I realised a few minutes into this game that Lambert was going to end up knackered...a lot of movement and effort with little reward. His only chance would be from a corner as he was going to get little service.
Yes, I agree. It doesn't change that he was good in one half and poor in the other. Nothing to be shamed about.
Hodgson says we lacked quality up top. If we had Rooney or Sturridge he thinks we probably would have scored a goal.
If everyone else is to be believed, Rickie is only there by default, what no one can say is that he let anyone down, he still had the strength to create a chance late on, despite being manhandled in the area. There were a lot of players on the pitch that didn't give 100% and could have done better.
I'm surprised you're actually bothering to pick me up on it, FLT. Of all the forward players, Rickie was doing quite well, in both halves. Yes, his performance went down in the second half, but he was ploughing a lone furrow upfield, virtually all match. Every player needs support around his position, the CF more than most because he is naturally outnumbered. I'm not sure anyone else could have done any better. No doubt Rooney would have flattered to deceive again, if he'd been available. Wonder if he plays Saturday.
Steven Gerrard: "We'll hopefully have more players fit for the last two games, which will give us a better cutting edge up front."
That's not fair DTLW. He didn't word it quite like that. He didn't say we lacked quality up top, but he did say with a Rooney or a Sturridge we may have got a goal. He didn't say or imply that was against or negative toward Rickie.
His plan seemed to be going long towards Lambert, which is all well and good, but not when you aren't getting men round him.
Why are you surprised? You said he played well and I said he did in the first half but not the second. I'm not knocking him, I'm being frank. Without comparison to any other player, do you think Rickie played well in the second half? I'm being pragmatic. His touch is a strength of his game and for lots of mitigating reasons his touch was poor in the second half and he gave it away or lost it a lot.
Bearing in mind Rooney and Sturridge might have replaced Walcott, Milner or Wilshere, none of whom offered much in attack (though Milner put in a good defensive shift), we probably would have had a greater chance of scoring.
"Perhaps we didn't have quite the quality" - when talking about being adventurous and taking chances, winning (potentially), 1-0.
If Rooney had played tonight with that lack of service, he would've ended up getting frustrated and ratty and possibly sent off...Rickie deserves credit for keeping his cool in the main.
Rickie can score if you give him the ball and he can go and get the ball and feed to others...what you can't expect is for him to get the ball, run up the field and score.
And when your supporting players are either 20-30 yards away, or if they are close enough, they are moving into the wrong position, it doesn't result in an attack that continues.
Jack Wilshire, remind me why this bloke is seen as "England's future"? Did he complete one pass tonight? How many fouls did he give away? Utter dogshit and clear example of hype over substance. Rickie did as well as could be expected. ****ing terrible service to him and support around him. Walcott was crap.
