Most on here criticised SC for playing 3 at the back - you must have a back 4 etc etc. Seems to work for well for Wales. Then there's Italy playing 2 up front in a different system, again folk said that doesn't work. Seems to me : Playing round pegs in round holes is paramount. Players must understand their roles in whatever system is used. Teamwork and understanding trumps all.
Wales have hungry players that would be considered 'inferior' if selected for England (Bale excepted). They are playing with passion and desire - which England hasn't done since 1990. I hope they beat Portugal - and I think they really can. As to the final - either France or Germany await. If they make it then I will probably support them - putting my Cardiff experience on hold for 90 minutes.
The same goes for a lot of underdog nations who raise their game against better opposition. This also happens at club level, hence all of the FA Cup shocks over the years. It's no different.
At the beginning of the tournament I posted that the way forwards for us should be 3-5-2 with Stones in the sweeper position and Vardy and Kane as twin strikers. I maintain that had Hodgeson developed a brain and some testicles and played that formation we would have done ok. Still don't think we would have been strong enough to win it, but we may have ended up on the other side of the draw and then who knows what could have happened. 3-5-2 is the way forwards for England. Sadly Vardy is now 29, so this was probably his only throw of the dice We need to develop another Gascoigne before we can flourish at international level
It's horses for courses - no one formation will be suitable for all teams at all times against all others. One of England's problems (amongst the many!) is that there doesn't seem to be a clear style that we're trying to achieve - unless you count passing the ball slowly sideways, waiting for the opposition to make a mistake, rather than force an opportunity.
So did England have enough 'passion' for the one single game when we actually beat Wales? Did the Euro '96 team not have enough either? I don't want to downplay the importance of the level of application, or 'desire', but I do think it's overused as an explanation of England's failings. I'd be interested to see if someone call pull together stats to check this, i.e. distance travelled, sprints made, tackles made etc. I'd be surprised if England noticeably lagged behind in any of these criteria. Unfortunately their failings are more likely attributable to lack of quality and inventiveness, as well as poor mental strength, exacerbated by the years of disappointment, high standards expected and fierce criticism. Joe Hart came across as being highly 'pumped' and 'passionate' going into each game; singing the national anthem the loudest, urging his team-mates on etc., but I think it's fair to say that he was England's worst player at the Euros (which is saying something). Another example I've thought of is the World Cup semi-final between Brazil and Germany 2 years ago - one side were cool, stoic and focused beforehand, while the other were geed up as if they were going into battle; we all know how that panned out. In my view, Wales have gotten to where they are through many factors, of which their 'passion and desire' is one, but their sheer quality and team ethic are much bigger ones.
and confidence which is key to everything in football and the confidence that having a couple of world class talents playing at the top of their game can give a team
Joe Allen is rumoured to be surplus to requirements at Liverpool as well now. Steven Gerrard said that when England are playing they are worrying about the headlines the next day, so confidence goes a long way. Even though I'm Welsh I think the press has ripped the players to shreds over the years knocking any confidence out of the players. We was talking in the Cardiff office the other day all saying the press will now ruin Joe Hart within a few years all the flak he's taking.
The small mentality that Wales have works. They treat every game like a cup final. The difference with England is the expectation to win because they are better.
This sort of comment pisses me off, and shows how SMALL MINDED you are. How many shots did England who so called dominated have on target? I would say based on Wales results v England's means Wales could of either set up wrong or had an off day. I don't mind England, but idiots like you let the others down.
Dominating possession is not the same as dominating a game. This is the current excuse for another poor performance from an England side. This team is a mirror reflection of the man who designs and manages it, his representative on the pitch also suffers with a lack of personality that directly reflects the side selected. You get what put there. Possession of the ball with no purpose is a current (dying) trend in the mould of a Barcelona side that did have a rare individual player that could transfer possession to purpose. We spent a season and a half watching this football 'DNA' under Sean O'driscoll, the philosophy was the same, the end result missing due to the vital part of the jigsaw also missing. It was boring! the ultimate sin to a football fan! The time has come to move on to a different philosophy as this one doesn't work. We need what suits us. Wales have what suits them, they went further. They were better.
We [England ] underperformed against Iceland. However a convincing 100% qualifying record and dominating all 3 group games v 3 teams who parked the bus was no accident. Wales' euros run is just a cup run which happens frequently to a team in most cup competitions.
Somebody should look closely at the cost vs success of the England experiment that has delivered disappointment after disappointment so many times since 1996 (OK Nick H I accept that). The most expensive team and the most expensive manager in successive tournaments. Clearly, you DONT always get what you pay for. At least the crap performances in tournaments have been so consistent that it no longer surprises or devastates me when it inevitably happens.
Hodgson, highest paid manager in the competition and he turns up at his finale and says, " I don't know why I'm here", that to me explains everything, you'll never convince the blazers...
We got what many, many expected to get.. The signs were all there before the tournament started and I posted my thoughts about Hodgson before the first game kicked off. The fiasco at the last world cup was there for all to see, history will repeat itself if you allow it to do so. Iceland didn't park the bus, they were playing 2 up front for large parts of the game, We were told that once teams opened up and had a go at us all would be rosy and you would see the real England.. They were frozen with a rigid game plan that wasn't working and a leader who was incapable of leading or inspiring that group of players. It would be easy for me to say your lack of years and experience won't allow you to see what is obvious, however that would be unfair as there are many within the game and much older than you that are still making the same excuses and cannot see what is right in front of them.
