So, you have all heavily critisized Ashley Young's performances at the Euro's. So the key question is... Would we have been better off with Downing?
0 goals, 0 assists, 1 penalty missed. Identical record to Downing in the Premiership for us last year.... Would rather have played neither and 3 in the middle with Wallcott and Wellbeck either side of Carroll.
Downing...? Not likely but possible if only due to how poor Young was. We'd have been better of with Adam Johnson and/or Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain though PS - I know what you're doing here and I am going to clarify that I think Young is a better player than Downing though
Agree with Dave - Young was terrible and I don't think it would have done any harm to have put Downing on. Having said that, I would prefer to see Ox instead of Walcott. Don't be blinded by his cameo against Sweden (or was it Ukraine?) - all he has is pace and still has a lot of work to do. I rate Ox well above Walcott.
i think the media and the general public made Hogson not to play Downing. Or was he poor at training?
Hodgson can take the flack for last night and in general. 4-4-2 one-size-fits-all isn't going to cut it against Italy. ****ing amateur
Depends on whether Downing would have performed well or not. Much as I think Young was poor he had a bad tournement and that can happen to anyone. Uncle Roy needs his head examining sticking with the lad though - he offered very little in every single game.
Jesus imagine how much ****e Downing would have got if he'd performed as badly as Young has I think his confidence was shot anyway so I'm glad he didn't play to be honest. I doubt he would have made any difference but as stated above I still can't believe Young got so much game time when he was so off the pace.
There was little point in us having a twenty-three man squad other than for training purposes. We only used sixteen different players - Hart, Johnson, Terry, Lescott, Cole, Milner, Gerrard, Parker, Young, Welbeck, Carroll, Rooney, Walcott, The Ox, Henderson and Defoe. The likes of Green, Butland, Kelly, Baines, Jagielka and Downing were all spectators
The fact that he persisted with Milner is beyond. I can understand Young's inclusion as he does have pace, decent delivery and a few skills. But Milner offers nothing. What was Roy expecting from him? He does not have pace, can't beat a man, no skills etc etc. He's a sh1t Dirk Kuyt ...
Young has pace but rarely uses it. I appreciate the defensive work that Milner does which is why i think we would have been better suited to a 433/451/4231 (whatever) type formation, let Milner sit in middle with Gerrard and Parker AND let the wide players do what they do best, attack! I understand your point about him going forwards though IMO, the biggest mistake happened before the tournament started and was the same problem for the 2010 World Cup, Adam Johnson's omission! He would provide balance, pace and trickery plus he isn't shy of working if needs be, certainly no less than Young.
Young didn't let me down. By that I mean all the way through the Italy game I was predicting he'd miss a penalty. Good lad.
Young was absolutely terrible last night, but then again so was Milner. How did either of them get a game over the likes of Ox, Walcott or Johnson... who knows. Then again, I think we'll start seeing less and less of Young, Milner etc.. as Hodgson is given time. I don't dislike Hodgson or think he's a bad manager, but his type of play didn't suit Liverpool at all. However, for perennial underachievers England, it might well do the trick as it's a very classic stuck-in-the-90s style, which seems to be how most of our players are being brought up to play anyway. I reckon given some time, the England team will improve but I doubt they'll do well until the 2016 Euros when most of the old guard have retired.
I've stuck up for him because deep down I don't think he's a bad player. However he was aweful for all our games.
