
The amazing thing is how bad our players are, which confirms they are pretty average in the first place.
The Belgians trio , Dembele is usual sideways impotent performance (15 million wasted) , Chadli 95% of nothingness .
Verts in a wrong position but still a disaster .
Paula the worst Brazilian first 11 player I think I have ever seen. How does he get in the team?
Benty confirms that he will be another squad player that will eventually sold to a mid table team.
Really none are worth keeping except for Verts in his correct position.
Belgium really didn't impress me yesterday, think a couple predicted they'd be the flops of the tournament on my outright predictions thread and judging by their first game, those people may be onto a winner. Someone on my Twitter made a good point during the game, "Belgium seem a team of great individuals but that's exactly that, individuals, not a good TEAM".
How good was Ochoa last night?! Safe to say he won't be a free agent for long once the world cup is over, that single performance has guaranteed him a contract with at least a good European club. Amazing what the world cup can do for players.
My prediction of Fred being top scorer looks a poor one, he's been shocking and wouldn't surprise me if he gets dropped in their 3rd game.
It's early days - many teams win the World Cup after struggling in the group games. I think there is a reason for this: to beat the highest quality teams in the later rounds you need skilful players, but these traditionally are also the most unpredictable - think Hazard. In the group stages the poorer teams do well as they pick solid players who won't let them down, whereas the better teams pick their best players to make sure they are ready for the business end of the tournament but risk uneven performances. England is a very good example of this: always pick the solid performer over the mercurial genius (think Wilkins over Hoddle) and qualify but get no further. This year I think Hodgson is doing his best to think like a winner: the team he had out for the last few minutes against Italy had our six most skilful attacking players. He runs the risk of not qualifying but I think they could surprise a few teams if they do get through.
I think with the players we have, our best chance of progressing is to "go for it". I'm not overly convinced with our defensive players, Johnson isn't a top standard international RB, Baines is good in the Prem yet hasn't really done much in a England shirt for me, Cahill and Jagielka are an ok pairing but there a far better CB partnerships in this tournament than those two where as Hart can be brilliant or shocking. We also don't have a Barry or Parker, a true DM, to sit in front of the back 4 and protect them so I'd rather Roy play our best attacking line up and aim to outscore our opponents as that's where we're strongest in my opinion. Sturridge is a predator, Rooney on his day is superb (though yet to show that in his World Cup appearances to date), Welbeck gets stick but is a great work horse and actually has a half decent strike rate for England and then we have Sterling who tore Italy a new one. Add Lallana and Ox to that list and we have a good bunch of attacking players there, supported by Gerrard, therefore I think Roy needs to stick/ go with an attacking game plan as playing it safe for England, is actually probably more riskier than going gun-ho so to speak.