I really couldn't give a stuff if we're attractive to watch or not. Some people find Spain and Barca boring, some don't. As said, every good team starts with a good defence, crack that and you're onto a winner. If the other team can't score, you'll at worst draw. I'm aware we lost but have immense faith in Hodgson to, after this tournament, blood the youngsters and have them defensively drilled and aware of their roles. All I can remember of "the England way" was pushing on and pushing on before making a monumental cock-up and conceding on the counter. I don't think I could personally judge Hodgson fairly on this tournament, although I am seeing some impressive glimpses, although ball retention needs to improve, and delivery from wide areas also. However on the ball retention front I think today's game was the best so far for that, so clearly it is being worked on. I think we have to wait for 2014 in Brazil to be able to give a fair appraisal in all honesty. Sadly the press will be all over him if it goes off-track, because he is not Harry Redknapp - who they were clamouring for. If Roy can give us a strong base to build from he can move onto improving our attacking side of things. This is what he did at Fulham and Switzerland/Finland also. He dragged Fulham away from the drop-zone when many thought they were doomed, then he built on it and led the team to a European Final! What Roy does is over-achieve through strength, team-work, organisation and mental focus with teams who can't go out and outplay the MUFC's, Man City's, Spain's, Germany's of this world. I also like Hodgson's approach to man-management and the way he handles himself in front of the media. He is realistic, whilst optimistic, which is a good trait to see in the England manager. He's certainly very interactive and open to talk when he feels it is necessary. I remember seeing Capello striding across from the hotel in South Africa and standing on the grass verge across the road, talking to the press. Roy was more than happy to let the cameras into his base and have a few words and take a few snaps. He's involved, and clearly passionate - however some media outlets questioned this, I guess because unlike Redknapp would, he doesn't blab on about that every 5 minutes. The players seem to respect him and appreciate that he accepts he is far older than them and has played Gary Neville as a sort of link between them and him. He lets them have their space and R&R time and they do the same. He's let them use their phones, bring their games consoles and do things such as go in others rooms when training and rehab is done. I see no issue with this and think Roy's approach of "I'll treat them like adults - respect works both ways" but also think he is right in that he has told the players where they stand and what he expects, and if there is a slump in attitude, or if people go against his wishes these privileges could be revoked. Right now, I think Hodgson is exactly what we need for the reasons stated above. But I won't be too hasty to criticise him, he's only been in 40 days or so. I am totally behind the bloke, he knows far more about football than pretty much anyone I can thing of. His sheer pool of knowledge, years of research and coaching are invaluable, and Roy is experienced domestically, in other nations, in European competition and International Management. The guy knows his stuff. Yet is mocked for a speech impediment, whilst the media championed a self-confessed illiterate man who has been in the spotlight for shady dealings and claimed he has the writing of a 3 year old. Good luck Roy.
The reason we are playing defensively and on the counter is precisely because we do not have the players to maintain possession for any length. Even Stevie G who is one of our technically better players still has a fairly average first touch. None of our players have feet and technical ability like Ribery, Benzema or even Nasri, let alone the German/Spanish/Italian sides. I think your assessment of certain players is overly harsh. For me, Welbeck was brilliant, he had little service and held the ball up well when he did. When Rooney comes back into the side, the two of them could become a real nuisance. Young didn't have his best game tonight, but I don't think he could be called a shambles. He is a winger by trade, who is playing centrally to cover for rooneys absence. He tracked and worked hard, and didn't do that much wrong for me. He is just not as good as other world class attacking players in the tournament. Milner was played in order to negate Ribery, and cover for the always-woeful Glen Johnson, who's positioning and transitions are literally terrible (especially in the first half). Which he did very well. In all honesty, today was the first time I have been proud of the England team in a long time. All I wanted from the World Cup was commitment and heart and getting the basics right, and we did none of that. We were nervous, played within ourselves, and appeared to not care at all. Today, Hodgson for me had the team set up well, picked the right team and they all played well. The 3 lions and English spirit from years gone was back, and really, we were fairly good going forward as well. We looked dangerous every time, and with more confidence and when the fitness levels are higher we will look even more dangerous. Dont forget it's only our first game. Will we win the tournament? No, not without a hell of a lot of luck (the same kind that Chelsea had.) But under Hodgson will they give it their very best? Yep. And at the end of the day, thats all we can ask as fans.
Some of our players do - its just that they're overlooked. Adam Johnson for example has fantastic technique and touch, but he is left in the dark.
I was bored enough that I watched the game on the Red Button a couple of hours ago. There were one or two things I was pleased about. One, although England ceded the territory, they kept out France fairly comfortably, apart from the one goal. Two, they demonstrated that they could retain possession when they really wanted to. Where I was less than impressed was where the odd English player started to get frustrated once England had demonstrated that they could retain possession, and decided to lump it, or force they play. At times, they had France running around, and the French didn't like it, choosing to foul and take their chances with a referee who seemed to be a bit uneven with his allowances of tackles. I thought Lawrenson said the odd significant thing which rang true too. When the commentator was asking why England were getting frustrated with pushing the ball around, and instead trying to speed towards the French goal, he answered... Premiership..! Which said it all in one word. I have to say that I was quite impressed by England. They played the European style very well indeed, and Hodgson has them well schooled in a very short time. I might even bother to watch the next one live.
England can win the tournament playing this style BUT they will have to win at least one or two shootouts in the process which is unlikely knowing England. Fact is if we play this Chelsea style all the top sides are going to struggle against us and get frustrated in the process. We just have to develop a swifter and more effective counter attack (something Chelsea had in the champions league against Barca in particular but something England are lacking). The problem we have is what we are going to do against Sweden and Ukraine. If we reach the knockout phase we need to try a nick a goal and park bus to win 1-0 against everyone or even settle for a shootout (depending who we're playing) imo. Yeah it's anti-football technically but it takes good organization, team work, spirit, determination. We aren't good enough to play high possession and dominate games against better than average teams
I wanted to add something. I'd have been tempted to play Baines at LM instead of Chamberlain with Chamberlain coming on for him later in the game. I know it sounds crazy playing two natural LB's but Baines is a very good crosser when he gets forward and obviously he has better defensive qualities than Chamberlain. I also feel Chamberlain would be more effect as a sub in internationals (it won't ever happen especially not now. just saying)
I think I've admitted elsewhere to seeing very llittle of the England team, due to incredible indifference, but from what I have seen, I think yours is a good summary. Let's also not forget a particular Greek side, a few years back, who won us all over with their incredible discipline and very smart game plans. To paraphrase our Nigel, hard work and a little bit of talent can beat sheer talent if hard work and the little bit of talent plays to its strengths and works hard enough. Yes, I know Nigel's original cliché is catchier.
I'd prefer Chamberlain to play on the right wher he can skin defenders on the outside and get crosses in like he did for us. A winger that always cuts inside is quite easy to defend against. He has 2 good feet and having the confidence to use both of them equally really would add a whole new dimension to his game.
Whilst I can't disagree with all of your points on Gerrards age and injury record. The guy just ran his socks off in that France game making tackles left right and centre. You can't say that is less demanding than latching on to a through ball and poking it in the back of the net. I think you've underestimated his fitness level which is always extremely high. Only last year he scored goals bursting through the defence in Englands qualifiers. I do think it's sensible to have him in a holding role but he's still more than capable right now and I'm sure we will see that if we progress on this tournament.
I have always thought we should give Baines a position in the team on the left flank of midfield as he is very good going forward, he will not get his chance in the team while Cole is in the team and I doubt we will play him in midfield but I think he would be good, he is very good at getting the ball forward at Everton and I think he would for England, also we would have a good free kick taker in him.
