Jonjo Shelvey (now playing for Çaykur Rizespor, on loan from Nottingham Forest)

[Rupert Pupkin]

I wouldn't necessarily make it Carroll though, Vardy would probably be a better option for the types of passes Shelvey can deliver.  The two of them up top with Shelvey either threading balls through or playing it out wide for the winger to cross would be the best bet in that scenario though.

 

It'd just be more of the same with Vardy though. I'm talking about a proper shock n' awe plan B where we literally say fuck it, let's send on the biggest, most aggressive centre forward we have and go old school Stoke-style for twenty minutes - Trippier and a winger banging in crosses from the flanks, Shelvey knocking them in the box early from the centre and our frontline bullying the shit out of their defenders. If we knew it was plan B and for most of the game we'd be trying to play decent football, i reckon the fans and players would accept it.

 

What an utterly depressing scenario this is. England need a plan B, but not one inspired by Pulis. How can anyone watch Maguire and Stones in this World Cup and think we need to "get it in the mixer?" Is this a joke that's gone straight over my head?

 

Depressing! How so?

When it came down to it, against the one team with anything about them, we had no plan B. Our plan B was more of plan A but with different players and we got beaten.

Even Belgium, arguably the best footballing team in the competition, went direct against Japan and it led to them winning the game.

The other criticism you can level against this England team is that for all the possession we had, we didn't create enough chances from open play. If you can't go round them and you can't go through them, what's the next best option to try - the same thing again or something different?

 

Should we bring Crouch back in from the international wilderness too? Go long has been England's plan B for 50 years and it has never worked, why would it work now? Belgium brought on Fellaini, but even then they didn't just look to lump it forward, look at the winning goal, it was direct, but not in the Pulis kind of way. Part of the problem for England against Croatia is that they did end up going too direct up to Kane and it just played right in to Lovren and Vida's hands. If you want to win a major tournament you have to have control of the matches, and if Plan A doesn't give you that, as it didn't against Croatia, then switch to a Plan B that does, not just "lump it forward and hope."

 

Shelvey didn't go to Russia at least in part because he didn't fit in England's system at all. He's not defensively good enough to be the holding player, and he doesn't have the pace or stamina required of the other midfield roles. Southgate will have to develop a plan B, now that he has time to do so. The switch to the 3-3-2-2 was too late to also be trying to get the players to adapt to a second new system at the same time, but he could look to adopt a 3-4-3 as a plan B where someone like Shelvey could play alongside Henderson or Dier, a bit like the role De Bruyne was being asked to do for Belgium. I'd much rather see something like that than England resorting to Sunday league tactics.

[mrmojorisin75]

I wouldn't necessarily make it Carroll though, Vardy would probably be a better option for the types of passes Shelvey can deliver.  The two of them up top with Shelvey either threading balls through or playing it out wide for the winger to cross would be the best bet in that scenario though.

 

It'd just be more of the same with Vardy though. I'm talking about a proper shock n' awe plan B where we literally say fuck it, let's send on the biggest, most aggressive centre forward we have and go old school Stoke-style for twenty minutes - Trippier and a winger banging in crosses from the flanks, Shelvey knocking them in the box early from the centre and our frontline bullying the shit out of their defenders. If we knew it was plan B and for most of the game we'd be trying to play decent football, i reckon the fans and players would accept it.

 

What an utterly depressing scenario this is. England need a plan B, but not one inspired by Pulis. How can anyone watch Maguire and Stones in this World Cup and think we need to "get it in the mixer?" Is this a joke that's gone straight over my head?

 

Depressing! How so?

When it came down to it, against the one team with anything about them, we had no plan B. Our plan B was more of plan A but with different players and we got beaten.

Even Belgium, arguably the best footballing team in the competition, went direct against Japan and it led to them winning the game.

The other criticism you can level against this England team is that for all the possession we had, we didn't create enough chances from open play. If you can't go round them and you can't go through them, what's the next best option to try - the same thing again or something different?

 

Should we bring Crouch back in from the international wilderness too? Go long has been England's plan B for 50 years and it has never worked, why would it work now? Belgium brought on Fellaini, but even then they didn't just look to lump it forward, look at the winning goal, it was direct, but not in the Pulis kind of way. Part of the problem for England against Croatia is that they did end up going too direct up to Kane and it just played right in to Lovren and Vida's hands. If you want to win a major tournament you have to have control of the matches, and if Plan A doesn't give you that, as it didn't against Croatia, then switch to a Plan B that does, not just "lump it forward and hope."

 

Shelvey didn't go to Russia at least in part because he didn't fit in England's system at all. He's not defensively good enough to be the holding player, and he doesn't have the pace or stamina required of the other midfield roles. Southgate will have to develop a plan B, now that he has time to do so. The switch to the 3-3-2-2 was too late to also be trying to get the players to adapt to a second new system at the same time, but he could look to adopt a 3-4-3 as a plan B where someone like Shelvey could play alongside Henderson or Dier, a bit like the role De Bruyne was being asked to do for Belgium. I'd much rather see something like that than England resorting to Sunday league tactics.

 

again peak leicester would have to be your template for a plan b when under the cosh by a team you can't get the ball off

 

tighten up into a 4 and play targetted, quality balls into the space between/behind CB's and FB's using the pace we have...that's where shelvey would have been invaluable...wouldn't have worked at all with the midfielders southgate took

[ED209]

If i were England manager (and there are many very good reasons why i'm not) I'd take players purely to implement a plan B. Play your possession, neat passing football as your plan A and when that doesn't work, bring on Andy Carroll, Shelvey and our best typical winger and bombard the opposition. Small tweaks of systems rarely have a dramatic impact, but look at what Belgium did to Japan when they brought on Fellaini and started putting the ball in the box. For some reason they stuck with their plan A for 95 minutes against France and got knocked out?!

In Carroll, we have arguably one of the best attacking headers of a ball in world football so why not use him (if he can stay fit). It's like we're scared to revert to effective old school tactics for fear of being labelled a long-ball team, but I say play to your strengths. I'd rather go out of a competition trying something drastic than going out with a whimper because our plan B was more of plan A. 

 

Funny you say that, I was joking about getting big Andy Carrol on during the semi final!

[Rupert Pupkin]

I wouldn't necessarily make it Carroll though, Vardy would probably be a better option for the types of passes Shelvey can deliver.  The two of them up top with Shelvey either threading balls through or playing it out wide for the winger to cross would be the best bet in that scenario though.

 

It'd just be more of the same with Vardy though. I'm talking about a proper shock n' awe plan B where we literally say fuck it, let's send on the biggest, most aggressive centre forward we have and go old school Stoke-style for twenty minutes - Trippier and a winger banging in crosses from the flanks, Shelvey knocking them in the box early from the centre and our frontline bullying the shit out of their defenders. If we knew it was plan B and for most of the game we'd be trying to play decent football, i reckon the fans and players would accept it.

 

What an utterly depressing scenario this is. England need a plan B, but not one inspired by Pulis. How can anyone watch Maguire and Stones in this World Cup and think we need to "get it in the mixer?" Is this a joke that's gone straight over my head?

 

Depressing! How so?

When it came down to it, against the one team with anything about them, we had no plan B. Our plan B was more of plan A but with different players and we got beaten.

Even Belgium, arguably the best footballing team in the competition, went direct against Japan and it led to them winning the game.

The other criticism you can level against this England team is that for all the possession we had, we didn't create enough chances from open play. If you can't go round them and you can't go through them, what's the next best option to try - the same thing again or something different?

 

Should we bring Crouch back in from the international wilderness too? Go long has been England's plan B for 50 years and it has never worked, why would it work now? Belgium brought on Fellaini, but even then they didn't just look to lump it forward, look at the winning goal, it was direct, but not in the Pulis kind of way. Part of the problem for England against Croatia is that they did end up going too direct up to Kane and it just played right in to Lovren and Vida's hands. If you want to win a major tournament you have to have control of the matches, and if Plan A doesn't give you that, as it didn't against Croatia, then switch to a Plan B that does, not just "lump it forward and hope."

 

Shelvey didn't go to Russia at least in part because he didn't fit in England's system at all. He's not defensively good enough to be the holding player, and he doesn't have the pace or stamina required of the other midfield roles. Southgate will have to develop a plan B, now that he has time to do so. The switch to the 3-3-2-2 was too late to also be trying to get the players to adapt to a second new system at the same time, but he could look to adopt a 3-4-3 as a plan B where someone like Shelvey could play alongside Henderson or Dier, a bit like the role De Bruyne was being asked to do for Belgium. I'd much rather see something like that than England resorting to Sunday league tactics.

 

again peak leicester would have to be your template for a plan b when under the cosh by a team you can't get the ball off

 

tighten up into a 4 and play targetted, quality balls into the space between/behind CB's and FB's using the pace we have...that's where shelvey would have been invaluable...wouldn't have worked at all with the midfielders southgate took

 

I don't think an international side has the time together to be able to learn to play two entirely different systems though, I think a plan B would have to be more of a tweak than a total change of style and formation. A 3-4-3 would have allowed England to exploit the space in behind the fullbacks with Harry Kane keeping the CB's occupied, or looking to run in behind on occasion, but we would need better passing from the deep midfielders, which Shelvey could provide, and Dier can't. It's not a huge change of system, but it would have helped lighten the workload for Henderson and made England more of a threat in wide areas which might have stopped Croatia pushing their fullbacks so far up the pitch, which is what killed us really. So, yeah, I basically agree, except about going to a back 4.

[mrmojorisin75]

I wouldn't necessarily make it Carroll though, Vardy would probably be a better option for the types of passes Shelvey can deliver.  The two of them up top with Shelvey either threading balls through or playing it out wide for the winger to cross would be the best bet in that scenario though.

 

It'd just be more of the same with Vardy though. I'm talking about a proper shock n' awe plan B where we literally say fuck it, let's send on the biggest, most aggressive centre forward we have and go old school Stoke-style for twenty minutes - Trippier and a winger banging in crosses from the flanks, Shelvey knocking them in the box early from the centre and our frontline bullying the shit out of their defenders. If we knew it was plan B and for most of the game we'd be trying to play decent football, i reckon the fans and players would accept it.

 

What an utterly depressing scenario this is. England need a plan B, but not one inspired by Pulis. How can anyone watch Maguire and Stones in this World Cup and think we need to "get it in the mixer?" Is this a joke that's gone straight over my head?

 

Depressing! How so?

When it came down to it, against the one team with anything about them, we had no plan B. Our plan B was more of plan A but with different players and we got beaten.

Even Belgium, arguably the best footballing team in the competition, went direct against Japan and it led to them winning the game.

The other criticism you can level against this England team is that for all the possession we had, we didn't create enough chances from open play. If you can't go round them and you can't go through them, what's the next best option to try - the same thing again or something different?

 

Should we bring Crouch back in from the international wilderness too? Go long has been England's plan B for 50 years and it has never worked, why would it work now? Belgium brought on Fellaini, but even then they didn't just look to lump it forward, look at the winning goal, it was direct, but not in the Pulis kind of way. Part of the problem for England against Croatia is that they did end up going too direct up to Kane and it just played right in to Lovren and Vida's hands. If you want to win a major tournament you have to have control of the matches, and if Plan A doesn't give you that, as it didn't against Croatia, then switch to a Plan B that does, not just "lump it forward and hope."

 

Shelvey didn't go to Russia at least in part because he didn't fit in England's system at all. He's not defensively good enough to be the holding player, and he doesn't have the pace or stamina required of the other midfield roles. Southgate will have to develop a plan B, now that he has time to do so. The switch to the 3-3-2-2 was too late to also be trying to get the players to adapt to a second new system at the same time, but he could look to adopt a 3-4-3 as a plan B where someone like Shelvey could play alongside Henderson or Dier, a bit like the role De Bruyne was being asked to do for Belgium. I'd much rather see something like that than England resorting to Sunday league tactics.

 

again peak leicester would have to be your template for a plan b when under the cosh by a team you can't get the ball off

 

tighten up into a 4 and play targetted, quality balls into the space between/behind CB's and FB's using the pace we have...that's where shelvey would have been invaluable...wouldn't have worked at all with the midfielders southgate took

 

I don't think an international side has the time together to be able to learn to play two entirely different systems though, I think a plan B would have to be more of a tweak than a total change of style and formation. A 3-4-3 would have allowed England to exploit the space in behind the fullbacks with Harry Kane keeping the CB's occupied, or looking to run in behind on occasion, but we would need better passing from the deep midfielders, which Shelvey could provide, and Dier can't. It's not a huge change of system, but it would have helped lighten the workload for Henderson and made England more of a threat in wide areas which might have stopped Croatia pushing their fullbacks so far up the pitch, which is what killed us really. So, yeah, I basically agree, except about going to a back 4.

 

don't agree really, a 4-4-2 should be bread and butter for english players like

[Mr Logic]

How the media influence thinking...  Matt Le Tissier shared his thoughts with Sky about England's performance in the World Cup

You will note the first player he mentions in the article quotes is Jonjo, Lallana almost as an afterthought, but Lallana makes the headline.

In the first mention they put Lallana first and then Wilshere. You get to the actual quote and Jonjo is first.

 

----

 

Matt Le Tissier says England lacked midfielder like Adam Lallana at World Cup

 

Last Updated: 13/07/18 11:53am

 

 

Matt Le Tissier thinks England struggled to create more chances at the World Cup as they didn't have a player who can "unlock a team", like Adam Lallana or Jack Wilshere.

 

Gareth Southgate's side saw their memorable run at the World Cup come to an end on Wednesday as they were beaten in extra-time by Croatia.

 

While England had more shots on target from set plays than any other team, there were only five teams who had fewer shots on target from open play.

And former England international Le Tissier told Sky Sports News: "We don't have too many midfielders in the squad who can create chances from very little, that midfielder who can pick a pass through the eye of a needle. That's the one area of the squad that was lacking.

 

"That's why people were talking about Jonjo Shelvey and Jack Wilshere, and for me also Adam Lallana. I know he was injured for large parts of the season but we lacked a player who can unlock a team and that proved to be our downfall.

"There are a lot of facets to football and set-pieces are a big part of the game as we have seen at this tournament. We were great at them and prepared them brilliantly and scored a lot of goals.

"The chances created from open play was the one part of the tournament where we were a lot worse than a lot of other teams."

Despite struggling to create chances from open play, England still enjoyed their best run at a World Cup since 1990.

 

And Le Tissier said three players in particular impressed him in Russia.

"To single out one player is really difficult because I think Kieran Trippier, Harry Maguire and Jordan Pickford all enhanced their reputations unbelievably.

"The players did perform well, there were probably two or three who might look at it and say I didn't quite reach my best form at the tournament, but the team was terrific and the positives far outweigh the negatives. If you pushed me for one name I'd say Trippier."

[Hanshithispantz]

We created chances in open play against Croatia like.

[tinoasprilla]

He had a lack of options on the bench as he took too many defenders. It was a squad full of centre backs and full backs pushed on

 

Henderson was in midfield on his own at times.  Ali out of position and lingard largely invisible.  Having shelvey or even Wiltshire *(Not a big fan) he could have pushed Ali up closer to Kane where he plays for Spurs

 

France and Croatia both play with target men in Giroud and Mandzukic.  Taking a Carroll type doesn't mean your a long ball team. He would have been a better option than an injured Kane and instead we went out with a whimper.  Three centre backs marking a 32 year old fat niall Quinn whilst we got over run continually in midfield 

 

Croatia worked us out other teams will

[mrmojorisin75]

Croatia worked us out other teams will

 

it was always the pre-tournament worry - that once we played a decent team we'd not be able to play the same game and struggle to adjust, exactly what happened

 

important thing now is that southgate learns from this, the giroud example is a good one tbf...he can have his principles but very few teams in the world can win tournaments by simply out-footballing everyone they play

[SSFC]

Yeah the team definitely needed something more in the midfield. 2nd to last in shots on target per 90 minutes at 0.9.  Only team that was worse in that category was Iran. Tells me that the set piece taking was great and efficiency. Its too bad that there wasnt more in the midfield to get that shot on target stat closer to middle of the pack...probably would have been playing later today.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Good little interview on 5 Live now, sounds so much more mature than he did a couple of years ago. And loves Rafa to bits.

[Bimpy474]

Croatia worked us out other teams will

 

it was always the pre-tournament worry - that once we played a decent team we'd not be able to play the same game and struggle to adjust, exactly what happened

 

important thing now is that southgate learns from this, the giroud example is a good one tbf...he can have his principles but very few teams in the world can win tournaments by simply out-footballing everyone they play

 

That'll be the problem though as it would be nice if he does,  he's laid a good foundation for the team to do better, he seems a thinker too. I just hope his limitations don't stop him developing the team going forward, as i think that be the problem, his limitations.

[Guest firetotheworks]

Those interviews always tend to come just before a red card in my experience. I hope not obviously, he's been mint for ages now.

 

[TRon]

Hasn't had much success with free kicks and I think his lack of confidence showed when he let Kenedy take over for the second half, then he should definitely have stepped up for the penalty. Cost us the win with that decision or lack of it.

[Infinitely Content]

He's class Shelvey. Not only is he our best user of a football, but he has quickly turned into our hardest working, most committed player. As valuable to us as Lascelles is, 100%.

[Kanji]

Hasn't had much success with free kicks and I think his lack of confidence showed when he let Kenedy take over for the second half, then he should definitely have stepped up for the penalty. Cost us the win with that decision or lack of it.

 

[TRon]

Hasn't had much success with free kicks and I think his lack of confidence showed when he let Kenedy take over for the second half, then he should definitely have stepped up for the penalty. Cost us the win with that decision or lack of it.

 

 

Tbf, I said that before Rafa had cleared it up that Kenedy was the designated penalty taker. I do think Shelvey looks unlikely to score from the free kicks as well, not many of them seem to come off.

[toontownman]

Best player on the park today. Guy is pure class when he is focused.

 

[Kanji]

Hasn't had much success with free kicks and I think his lack of confidence showed when he let Kenedy take over for the second half, then he should definitely have stepped up for the penalty. Cost us the win with that decision or lack of it.

 

 

Tbf, I said that before Rafa had cleared it up that Kenedy was the designated penalty taker. I do think Shelvey looks unlikely to score from the free kicks as well, not many of them seem to come off.

 

Got it was going to say.

[Raconteur]

Best player on the park today. Guy is pure class when he is focused.

 

 

Best part was that it wasn't his 60 yard passes today, but the running and closing down and harrying. Diamond in a pile of turd against Cardiff.

[The College Dropout]

Still wish he would look for simple passes more often.

[Guest chopey]

I said it the other day watching the arsenal game Shelvey is better than everyone of their midfielders.

[shakey jake]

I said it the other day watching the arsenal game Shelvey is better than everyone of their midfielders.

 

Someone better will be in for him in january

[TRon]

Still wish he would look for simple passes more often.

 

I get the feeling he's under instruction to play the long ball. Rafa doesn't seem to trust our players ability to bring the ball out with short passing, obviously he doesn't think a lot of them are good enough to do it. I think he's got a point if the game against Cardiff is any indicator.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Still wish he would look for simple passes more often.

 

I get the feeling he's under instruction to play the long ball. Rafa doesn't seem to trust our players ability to bring the ball out with short passing, obviously he doesn't think a lot of them are good enough to do it. I think he's got a point if the game against Cardiff is any indicator.

 

Definitely the plan is to get the ball forward quickly, it's our chosen style. I would love us to stroke it around more as well, especially against the shit teams. Maybe we will once a few more of the new signings come in and confidence increases a bit.