England -v- USA, Sat 7:30PM RTE & ITV HD

Flukey

Frank Spencer wrote: »

The social networking site Twitter was immediately deluged with complaints about the coverage. One poster named "Timwellspent" wrote: "ITV HD missed England's goal because it was playing an advert. A joke and embarrassment quite frankly."

The last sentence is a good description of the second goal.

Jimmy Iovine

Anyone watching You're On Sky Sports now. Always a good laugh with the shite they spout but this time it's crazy.

According to Jake from Carlisle Gerrard was the best player on the pitch and had his best game ever for them. He backed it up by saying he wasn't even a Liverpool supporter. Tony Cascarino disagreed saying Terry was.

Haven't a clue what match either of these lads were watching. Disgraceful really

Lukker-

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Anyone watching You're On Sky Sports now. Always a good laugh with the shite they spout but this time it's crazy.

According to Jake from Carlisle Gerrard was the best player on the pitch and had his best game ever for them. He backed it up by saying he wasn't even a Liverpool supporter. Tony Cascarino disagreed saying Terry was.

Haven't a clue what match either of these lads were watching. Disgraceful really

Who'd you think was?

SlickRic

just in to give a quick review of my thoughts.

Green...dear dear dear. you're the latest in a long line of England keepers at the WC, so don't be too hard on yourself

England were not only poor, but the way they played as a unit was so full of fear. the made no attempt to pass through an inferior US team, and they got exactly what they deserved for simply trying to punt it up the field.

there were a few good performances though.

Terry was outstanding for one. a rock, and a real leader. i don't think he lost a single header today, and bailed a couple of his colleagues out of trouble on a couple of occasions.

Gerrard was also very impressive first half, causing me to turn to my mate and ask 'where the f*ck's he been for the last year?'.

Johnson looked a threat going forward, and Heskey did all that could be asked of him, considering we all know he can't hit a barn door. did one person think he'd score that 1-on-1? Lennon was also decent.

Capello is making the same mistake Ancelotti did with Lampard, though it could be argued he had no choice tonight. you ask him to sit, you lose pretty much everything that's good about his game, bar the odd pot-shot if he happens to get room.

if i was Capello , next game...

---

Barry

---

---

Lampard

---

Lennon

---

Stevie

---

Cole

---

Rooney

---

if that makes sense??

Lampard needs to be allowed to influence the game further forward, i only noticed him about 60mins in. Gerrard can't control a game, Lampard can. so i would concentrate on building the team around that, because at the moment, it's all a bit of a mess of lump it forward, get the second ball, and go from there. more control is needed.

credit to USA though, they fought well. and the probably had the MOTM is Onyewu.

also, was in Sinnotts in town for it. f*cking hilarious amount of support for USA. U.....S.....A chants were at full strength.

Dr. Nick

In defence of England, 1994 WC, Italy 0, Ireland 1. One of those teams went on to the final and lost on penalties.....

JPA

SWP is a terrible player, why would anyone pick him.
I think your team is good Slick Ric but swap SWP for J. Cole giving him a license to roam or swap with Lennon.

SlickRic

JPA wrote: »

SWP is a terrible player, why would anyone pick him.
I think your team is good Slick Ric but swap SWP for J. Cole giving him a license to roam or swap with Lennon.

good point.

i went blank on who else England had as an option.

i might just edit that.

herbieflowers

I actually thought England played well. They created some decent opportunites (Lennon was a constant threat) but I don't think people are giving the USA credit - they were extremely resolute and dogged in defence, always getting a good tackle / block in.

Defensively they were solid, apart from Carragher being left for dead I can't remember any decent chances the US had.

OPENROAD

herbieflowers wrote: »

I actually thought England played well. They created some decent opportunites (Lennon was a constant threat) but I don't think people are giving the USA credit - they were extremely resolute and dogged in defence, always getting a good tackle / block in.

Agree, everyone seems to be knocking the Americans, rte were very harsh on them imo, they are a very decent team, actually think they would probably beat Ireland imo

SlickRic

herbieflowers wrote: »

Defensively they were solid, apart from Carragher being left for dead I can't remember any decent chances the US had.

agreed.

meaning England should really have been able to control the game, get Cole and Johnson going down the flanks, and put the game to bed.

but they didn't. they chose the 'lump it to Heskey' option.

pathetic tbh.

i'm surprised Rooney didn't nut someone he was seeing so little of the ball.

and, as i've said before, England will never win this World Cup if they do not get Rooney into the game at almost every given opportunity.

herbieflowers

OPENROAD wrote: »

Agree, everyone seems to be knocking the Americans, rte were very harsh on them imo, they are a very decent team, actually think they would probably beat Ireland imo

.

steelcityblues

Lukker- wrote: »

Who'd you think was?

Landon Donovan for me!

herbieflowers

SlickRic wrote: »

agreed.

meaning England should really have been able to control the game, get Cole and Johnson going down the flanks, and put the game to bed.

but they didn't. they chose the 'lump it to Heskey' option.

pathetic tbh.

i'm surprised Rooney didn't nut someone he was seeing so little of the ball.

and, as i've said before, England will never win this World Cup if they do not get Rooney into the game at almost every given opportunity.

I think they had control of the game. It's always going to be tough against a team as well organised as they were. The freak goal let them back into it and it knocked England big time. Up until that point they were comfortable, the second half they dominated, just couldn't find a way through. Not a terrible, miserable or awful performance by any means. But I don't think it was a bad performance, they just came up against a very well-drilled side who did their homework.

Re: Rooney, I just felt the US did a great job on denying him space anytime he got the ball. When he did come from deep they got close to him or fouled him. They frustrated him, he was out on the wing at one point!

dartbhoy

I had to laugh at the so called experts on ITV saying that England played really well! What game were they watching? USA work well together as a team unit and are a good bunch of grafters but their an average team. England lacked ideas on the field and looked like a team with no plan. It was a terrible mistake by Green for the goal but if their so good they should have been good enough to comeback and win that game but tonight clearly proved their not a good team!

Jimmy Iovine

Lukker- wrote: »

Who'd you think was?

I thought Gerrard was very good in the first half. The only thing I feel was that while he was a real driving force he was a bit wasteful with his passing.

Second half was a different matter. Gerrard and Lampard looked like they never played together before and this hampered the teams performances.

I thought Johnson was good going forward as was Cole at times. Rooney was very distant at times but it could be argue his support was lacking.

For the Americans, Howard was very good in goal. Showed good courage in going for the cross with Heskey where he got the knock.

Onyewu bossed around Heskey thus cutting out the route 1 approach.

Bradley in midfield showed some great touches and when England sat off him as they did in the first half at times he really used it economically.

Also forgot about Donovan. Has a great delivery on him. If only Altidore could head the bloody thing

In short I'd probably give it to Onyewu.

OPENROAD

dartbhoy wrote: »

I had to laugh at the so called experts on ITV saying that England played really well! What game were they watching? USA work well together as a team unit and are a good bunch of grafters but their an average team. England lacked ideas on the field and looked like a team with no plan. It was a terrible mistake by Green for the goal but if their so good they should have been good enough to comeback and win that game but tonight clearly proved their not a good team!

Adrian Chiles certainly did not think so

Did you watch the rte coverage?

dartbhoy

OPENROAD wrote: »

Adrian Chiles certainly did not think so

Did you watch the rte coverage?

I was flicking back and forward between RTE and ITV. Kevin Keegan was praising the England performance but IMO that performance was dreadful. While they did have a lot of possession the distribution of the ball was terrible and Rooney wasn't given 1 decent ball all night. Still though it's early days and they have time to improve. England and USA should still qualify out of the group IMO.

Mister men

herbieflowers wrote: »

I actually thought England played well. They created some decent opportunites (Lennon was a constant threat) but I don't think people are giving the USA credit - they were extremely resolute and dogged in defence, always getting a good tackle / block in.

Defensively they were solid, apart from Carragher being left for dead I can't remember any decent chances the US had.

Well put it this way if England play like that againest any one of the top teams they will be out.

allthedoyles

Gerrarrd is only worth about 30 minutes on the pitch.

Don't matter what they do ...............last 16 only

JerryHandbag

Oneywu was superb for USA alright.

Just as a side, RTE said there were 7 of the starting USA team that had played/currently play in England....DeMerit, Dempsey, Donovan, Howard, Altidore, anyone know who the other 2 were? Was Onyewu one of them?

Peyton Manning

JerryHandbag wrote: »

Oneywu was superb for USA alright.

Just as a side, RTE said there were 7 of the starting USA team that had played/currently play in England....DeMerit, Dempsey, Donovan, Howard, Altidore, anyone know who the other 2 were? Was Onyewu one of them?

Yup, he was on loan at Newcastle.

The other is Bocanegra btw.

SlickRic

herbieflowers wrote: »

I think they had control of the game. It's always going to be tough against a team as well organised as they were. The freak goal let them back into it and it knocked England big time. Up until that point they were comfortable, the second half they dominated, just couldn't find a way through. Not a terrible, miserable or awful performance by any means. But I don't think it was a bad performance, they just came up against a very well-drilled side who did their homework.

Re: Rooney, I just felt the US did a great job on denying him space anytime he got the ball. When he did come from deep they got close to him or fouled him. They frustrated him, he was out on the wing at one point!

while much of what you say, i believe, is kind of true, i think England had 'control' of the game, but not because they were playing in a controlled manner.

they weren't ever under much pressure, because USA were pretty toothless (until Carra v Altidore ), but they didn't stamp any authority on the game, like you'd expect a top side to do. the US were dogged, but they weren't even that well drilled - it was a solid, if not necessarily brilliant, defensive performance.

England had enough quality to control that game properly - play it through Lampard, get it to the wings where the likes of Lennon and Johnson blatantly had the beating of USA's left hand side, and just go for it. but Capello, i assume, is encouraging them to go for the safe option when in possession - get it to Heskey in the air.

up against a Spain, Brazil, Holland, or even Argentina, England won't see the ball for f*cking days, and for that reason i just don't think they're capable of winning the tournament.

England's priority should be controlling the game in such a manner that they can get it to the likes of Rooney and Gerrard, in space, and then they can hurt teams. it was too haphazard tonight. maybe i'm being too harsh comparing them to the best teams, i don't know, but i'd expect more from them.

JerryHandbag

Ah yes of course, totally forgot Bocanegra played at Fulham.

Laois_Man

Haven't read this whole thread. Not sure if something similar has been said.

If I was an England supporter, I'd be very disappointed with the job Capello is doing. That team tonight, in terms of personnel at least, was pretty much what you'd have gotten from Sven.

England are nothing short of rubbish in as many as SIX positions. Namely,
keeper,
right back (in defensive terms at least),
one of the centre backs.
No holding midfielder.
No left winger whatsoever.
Partner for Rooney

In some of these positions, the manager has left very capable players AT HOME.

Left winger for example. He sees Milner having a stinker and replaces him with yet another RIGHT winger. Meanwhile, the like of Adam Johnson, Stewart downing, ashley young etc are at home.

I think adam Johnson's gonna be a hell of a player by the way. Been saying so since I first saw him at Boro

RichTea

Only seen the match now. Dear lord, England were poor.

Short match report


BTW, serious fail by ITV HD1. You'd think they'd have learned their lesson by now. For shame.

Kold

I thought SWP did pretty well myself and he looked hungry. Milner just didn't look comfortable on the left.

SlickRic

Laois_Man wrote: »

If I was an England supporter, I'd be very disappointed with the job Capello is doing.

let's not go overboard...

Laois_Man wrote: »

England are nothing short of rubbish in as many as SIX positions. Namely,
keeper,
right back (in defensive terms at least),
one of the centre backs.
No holding midfielder.
No left winger whatsoever.
Partner for Rooney

Johnson is not rubbish, even defensively. he's average at worst in that aspect.

King is fine when fit, as could Dawson be, and Rio if he was fit. Capello obviously preferred Carra's experience to Dawson's form tonight - almost cost England.

i agree on the holding midfielder. the fact he seems to have to rely on someone as ordinary as Barry is laughable. as much as i don't think Carrick's up to much these days, and Huddlestone is very green, i'm shocked he didn't bring one of them. or even Parker.

no left-footed midfielder in the squad is indeed lunacy. for that reason alone i'd have had Adam Johnson in, even though he plays on the right normally.

Rooney would be best suited, in this order IMO;

1) up front on his own.
2) Gerrard as his partner (a la his Torres partnership)
3) Heskey (if the ball wasn't lumped up every time Heskey's on the field).

Laois_Man wrote: »

Left winger for example. He sees Milner having a stinker and replaces him with yet another RIGHT winger. Meanwhile, the like of Adam Johnson, Stewart downing, ashley young etc are at home.

Downing and Young have not been good enough this year; both tailed off badly towards the end of the season especially IMO.

as i've already said, Adam Johnson should have gone.

while the squad is not in the greatest shape IMO, i think Capello has instilled an organisation and work ethic that was lacking; for that alone he's done a very good job. plus his near faultless qualifying campaign. he's made them an efficient enough unit, that can beat most teams no matter how they're playing.

that next level to Spain, Brazil etc is the elusive one.

steelcityblues

Shearer just said he is 'pretty sure England will win the remaining two matches'!

Funny if his prediction fell flat on his Geordie a**.

JPA

Just realise Heskey played the role he is there for, he wasn't rubbish, he played exactly what was asked of him, if you think that role in itself is a rubbish role which should not exist fair enough, but Heskey played it very well.

Kold

I thought the role was to hold up the ball and play Rooney in. In this role he didn't play that well really. I'd prefer Crouch up there as he would at least draw markers off Rooney.

everdead.ie

King out injured for the algeria game I hope Dawson slots in A better(Then Carragher) defender even if he does go for a lot of diagonal long balls.

Where's that lad who said England can now win the world cup because they brought carragher :pac:

On Rooney he's obviously off form but if you leave him out he's never going to get his form back so you have to play him.

On Apres match Modric isn't from slovakia but he's from that area so I expect him to pop up at some stage brilliant stuff

JPA

Kold wrote: »

I thought the role was to hold up the ball and play Rooney in. In this role he didn't play that well really. I'd prefer Crouch up there as he would at least draw markers off Rooney.

Well he set up Gerrard, after that he generally won the high balls, sometimes giving it away no doubt, but generally doing his job to a good standard.

Johnny Utah

Hate to say I told you so, but before tonight's match I posted the following:

Johnny Utah wrote: »

Na Sassanach are in for a tough time tonight. Hopefully, the Yanks can do a job on them!

Johnny Utah wrote: »

Green leaked goals like a sieve all season for the Hammers. That won't do his confidence a lot of good. Ergo, probably should have picked Hart.

Johnny Utah wrote: »

I'd say Theo Walcott has a better chance of scoring than Heskey.

Looks like I was correct on all three counts. :cool:

everdead.ie

JPA wrote: »

Well he set up Gerrard, after that he generally won the high balls, sometimes giving it away no doubt, but generally doing his job to a good standard.

I'd agree Heskey worked well in his part of the system but the system was the problem it wasn't working and Capello was tied after making two early subs Milner wasn't involved and King injured I'd have made both subs although brought on J.Cole for Milner.

OPENROAD

Johnny Utah wrote: »

Hate to say I told you so, but before tonight's match I posted the following:












Looks like I was correct on all three counts. :cool:

The US are a very good team, despite what rte said, a draw is not a bad result for England imo, wish I had stuck money on it now, England will be fine imo, they will still top the group, would like to see Joe Cole starting the nxt match.

Mr.Nice Guy

I'm amazed Heskey is coming out of that game with credit. He won a few headers and passed the ball to a top class player in Gerrard who finished well. Great. He also missed a fantastic chance clear on goal that 90% of top strikers would put away (or at the very least force a save) and he went on to miss a good chance with a header. Call me old fashioned but I want a forward who can actually look threatening and not just be big and win headers.

I thought the rating the NOTW gave him basically summed up the madness of it all:

EMILE HESKEY 7

The choice of Green backfired, but Heskey repaid Capello's faith with great big shovel-loads of hard work, enterprise and creativity. Laid down his marker with two, early towering headers, then bullied the USA centre halves for fun. He may never score another international goal but if he keeps picking passes like the one which played in Gerrard for the opener, Capello will not care. Maybe. The Americans had no answer to him until Jay DeMerit - accidentally - caught him in the head. But just as he does with the critics, the big man came back for more. But. But. But. If he had hit his 52nd-minute shot just a foot or two either side of Howard, England would probably have won. Should probably have gone off sooner.

7/10 for a guy who they acknowledge was wasteful, who missed a chance to seal a win, and - this is the best bit - who they feel should have gone off sooner. WTF? Oh but hey, he had some towering headers and 'enterprise'.

Bloody hell. Ireland might as well call up Gary Doherty again if this is what football is now all about.

JPA

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I'm amazed Heskey is coming out of that game with credit. He won a few headers and passed the ball to a top class player in Gerrard who finished well. Great. He also missed a fantastic chance clear on goal that 90% of top strikers would put away (or at the very least force a save) and he went on to miss a good chance with a header. Call me old fashioned but I want a forward who can actually look threatening and not just be big and win headers.

I thought the rating the NOTW gave him basically summed up the madness of it all:



7/10 for a guy who they acknowledge was wasteful, who missed a chance to seal a win, and - this is the best bit - who they feel should have gone off sooner. WTF? Oh but hey, he had some towering headers and 'enterprise'.

Bloody hell. Ireland might as well call up Gary Doherty again if this is what football is now all about.

I am a Villa fan but I personally hope Heskey is sold this summer, however he was easily one of Englands top 3 players. You are disagreeing with the approach and the tactics, but the player himself was good at what he was in the team to do.

argosy2006

England are for ever worried about their opposition ,
Gerrard and lampard played when they beat Croatia 5-1. and both got two goals, and both attacked,

.......,,,,..james,,,,,,,,,,,,
johnson , carra ..terry ,,,,, cole
........barry ,, carrick
lennon ,,,gerrard,,,,,,,,wright philips
,,,,,,,,,,,,.rooney

barry and carrick to never go forward, just take ball from carra and terry and find there passes to lennon.philips.gerrard. and stay in midfield, no need for heskey and long balls if gerrard is free to support rooney and hold up ball, as good as anyone at that if asked to play de role, just needs it to his feet,
england need to hold ball longer, heskey gave it back to usa 10,254,985 times, england played way to deep also, which is why they never got going tonight, huge hole between back four and gerrard and lampard at times.
Need to move as a group, forward and back, keep spaces tight,
possession possession possession ! seemed to be in huge rush tonight to get it forward and give it away,, if pass is not on its not on, move ball around, whats their rush, its 90 mins, not 10 mins,,. string 20 passes together, !!

nullzero

I've watched analysis from RTE, ITV and now BBC on this game and it's incredible how blinkered the English media are towards what was a shockingly bad perfromance set against the stadards they set for themselves.

Giles and Dunphy were right when they said England's midfield wasn't properly balanced, did ITV or BBC pick up on this? Not a hope.
I know the Brit's will say that our lad's don't know what they're talking about, but the truth is that the Pundits on the UK stations are a joke. I've just heard Shearer and Hansen talking about how affective Gerrard was in midfield, picking out the complete 90 seconds worth of footgae where he was able to make an impact on the game. It's time for either Gerrard or Lampard to be taken out of the team, but can our friends in the BBC see that? Not a chance.
The one bow towards reailty was Lee Dixon saying that John Terry and Carragher looked a bit heavy legged, but apart from that the prognosis from the BBC panel of experts is that England are A OK to go on and win the world cup should they keep performing like they did tonight. It almost has an air of propaganda to it, it's no wonder I and many others sport a wry smile when England get eliminated.

aidan24326

Heskey did the job that was asked of him reasonably well, but there wasn't exactly much finesse to it and if that's the way England are going to continue playing then they are living in cuckoo land if they think they can win this world cup.

I thought the lads on RTE got the analysis fairly spot on for once. Switch over to ITV and it was the usual crap, they were full of praise for England's central midfield. Now Gerrard had a decent game overall, but Lampard wasn't in it at all. Rooney was almost anonymous. He ran around and worked hard like he always does, but that's not what he's there for.

It's hard to think of any England player who came out of this game with much credit. Johnson and Cole in the fullback positions didn't do anything wrong, but then again they weren't stretched either. England will qualify from what is a weak group but they won't be winning it on this evidence.

OPENROAD

nullzero wrote: »

I've watched analysis from RTE, ITV and now BBC on this game and it's incredible how blinkered the English media are towards what was a shockingly bad perfromance set against the stadards they set for themselves.

Giles and Dunphy were right when they said England's midfield wasn't properly balanced, did ITV or BBC pick up on this? Not a hope.
I know the Brit's will say that our lad's don't know what they're talking about, but the truth is that the Pundits on the UK stations are a joke. I've just heard Shearer and Hansen talking about how affective Gerrard was in midfield, picking out the complete 90 seconds worth of footgae where he was able to make an impact on the game. It's time for either Gerrard or Lampard to be taken out of the team, but can our friends in the BBC see that? Not a chance.
The one bow towards reailty was Lee Dixon saying that John Terry and Carragher looked a bit heavy legged, but apart from that the prognosis from the BBC panel of experts is that England are A OK to go on and win the world cup should they keep performing like they did tonight. It almost has an air of propaganda to it, it's no wonder I and many others sport a wry smile when England get eliminated.

Can't stand Hansen( Scotish by the way so not just English pundits), so pro Gerrard

Mr.Nice Guy

JPA wrote: »

I am a Villa fan but I personally hope Heskey is sold this summer, however he was easily one of Englands top 3 players. You are disagreeing with the approach and the tactics, but the player himself was good at what he was in the team to do.

I'm disagreeing with both. I don't see how he was one of their top 3 players. For the assist? Surely any England forward could have given Gerrard that pass as it was terrible defending from the USA. For the role he was in I feel he disappointed. The talk was he was there to help allow Rooney express himself but he didn't. In fact, England looked more dangerous when he went off. According to recent reports Rooney has said he'd prefer to play in a 4-5-1 system. I'm not surprised.

dfx-

I missed the game, but looking at the replay on BBC3 now...

Rooney should have come off for Crouch instead of Heskey, Gerrard should keep his place on his performance alone (captaincy..yeah I know) and Lampard dropped...

Yet as many people posted here at 8:09pm, before the fluke goal, England were doing well. Nowhere near being written off after one game yet..

aidan24326

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

According to recent reports Rooney has said he'd prefer to play in a 4-5-1 system. I'm not surprised.

Before the game I would have bet money that England would start with that 4-5-1 system that Capello seems to favour most of the time. Rooney through the middle, with Lennon and Joe Cole either side of him.

Why play Milner on the left? Milner is a good player but he's never going to offer an awful lot in that left side role. Joe Cole plays there for Chelsea, often to very good effect, so surely it had to be him?

And Crouch can do alot of the same target man stuff that Heskey does, while offering a far greater goal threat.

I really think Capello is placing far too much importance on Gareth Barry. It's like, Barry is injured, so we can't play 4-5-1 without him.

Mr.Nice Guy

aidan24326 wrote: »

Before the game I would have bet money that England would start with that 4-5-1 system that Capello seems to favour most of the time. Rooney through the middle, with Lennon and Joe Cole either side of him.

Why play Milner on the left? Milner is a good player but he's never going to offer an awful lot in that left side role. Joe Cole plays there for Chelsea, often to very good effect, so surely it had to be him?

And Crouch can do alot of the same target man stuff that Heskey does, while offering a far greater goal threat.

I really think Capello is placing far too much importance on Gareth Barry. It's like, Barry is injured, so we can't play 4-5-1 without him.

Yeah I'd agree. I thought he would go with 4-5-1 too. I think it would suit them better. Maybe he'll ring the changes in the next game.

Headshot

He probably went 4-4-2 because he expected england to beat the usa and wasnt worried about being over run in cm, kinda reminds me of the utd situation in terms of 442 against the average teams and 451 against the big teams.

Guy:Incognito

I thought Johnson did his dissappearing right back act he does with Liverpool where he is conspicuous by his absence during opposition attacks, like when Altidore ran at Carragher. There just always seems to be a Glen Johnson shaped hole when you look across the back 4.

With that and the amount Cole likes to get forward I'd go with this for the next game

---

James/Green/Hart (not sure what Capello has in mind there, though I'd expect James)

---Johnson----Terry----Dawson----Cole

---

Carra

---

---

Gerrard

---

Lampard (possibly replaced)

---

Cole

---

---

Rooney---Crouch/Heskey---

With one swap for Carra or Dawson that can switch back to 4-4-2 if needed.

yerayeah

Was just thinking there that Capello is probably wishing that he'd approached Scholes sooner about coming back to the England set up, they could really have used his ability to link play between defence and attack today, rather than hoofing it up to Heskey.

A lot of people n here are saying that Heskey did his job in the system well, which he did I suppose, but the amount of times he A. Was caught offside, or B. Ended up lying on the ground was incredible!:pac:

Imo, as effective as Heskey can be in the current system, Capello is deluded if he thinks he can win a World Cup with Heskey as a crucial cog in his machine!

Glico Man

:pac:

FatherTed

I said in the other World Cup discussion thread that USA are a good team and I was laughed at. Even now posters are saying that it was only that England played badly. They are not given enough credit, I thought Howard, Onyweu, Cherundolo and Bradley were great. They are solid players. Being in the US, I watch almost all of their games and I've seen them play a lot better than they did tonight, thought Clark was hopeless in midfield in the first half (didn't track Gerrard for their goal) but did get much better late in the game. I felt at times Donovan spent too much time closer to the wing and I thought he could come inside especially as he's done so late in games against Mexico, Spain etc.

I thought the backline was tremendous. Cherundolo was brilliant and Onyewu(goal aside) was a monster in there. Great performance considering was his first full 90 minute game since being injured last October.