Jump to content
IGNORED

Malta v England

Red Army 75

By Red Army 75
in Football Chat

Recommended Posts

downendcity

downendcity

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Back to England 

 

Prior to Steve Bull , I was the last player to be capped for England whilst playing outside the top two divisions 

Ohhh I also managed my Country

Who am I ?

Alf Ramsey?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
One Team In Keynsham

One Team In Keynsham

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, joe jordans teeth said:

The amount of transfer fees he has generated is unbelievable as well for a bloke who could hardly be arsed half the time 

Up there with some of Wenger's impressive pieces of business: think he bought him for 500k, sold him for 23m, back when 23m was not getting you half of Kyle Walker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesBCFC

JamesBCFC

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Donkeeebles said:

I don't remember Sol playing for 5 premier league teams? I can only think of 3 (Spurs,Arsenal,Pompey) 

He was at Newcastle for a year (not sure if it was in the Prem or not) 

Still one short, I missed the 5 teams part and just went by no fee and appearences (assumed he made that many)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harry

Harry

Posted
Posted

Don't think I've witnessed a worse left side for England than Bertrand & Sterling tonight. Awful. 

I also think in games such as this, where defending will be at a minimum, why we don't just play 1 centre half and stick another striker up top. 

Playing with 2 holding midfielders should allow you to sacrifice a CB in games where the opposition will not even enter your box with the ball all game. Try something different to break down these sort of teams. 1 CB, 2 attacking FB's, 2 deep CM's, 2 wingers, 1 AM & 2 ST's. 

Why not? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davefevs

Davefevs

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Harry said:

Don't think I've witnessed a worse left side for England than Bertrand & Sterling tonight. Awful. 

I also think in games such as this, where defending will be at a minimum, why we don't just play 1 centre half and stick another striker up top. 

Playing with 2 holding midfielders should allow you to sacrifice a CB in games where the opposition will not even enter your box with the ball all game. Try something different to break down these sort of teams. 1 CB, 2 attacking FB's, 2 deep CM's, 2 wingers, 1 AM & 2 ST's. 

Why not? 

Just typed this on another thread, but having read yours `Harry, thought I'd paste it here too.

Just watched 80 minutes of the England game (I know the result should've hung on and watched the last 10 - will watch that in the morning), but to me it highlighted how it is completely wrong for us (England).  It forces us to to be so rigid centrally.  Jones and Cahill never venture into midfield, despite Malta leaving no-one up.  Henderson and Livermore never break the lines and because Malta's striker drops into midfield, H & L have congestion to break through.  So we go wide to either the full backs and back again, or get it into Sterling or Oxlade and then go back. Alli is too far up, which means he cannot make late runs into the box...because he's already there! Kane looks average (unless he's shooting), and hangs onto the ball too long.  We basically cannot create through the centre of the pitch....which is where the top teams sting us with their tactics and movement.  If Malta can see it and adapt their tactics, why can't Southgate (and previous managers) see it and counter it, or even set up differently in the first place.

You're all gonna tell me we were brilliant in the last 10.  I'm gonna guess that with Welbeck, Vardy, Rashford and Kane all in the pitch, we were more fluid and flexible in our formation and the rigidity of Malta's defence suddenly couldn't cope.  Was Alli still on?  If so, was he moved deeper?

Bit of a ramble....sorry....but there's a lesson here....be wary of 4231 for City.  It seems perfect for the 2 to be Pack and Smith, shielding the 2x CBs, but if they don't break their lines, we can only attack through the wings.  And if we can't spring the wide men quick enough, we stagnate, can't attack and get pressed into losing possession too easily.

2 hours ago, downendcity said:

I know it's not England, but Eidur Gudjonsen takes a bit of beating in the father and son stakes,  as on his debut he came on as substitute for ....................his father!!!

 

P.S. Back in the 80s in the Sussex County league I played in the same team as a father and son.

I played in the same team as my dad in Somerset Senior Div 2 alongside Trevor Tainton v Wells City.  We were short and my dad in his late 40s lasted the first half and we played with 10 in the second.  I thought he was gonna have a heart attack!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BCFC Rich

BCFC Rich

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Bit of a ramble....sorry....but there's a lesson here....be wary of 4231 for City.  It seems perfect for the 2 to be Pack and Smith, shielding the 2x CBs, but if they don't break their lines, we can only attack through the wings.  And if we can't spring the wide men quick enough, we stagnate, can't attack and get pressed into losing possession too easily.

 

The thing was England set up like this and had some success out wide but seemed to always want to come back in when they got into crossing positions the rarely used them to cross and the full backs did not overlap well. It seemed like we were set up to play with width and like that could have worked but the players kept bringing us back through the middle and Kane kept drifting out to the right so there was no one in the middle.  You would hope if we did set u the same we would want to use our wingers as wingers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BobBobSuperBob

BobBobSuperBob

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Donkeeebles said:

I don't remember Sol playing for 5 premier league teams? I can only think of 3 (Spurs,Arsenal,Pompey) 

 

8 hours ago, JamesBCFC said:

He was at Newcastle for a year (not sure if it was in the Prem or not) 

Still one short, I missed the 5 teams part and just went by no fee and appearences (assumed he made that many)

Don't drive yourself mad gents about the fifth

My bad - two spells at Arsenal so only 4 different  prem clubs 

Apologes 

:blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chinapig

chinapig

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Just typed this on another thread, but having read yours `Harry, thought I'd paste it here too.

Just watched 80 minutes of the England game (I know the result should've hung on and watched the last 10 - will watch that in the morning), but to me it highlighted how it is completely wrong for us (England).  It forces us to to be so rigid centrally.  Jones and Cahill never venture into midfield, despite Malta leaving no-one up.  Henderson and Livermore never break the lines and because Malta's striker drops into midfield, H & L have congestion to break through.  So we go wide to either the full backs and back again, or get it into Sterling or Oxlade and then go back. Alli is too far up, which means he cannot make late runs into the box...because he's already there! Kane looks average (unless he's shooting), and hangs onto the ball too long.  We basically cannot create through the centre of the pitch....which is where the top teams sting us with their tactics and movement.  If Malta can see it and adapt their tactics, why can't Southgate (and previous managers) see it and counter it, or even set up differently in the first place.

You're all gonna tell me we were brilliant in the last 10.  I'm gonna guess that with Welbeck, Vardy, Rashford and Kane all in the pitch, we were more fluid and flexible in our formation and the rigidity of Malta's defence suddenly couldn't cope.  Was Alli still on?  If so, was he moved deeper?

Bit of a ramble....sorry....but there's a lesson here....be wary of 4231 for City.  It seems perfect for the 2 to be Pack and Smith, shielding the 2x CBs, but if they don't break their lines, we can only attack through the wings.  And if we can't spring the wide men quick enough, we stagnate, can't attack and get pressed into losing possession too easily.

I played in the same team as my dad in Somerset Senior Div 2 alongside Trevor Tainton v Wells City.  We were short and my dad in his late 40s lasted the first half and we played with 10 in the second.  I thought he was gonna have a heart attack!

 

Equally rambling response follows.:whistle:

How does Southgate watch Alli play for Spurs then decide he's going to have him standing alongside Kane, leaving him no space to run from or into?

Raw talent is of limited value without a football brain: Rashford has one, Sterling doesn't.

Why are English players incapable of playing anything but bog standard 4-4-2 unless they are surrounded by more adaptable foreign players in their club sides?

In international football getting the ball wide and hitting hopeful high balls into a crowded box isn't the solution either, much though English fans think it is - along of course with 'passion'. There are no successful international, or club, sides who do it.

How are we still in a position where our centre backs look like new born giraffes when they have the ball at their feet?

As for City, as Neil Harris said, they stifled us precisely by stopping us playing between the lines, our preferred style. I know some yearn for an old fashioned languid number 10 strolling around spraying defence splitting passes but they have pretty much disappeared from the modern high tempo pressing game and were always a rarity.

What we lack imo is a powerful midfielder who can physically break through the lines when that happens. I find it curious that LJ is happy with our midfield options given how relatively easy it is to break through us.

Ramble over, as you were. :shutup:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robbored

Robbored

Posted
Posted

It really is very easy to understand why England are so conservative in their approach.

1) Southgate is Mr Conservative himself. I bet that when he has sex with his wife it's always in the missionary position.

2) England lack an attacking midfielder in the mould of Gerrard or Lampard. 

 

Its clear that England will reach the World Cup finals next summer but will just scrap out of the group and then lose in the quarters..........:facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chinapig

chinapig

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Robbored said:

It really is very easy to understand why England are so conservative in their approach.

1) Southgate is Mr Conservative himself. I bet that when he has sex with his wife it's always in the missionary position.

2) England lack an attacking midfielder in the mould of Gerrard or Lampard. 

 

Its clear that England will reach the World Cup finals next summer but will just scrap out of the group and then lose in the quarters..........:facepalm:

That will be the Gerrard and Lampard who were so great in international tournaments then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robbored

Robbored

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, chinapig said:

That will be the Gerrard and Lampard who were so great in international tournaments then?

Both were attacking midfielders with creativity and goals in them - something England don't currently have is my point CP.

but then you knew that...........,:facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chinapig

chinapig

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Both were attacking midfielders with creativity and goals in them - something England don't currently have is my point CP.

but then you knew that...........,:facepalm:

For their clubs certainly but for England rather less so. The so called golden generation was nothing of the sort. The evidence of international tournaments is pretty unequivocal, the rest was PR and marketing.

But then you knew that.:whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RoystonFoote'snephew

RoystonFoote'snephew

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Robbored said:

It really is very easy to understand why England are so conservative in their approach.

1) Southgate is Mr Conservative himself. I bet that when he has sex with his wife it's always in the missionary position.

2) England lack an attacking midfielder in the mould of Gerrard or Lampard. 

 

Its clear that England will reach the World Cup finals next summer but will just scrap out of the group and then lose in the quarters..........:facepalm:

I like the positivity. You think they'll get out of the group! I suppose when Dier is fit, Mr Dull can field 3 holding midfielders. Perhaps we can repeat Italy's feat of 1982 and qualify from the group with three 0-0 draws. Sorry! Strike that! I forgot our centre halves might include the inept Jones. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...