England: Burn and Gordon named in latest squad (Official)

[Pilko]

Just now, samptime29 said:

Pickford a prick but been superb in this tournament. Very impressed.

 

Pickford for Everton and Pickford for England may as well be two totally different blokes.

[Disco]

Both united in massive cunts. 

[B-more Mag]

England Band really came through for you today.

[Disco]

I didn't even hear them.

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

They were definitely there but it was hard to hear them over the crowd, which was a plus.

[Disco]

Genuinely didn't realise. Crowd wasn't even that good until the second half either. 

 

TBF to Wembley and England it is proper League One when it comes to home games so they do fit in.

[St. Maximin]

44 minutes ago, Ketsbaia said:

Was fun reading the 20-odd pages from during the match - a reminder that England were pretty bad (especially Kane) and the game could've went either way. But the route is sensationally 'easy' now, it really should be a spot in the final.

 

The overhyping of Grealish really winds me up, mind.

I just don’t get this. People go out their way to say Grealish is overhyped or play down everything he does well because Mount/Foden/Saka/Sterling et al would do exactly the same. I know he’s a whopper but the guy is brilliant. Not just his skills, ability to win fouls and drag defenders across, but he has terrific end-product also. 30 goals or assists in 62 Premier League games for Villa says what you need to know frankly. 

I’m a big Saka fan but his stats are nothing on Grealish’s and while he’s certainly played well, he’s lacked the end-product on the wing and that’s ultimately what we want. That’s why Sterling is there as despite being frustrating and less skilful than some other players, his movement is brilliant. 

 

It’s possible for Gareth to be right in being conservative while also getting away with it by not having Grealish or another attacking player start, meaning we’d be more threatening earlier on. 

[Ketsbaia]

I just think it's too much. Chanting his name, an ovation when he comes on, the discussion of every fan/pundit. Even on that Peter Crouch show they were saying how he has to start because he apparently changed the match today. Grealishmania is a real thing and I'm not sure why, although he is pretty good.

 

Where's Sanchomania or Fodenmania?

[rgk_lfc]

23 minutes ago, Ketsbaia said:

I just think it's too much. Chanting his name, an ovation when he comes on, the discussion of every fan/pundit. Even on that Peter Crouch show they were saying how he has to start because he apparently changed the match today. Grealishmania is a real thing and I'm not sure why, although he is pretty good.

 

Where's Sanchomania or Fodenmania?

 

I am saying this with the benefit of hindsight but I think Southgate's use of Grealish and Saka is smart. Saka is not at the same level as Grealish but he is a very good, tactical player in his own right.  Southgate kept things compact till 60-65th minute and Saka helped with that. When the opposition defense tires a bit and space opens up, unleash Grealish. Not a bad strategy against a team like Germany. I don't think it would have worked against the great Italian, Brazilian, Portuguese, French , Spanish defenses of 2000-2010 but it is a very good strategy against current top international teams where the quality of defense is a bit on the poorer side. A bit more conservative than what I would have liked but cannot argue with the results. 

[Beren]

As I said, if you care about the results there is nothing to knock. My view, in sports, is that I'm not supporting a share price or a piece of code - I want to enjoy watching it. Seven 0-0s, with four penalty shootout wins would leave me feeling cold. England are dross to watch so far IMO.

 

Someone posted the results from Spain's win in 2010 but that doesn't really show how much control Spain had in those games. You would be hard pressed to say England control games. (Incidentally, I do find some of Spain's extended overplaying build up play tedious, although it is effective). If Müller's big chance happens a few minutes before Sterling's opener and he takes it, people would have an entirely different thesaurus of expletives for the identical performance people are now praising. It would be about how conservative England were, how there were square pegs in round holes (attacking players in a defensive system) and how the team didn't really create enough clear cut chances or look incisive etc.

 

England can't play "keep away" like Spain, so I strongly suspect they will need to find another gear IMO. They haven't shown one to be immediately within reach. Spawning a tournament like Greece or Portugal is a possibility, but then you'd become a pejorative verb for the next decade to a generation, in the same way people say England are now Greece'ing it.

[Guest HTT II]

If England win the tournament, I doubt people will care this generation or decades and decades later whether we played scintillating football or not…

[ElDiablo]

It would be really nice if we put in a convincing performance on Saturday and were a little more positive. I'm not against keeping the 3 at the back tbh, as long as the full backs do genuinely push on and we play a little bit quicker to move Ukraine around.

 

Also the Muller thing, it comes from an individual mistake and not a system fault. It was a big moment but then the Maguire header and Kane's fluff in the first half could have as easily gone in, as could Werner's 1 on 1. Both sides had a bit of luck.

[Guest neesy111]

It just depends on how you view football whether you want England to be playing more attacking football or not, or feel they have to as the tournament progresses.

[Cronky]

42 minutes ago, HTT II said:

If England win the tournament, I doubt people will care this generation or decades and decades later whether we played scintillating football or not…

 

Indeed not. There are eerie parallels with 1966. We were poor in the group games, getting a lot criticism, but not conceding any goals. Things opened up for us and we gradually improved. And there's the parallel of playing games at Wembley, which of course is a big advantage.

 

I honestly wonder though, looking back, whether 1966 was a double edged sword. Victory flattered us a bit, and raised expectations which have been difficult to fulfil. It made us feel that we were better than we were, when we should have been trying harder to improve technically. We have more skilful players now, but we still have some way to go. 

 

Having said all that, I roared as loudly as anyone when those two goals went in. 

[Boo Boy]

I liked the way we nullify the opposition first and then go and try and win the game. Southgate got a lot of stick pre game because of the team he picked but he recognised germany's wing backs were the threat and picked a team to nullify that and thought we had better players elsewhere which we have. different game saturday and he might need the flair players in to break them down

[The Prophet]

It was a fantastic atmosphere yesterday, especially for Wembley. The only really shame was some fans choosing to boo the taking of the knee. Having said that, it was quickly drown out with applause.

 

The game itself was a pretty dull affair. As suspected we set out to nullify Germany and take any chances that came our way and fair play it worked. We're not a good watch but it us usually a side with a solid defence who does the business. The back six have been as organised as any.

 

I actually fear the likes of Denmark. Any team that is capable of deploying an organised low block will cause us more problems than one who will come on to us. 

[James]

Tournaments past we have been able to put out strong first elevens filled which after a long season were usually dead on their feet after 45 minutes, and then the subs would effectively replacing a good player with an inferior, not match fit version.

 

this tournament we’ve been able to rotate players in and out, keep fresh and bring on impactful substitutes. It’s the best strength we’ve ever had

[Lazarus]

Ive made comments in here before about having a functioning team instead of just playing your 'best' players.

 

I think Southgate has found that team.

 

Its a delicate balance and i cant help but feel were carrying Kane and are overly cautious in midfield but it seems to be working

[Lazarus]

10 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

It was a fantastic atmosphere yesterday, especially for Wembley. The only really shame was some fans choosing to boo the taking of the knee. Having said that, it was quickly drown out with applause.

 

The game itself was a pretty dull affair. As suspected we set out to nullify Germany and take any chances that came our way and fair play it worked. We're not a good watch but it us usually a side with a solid defence who does the business. The back six have been as organised as any.

 

I actually fear the likes of Denmark. Any team that is capable of deploying an organised low block will cause us more problems than one who will come on to us. 

 

Mate of mine reckons that Eriksens collapse was the best thing to have happenned to Denmark as its completely focused and united them.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 30, 2021 by Lazarus

[Yorkie]

2 hours ago, Beren said:

If Müller's big chance happens a few minutes before Sterling's opener and he takes it, people would have an entirely different thesaurus of expletives for the identical performance people are now praising.

 

I always find that a really strange way to be critical. The fact is, it didn't. And it only came about because of an uncharacteristic mistake from one of our attackers. 

[McCormick]

 It was a fairly assured tactical performance and a good win.

 

I’ve been very critical of Southgate’s team selections and play style thus far and, even if I honestly think we have more talent than what we’re currently showing, it’s bonkers to argue with looking very compact and conceding 0 goals so long as we’re winning games.

[Beren]

12 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

I always find that a really strange way to be critical. The fact is, it didn't. And it only came about because of an uncharacteristic mistake from one of our attackers. 

 

My point is that the preceding 74 minutes and their characterisation should be no different, irrespective of who scored first. And I don't think my earlier descriptions of the performance would be grossly unfair from an objective point of view. Just IMO.

[Interpolic]

I'm totally with Beren here in that the performances have been really unconvincing (that's a great post btw), however there is something somewhat intangible under the surface here that is getting us results not seen for many years. There is a togetherness, we're more organised and can execute a plan, we're more composed in defence. 

 

I didn't rate Southgate before England and I still have my grumbles re the attacking talent we're not utilising. But you can't argue with the results we've seen recently. A semi final run followed by quarters or better in this tournament is absolutely fantastic by recent England standards. 

 

And people can say what they like about us not beating anyone big Germany-aside, but we did get knocked out by Iceland under Hodgson recently and we've seen big teams knocked out by lesser sides during these Euros. I want us playing more attractive football and we really should do so against Ukraine but my mentality has switched a bit now we're in the knockouts, in that the main priority now is to win. 

[Yorkie]

15 minutes ago, Beren said:

 

My point is that the preceding 74 minutes and their characterisation should be no different, irrespective of who scored first. And I don't think my earlier descriptions of the performance would be grossly unfair from an objective point of view. Just IMO.

 

Well I disagree with the suggestion that we didn't control the game. This team absolutely spanked Portugal after getting in-behind on numerous occasions, but we limited them to half-chances all the way through that 74 minutes. Then we opened the game up with the subs to try and win it, and duly did so. I think we've managed every game extremely well aside from the Scotland one, where we got rattled early on and never fully recovered. 

 

We're nowhere near as attractive but I think we've looked every bit like we could go toe-to-toe with Belgium, Italy and Spain. We've got loads of attacking options but we're blessed with defensive players as well. Southgate has chosen to put the onus on the latter to create a context where he's choosing his match-winners/bringing them into the game from a position of solidity. You could say there's enough talent in the squad to do it the other way round - and base our gameplans on our attackers - but we've done that in the past and failed. The results speak for themselves so far. 

[Smal]

I know it never feels that way watching as a fan because you’re nervous af for 90 minutes, but that was as controlled as England are ever going to get against a side like Germany.

 

Our tactics/formation/whatever nullified them, their wing backs were barely in the game, and their main chance to score was as a result of an individual error in an attacking scenario. We dictated that. If you were watching that as a neutral you’d be saying England are genuine contenders on that performance.