a long time. Some of us want England to improve and get better and not settle for second best. Rashford can score goals and create space. He can also carry the ball. Sterling may do one or two of those things better than Rashford but it's the totality of all things together which count. I just happen to believe England would be a better team with Rashford in than with Sterling in. You need to remember that Ashley isn't in charge of England and, therefore, debate and discussion are still allowed and to criticize isn't necessarily always a negative thing. People can criticize but still be 100% behind the team. In football if you stand still you go backwards. I will be more than happy if Sterling scores the winner tomorrow but it won't change my view (one match never does) as he would need to start scoring consistently over a period of time for that to happen.
Is it more likely that Sterling will suddenly score and become a saviour, or that he'll mess up another series of chances and potentially be the downfall in the most winnable of World Cups ever? Hell, even for Sterling's sake I wouldn't play him. Everyone is expecting him to mess up, including himself. When he does, how does he deal with that? Do we need the guy becoming a villain for the sake of pride? Sorry, I just don't see it. I don't see him creating space, I don't see him carrying the ball, he gives it away too often, he doesn't set up chances, he doesn't score goals. I'm "bewildered" as to how he starts every match. He hasn't scored for two and a half years, has he even assisted once during that time? Whilst not quite a liability, I cannot fathom - and I'm far from alone - how he's on the teamsheet with no hesitation. As has been said, being a nuisance shouldn't be enough for International football. If it was, Perez would play for Spain. As it stands, I'm not sure Spain know he exists, because you tend to need to do more as a forward.
