Leazes_End_Mag Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 5 players who shouldn't be anywhere near the squad: Henderson Wilshere Barkley Sturridge Rashford 4 who should have been straight in it: Drinkwater Antonio Townsend Defoe Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Should have Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty66 Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 I would have also taken Rashford tbh,I know it's chucking him in at the deep end but he's been getting goals in big games and seems to be very grounded, as well as having that natural goalscoring ability. Of course there is a risk of him doing something stupid like Beckham against Argentina due to his in-experience,but at the same time there is a chance he scores the winning goal and becomes an instant superstar (In England at least) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ndegwa Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Glad Drinkwater's not going to be honest, I don't think his style suits international football. Looked a bit out of sorts against the Aussies. I agree with Henderson deserving his place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shays Given Tim Flowers Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 I would have also taken Rashford tbh,I know it's chucking him in at the deep end but he's been getting goals in big games and seems to be very grounded, as well as having that natural goalscoring ability. Of course there is a risk of him doing something stupid like Beckham against Argentina due to his in-experience,but at the same time there is a chance he scores the winning goal and becomes an instant superstar (In England at least) Too bad he won't play at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyn davies Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Don't worry by the end of game 1 we'll revert to type and Woy will be getting it in the neck, game 2 and the press will be on the pitch and it will be all over. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Still can't figure out what Jordan Henderson does tbh. I've heard that he plays football for a living but I still haven't seen it. As a non-English person who usually likes to see England do well in international tournaments, I hope England crash and burn with this ridiculous squad that they've settled on. Cowardly decisions as usual. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lush Vlad Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Glad Drinkwater's not going to be honest, I don't think his style suits international football. Looked a bit out of sorts against the Aussies. I agree with Henderson deserving his place. This. Plays in a totally different system for Leicester and has a T-1000 playing next to him. But it's 'a disgrace' that he's not going? He looked massively lost against Australia and I don't get why everyone is so upset about him being left out? He was never going to the Euros. TBH, I don't think the squad is that bad. I would have taken Townsend, as I'm biased and he offers something a bit different. We are probably gambling a bit on some of the players fitness. But I don't think we have that many great options behind them. So I think it's worth the gamble. I don't think Rashford will even play, so I guess you could say that's a bit pointless, and all. But after the problem with Sturridge, the debut goal and the wankfest in the media. He was always going to get included. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Still can't figure out what Jordan Henderson does tbh. I've heard that he plays football for a living but I still haven't seen it. Can't remember the amount of times I've watched Liverpool and after 35 minutes the commentator mentions Henderson and I go "Oh, shit, he's playing?". Was the same when he played for the mackems as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Normally I think Henderson is a decent/good player. But he's not fit, not sharp. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest chopey Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 I still think Townsend is a better sub choice than Lallana Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 I would have taken Carroll ahead of Rashford and Sturridge as well btw. Been in good form for West Ham since returning from injury, and when he's on his game, he's a nightmare for defenders. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Aye he adds something different to the side. I get that Rashford has looked really good and deserves his place, but from a tactical POV he adds nothing to that squad. The same happened with Walcott. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 At least the side has a bit of an identity. Although seemingly at the cost of genuine plan B's. Think Sturridge and Rashford look like fine finishers, with good pace, Sturridge can beat a man but tactically they would be similar to Vardy. If a team is sitting deep and playing narrow there's no one to fling in crosses or to head it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 I would have taken Carroll ahead of Rashford and Sturridge as well btw. Been in good form for West Ham since returning from injury, and when he's on his game, he's a nightmare for defenders. Why should England actually have real options to influence games, to try and win the tournament? Surely it's better to placate the pundits and media in order to avoid criticism for leaving out the household names. I honestly had hope for Hodgson. Hope he does well but with that selection he's looking at an early exit imo. Possibly even in the group stage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John P Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 I would have taken Carroll ahead of Rashford and Sturridge as well btw. Been in good form for West Ham since returning from injury, and when he's on his game, he's a nightmare for defenders. Why should England actually have real options to influence games, to try and win the tournament? Surely it's better to placate the pundits and media in order to avoid criticism for leaving out the household names. I honestly had hope for Hodgson. Hope he does well but with that selection he's looking at an early exit imo. Possibly even in the group stage. Not sure I agree with this. The first 11 isn't affected by not taking Townsend and Drinkwater and we should have more than enough in the first choice team to be getting through the group without having to resort to Townsend coming on and saving the day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Honestly Sturridge is probably England's most naturally talented player. Nobody else in the squad can score a goal like the one he scored in the EL final. It's absolutely the right decision to gamble on taking him. Certainly over the likes of Carroll and Defoe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Honestly Sturridge is probably England's most naturally talented player. Nobody else in the squad can score a goal like the one he scored in the EL final. It's absolutely the right decision to gamble on taking him. Certainly over the likes of Carroll and Defoe. Carroll would be one of the strongest in the air in the entire tournament and would be able to score goals that no one ens there could do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanj Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 IMO you take Carroll over Rashford in that he injects the big man/target man role for Plan B/C. You also take Townsend over Barkley or Sterling or Lallana to play as the direct, pacy winger with an eye for goal and an unpredictable match winning left foot. Sturridge fit is the best striker in England IMO so I'm happy with his inclusion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 A 23-man squad should be like a toolbox, with players for different situations. You take fast players, wingers, tall strikers, versatile players, big-game players, set-piece specialists etc. A mix of form and reliabilty. Not only has Hodgson taken too many risks (taking ALL of Wilshere, Sturridge, Rashford and Barkley), there's no real plan B. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanj Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 i'm on that thought process overall man Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest chopey Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 If rashford played for Sunderland and Defoe played for man utd I wonder if which one would picked Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
triggs Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 If rashford played for Sunderland and Defoe played for man utd I wonder if which one would picked I don't think Defoe would be very good if he played for Man Utd. Would have to be involved in build up play a lot more and wouldn't have the chance to get in behind the defence as much. He's not suited to playing for a big team IMO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Not only has Hodgson taken too many risks (taking ALL of Wilshere, Sturridge, Rashford and Barkley), there's no real plan B. Agreed. Wilshere, Sturridge & Henderson is a big risk. All could break down with no surprise. I just don't think Barkley is that good. If rashford played for Sunderland and Defoe played for man utd I wonder if which one would picked I don't think Defoe would be very good if he played for Man Utd. Would have to be involved in build up play a lot more and wouldn't have the chance to get in behind the defence as much. He's not suited to playing for a big team IMO Maybe we aren't counting them. But he has over 130 goals for Spurs. 90 in the PL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Not only has Hodgson taken too many risks (taking ALL of Wilshere, Sturridge, Rashford and Barkley), there's no real plan B. Agreed. Wilshere, Sturridge & Henderson is a big risk. All could break down with no surprise. I just don't think Barkley is that good. If rashford played for Sunderland and Defoe played for man utd I wonder if which one would picked I don't think Defoe would be very good if he played for Man Utd. Would have to be involved in build up play a lot more and wouldn't have the chance to get in behind the defence as much. He's not suited to playing for a big team IMO Maybe we aren't counting them. But he has over 130 goals for Spurs. 90 in the PL. Based on that logic we should be taking Darren Bent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now