Group C: 1. England, 2. Denmark, 3. Slovenia (Q), 4. Serbia

[Cf]

3 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Agreed. It was a good sub.

 

I would've preferred Palmer to help control the game/ball more.

 

Southgate does that thing Eddie does which frustrates me. 95% of his subs are pre-planned, including the minute of the introduction. No matter what's happening on the pitch.

 

[The College Dropout]

You don't think Eddie pre-plans most of his subs?

[huss9]

10 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Agreed. It was a good sub.

 

I would've preferred Palmer to help control the game/ball more.

 

Southgate does that thing Eddie does which frustrates me. 95% of his subs are pre-planned, including the minute of the introduction. No matter what's happening on the pitch.

first bit of that is often true - we have a game plan and its often like for like attacking subs to give us some fresh impetus and to give the opposition something to think about.

but that second bit isnt at all.

 

eddie would have changed both wingers yesterday and replaced them with fresh legs and pace.

saka was only fit enough for 45 minututes so either should have been replaced at half time or not started and brought on in the second half if we were struggling.

 

 

Edited June 17 by huss9

[Coffee_Johnny]

58 minutes ago, buzza said:

Bellingham in middle with Rice (TAA out), foden at 10 and gordon on the wing. Rest the same as before

That sounds like a winning combo to me. 

[The College Dropout]

6 minutes ago, huss9 said:

first bit of that is often true - we have a game plan and its often like for like attacking subs to give us some fresh impetus and to give the opposition something to think about.

but that second bit isnt at all.

 

eddie would have changed both wingers yesterday and replaced them with frsh legs and pace.

sake was only fit enough for 45 minututes so either should have been replaced at half time or not started and brought on in the second half if we were struggling.

Unless a goal is conceded Eddie is doing what Eddie planned from the start. Evidence: the numerous times Burn had been getting burned for 60+ minutes in a game. He's only getting subbed if we concede and need to chase. Good, bad, indifferent - Longstaff ain't getting subbed unless we are 3+ up.

 

Pre-planning the Saka sub made sense, including the time. You can't take him off after that first-half.

 

If Eddie planned on Foden playing 90 minutes, Foden would play 90 minutes.

 

 

Edited June 17 by The College Dropout

[Sibierski]

I mean, Bowen did nearly get the assist but for a great save when he immediately came on, but did anything else literally happen after that? Can't say it was a good sub based on one single contribution. He's not a ball retention player, so outside that, he was a passenger for rest of the game.

[AJ9]

I think it’s fairly clear in a lot of games last season that Eddie pre-planned his subs. I do wonder if that was more out of necessity than design. I would imagine it was with an eye on the physical load and condition of both starting player and sub, not so much to do with changing the game. Maybe a lot of that was to do with us not having a full squad available. Though there have been times where an opportunity to change the game with a sub was missed (Wolves away is in my mind for some reason - might be wrong)? Anyway, Southgate has no similar excuse, and has been doing it for years. Not pro-active enough at all, but we know this, almost pointless now to debate the merits of Southgate. He’s gonna do his thing and we will get dumped out by the first decent side we meet.

[RodneyCisse]

30 minutes ago, Coffee_Johnny said:

That sounds like a winning combo to me. 

Dont be so sensible.

[Cf]

41 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

You don't think Eddie pre-plans most of his subs?

 

I mean most managers will go into a game with a reasonable idea of what subs they're planning to make it things are going to plan. But Eddie can make changes on the hoof if he needs to. Let's not compare him to Southgate.

[huss9]

36 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Unless a goal is conceded Eddie is doing what Eddie planned from the start. Evidence: the numerous times Burn had been getting burned for 60+ minutes in a game. He's only getting subbed if we concede and need to chase. Good, bad, indifferent - Longstaff ain't getting subbed unless we are 3+ up.

 

Pre-planning the Saka sub made sense, including the time. You can't take him off after that first-half.

 

If Eddie planned on Foden playing 90 minutes, Foden would play 90 minutes.

 

 

 

you said eddie make the same changes no matter what is happening on the pitch.

but then you say "unless such and such happens".

 

and what you said about eddie and foden. come on, thats not true at all.

 

[The College Dropout]

Just now, huss9 said:

you said eddie make the same changes no matter what is happening on the pitch.

but then you say "unless such and such happens".

 

and what you said about eddie and foden. come on, thats not true at all.

 

Eddie pre-plans his subs. That includes pre-plans for chasing a game and holding on a to lead.  
 

He likes to wait an hour before any subs too. 
 

Most managers are like this tbh. 

[tinoasprilla]

I must have watched a different game as I didn’t see England play with a 10.  It was 4 3 3 with Rice in the middle, TAA right and Bellingham left.  TAA in the team to hit long diagonals to the left wing where we don’t have anyone as Foden drifts in.  All the attacks down our right at which point Bellingham breaks forward and TAA sits.  All the Serbs did second half was push their LCB onto Saka.  Leaving 2 on Kane who they know can’t run in behind.  We are/were predictable no plan B although I think the Serbs aren’t a bad team in fairness

 

i reckon Gordon will be lucky to get 10 minutes unless we beat Denmark then he will play in the last group game 

[KingArthur]

10 hours ago, tgarve said:

I haven’t read this thread but I can feel the negativity already with my friends.

 

That was a good result against a team that is stubborn strong and we did well to win

 

Expectations too high

Serbia is quite crap to be honest, and had England on the ropes for a long while. Very disappointing and negative start.

[Yorkie]

3 minutes ago, tinoasprilla said:

I must have watched a different game as I didn’t see England play with a 10.  It was 4 3 3 with Rice in the middle, TAA right and Bellingham left.  TAA in the team to hit long diagonals to the left wing where we don’t have anyone as Foden drifts in.  All the attacks down our right at which point Bellingham breaks forward and TAA sits.  All the Serbs did second half was push their LCB onto Saka.  Leaving 2 on Kane who they know can’t run in behind.  We are/were predictable no plan B although I think the Serbs aren’t a bad team in fairness

 

i reckon Gordon will be lucky to get 10 minutes unless we beat Denmark then he will play in the last group game 

 

Yeah I think you're right tbh. It was 4-2-3-1 out of possession but 4-3-3 in it. This is Bellingham's touch map. 

 

[Likelylad]

One thing i've noticed on social media today, is that supporters of specific teams are looking to defend their own players to any criticism.

I've seen Liverpool fans refusing to admit that TAA wasn't particularly great in CM, City fans blaming Bellingham for Foden's poor performance and Man U fans whinging that it's all because Rashford isn't there.

 

[KaKa]

8 minutes ago, Likelylad said:

One thing i've noticed on social media today, is that supporters of specific teams are looking to defend their own players to any criticism.

I've seen Liverpool fans refusing to admit that TAA wasn't particularly great in CM, City fans blaming Bellingham for Foden's poor performance and Man U fans whinging that it's all because Rashford isn't there.

 

 

Noticed the same. So pathetic!

[Cf]

The last thing you'll have seen here is people claiming Gordon would have fixed everything.

[Cf]

But I do agree  

[Shearergol]

4 minutes ago, Cf said:

The last thing you'll have seen here is people claiming Gordon would have fixed everything.

 

Gordon would fix anything and everything. Whatever the question, he's the answer.

[TheBrownBottle]

6 hours ago, Tiresias said:

I am not going to overreact, it's a win, we didn't concede and plenty of good tournament teams grind them out. But there is some muddy thinking going on. I do not blame Southgate too much for Foden having a poor game, I think he would be entitled to expect Foden to be more effective than he was. But I do not understand why we are having TAA learn to be a midfielder at a tournament...Also when Gallagher comes on for him looks like he is the backup, now I do rate Gallagher but again he is a bustling risk taking player. England does not produce players who try and keep posession unfortunately. Lewis Cook from Bournemouth is the only one but he seems to have been nowhere near. 

 

Wharton may be that, but you can tell he hasn't been in the set up long enough for Southgate to trust too much. 

 

Again however, digging in and grinding out a 1-0 is very much a good quality for a tournament team. I hope Gordon gets a shout, he would be so much better on that left side than Foden was. Foden is a genius player though but coming on for a tired Saka on his preferred side at 60 minutes could be just as helpful. 

I’m perfectly happy to blame Southgate for Foden’s performances.  They are the performances of a poorly managed player.  The lad is simply playing uncoached for England, it is clear that Southgate cannot get the lad to unlearn elements of what he does for Man City which won’t work in this England side.

 

TAA in midfield is a pisstake.  You’d think Southgate would remember being played in midfield by Keegan and think ‘this isn’t a good idea’.

 

It is just a miserable experience watching a Southgate-managed England side.  They’ve got the best attacking players in this tournament, and this mediocre empty suit has them playing on the back foot with two holding midfielders despite England not producing any holding midfielders.   I just want to be entertained, I’m not that arsed about England winning or losing.  The quicker the glaky looking twat gets the boot the better. 

[TheBrownBottle]

8 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

This isn’t a squad for of world class players. There’s multiple positions of weakness. 

How many international sides historically have been full of world class players?  They usually aren’t.  France 98-00 and Spain 08-12 are the only sides I can think of in my lifetime where this could be said.  Every other international side which won WCs or continental competitions had weaknesses.

 

England has a significant proportion of top players, and relative to the rest of the teams in the tournament potentially has more than anyone else, which is not something which we could say historically.  Southgate is pissing away the country’s best ever opportunity to win international competitions.  Euro 2020 will always be the nadir for this - and that Serbia game was remarkably similar.  Take an early lead then retreat into a shell, when the talent was there to go and get a killer second goal if you only had the bollocks to go and get it.  

[leffe186]

7 hours ago, Sibierski said:

I mean, Bowen did nearly get the assist but for a great save when he immediately came on, but did anything else literally happen after that? Can't say it was a good sub based on one single contribution. He's not a ball retention player, so outside that, he was a passenger for rest of the game.

Naah, he worked hard, defended well, made some nice runs forward. He did fine, but like others have said, Serbia were focused on that side because they weren’t asked any questions on the other.

 

It’s just frustrating when it was so obvious Gordon should come on. To the point where I genuinely wonder if he’s carrying a knock or something.

[Kaizero]

As a neutral, it really, really, bugs me how shit Southgate is making England play given how offensive and technically gifted most of this generation of England players are

[Yorkie]

Thought that was a decent and balanced debate on ITV ahead of this France game, there.  

 

It wasn't pretty last night but the win was so important and affords us the time to fine-tune and grow into this system in the remaining games. Obviously if it goes badly wrong against Denmark then you change it up. 

 

It's the age-old issue with the England team but the fact of the matter is - those front six are the six best players. They've given themselves the breathing space to try and make it work, so they should go unchanged for me. 

[Ronaldo]

6 hours ago, Likelylad said:

One thing i've noticed on social media today, is that supporters of specific teams are looking to defend their own players to any criticism.

I've seen Liverpool fans refusing to admit that TAA wasn't particularly great in CM, City fans blaming Bellingham for Foden's poor performance and Man U fans whinging that it's all because Rashford isn't there.

 

Man U fans don’t even want Rashford at Man U, let alone playing for England. Unless you’re taking about Man U fans from ‘elsewhere’.