England V Italy

Kirby

wonderfullife wrote: »

Poor Stevie G had cramp after 70 mins!!

No he didn't. He lost the ball trying to take a man on while looking like a drunk baby deer, felt embarrassed, and faked it to try and get the italians to put the ball out of play....which they did. He has done it before and will likely do it again. It's one of his signature moves. The other two being smashing one in the top corner when minutes from defeat and ofcourse his starfish impression when he gets fouled.

kryogen

Paul Tergat wrote: »

Aye good shout that was the WC that Butt and Sinclair were really good for us

Yeah, it was 2006 that Hargreaves (much maligned when announced in the squad/team) came to the fore and played well in that tournament. Really is a shame about his knees

wonderfullife

kryogen wrote: »

Em, Hargreaves? You have the wrong year buddy.

He played 108 minutes in that world cup

For context Vassell played 99 minutes, Dyer 105 minutes
Sinclair 307 minutes

That was 1st choice team in the Argie game, ok he came off injured but comparing like for like.

monkey9

Kirby wrote: »

No he didn't. He lost the ball trying to take a man on while looking like a drunk baby deer, felt embarrassed, and faked it to try and get the italians to put the ball out of play....which they did. He has done it before and will likely do it again. It's one of his signature moves. The other two being smashing one in the top corner when minutes from defeat and ofcourse his starfish impression when he gets fouled.

LOL! He had cramp.

Paul Tergat

wonderfullife wrote: »

What amazes me is they KNEW before the match the story yet did nothing about it.

In the interview it said we 'worked hard to keep him in check. It seemed that way for maybe the first 15 mins and then he was just left. It was baffling

Paul Tergat

kryogen wrote: »

Didn't Scholes play that in the middle most of the time though? with Sinclair on the left?

Yeah you responded to my correction. It was when Lampard and Gerrard were on the scene he was moved out

kitakyushu

Yeah I thought Hargreaves was only a sub back then too but he was first choice at 2002 until an injury v Argentina. The team was then shuffled around a bit for the remaining 3+ games.

I suspect Gerrard might have even been first choice in CM by 2002 but he missed the whole world cup with injury too.

Kirby

monkey9 wrote: »

LOL! He had cramp.

Amazing that "cramp" only hits players when they are time wasting, miss a sitter or lose possession isn't it?

kryogen

kitakyushu wrote: »

Yeah I thought Hargreaves was only a sub back then too but he was first choice at 2002 until an injury v Argentina. The team was then shuffled around a bit for the remaining 3+ games.

I suspect Gerrard might have even been first choice in CM by 2002 but he missed the whole world cup with injury too.

Gerrard was in the team I think, he definitely had a few caps anyway, Hargo played the first game, I had put it down to the formation used by Sven though? He did impress and then started the second game but got injured and Sinclair came on for him and he also impressed.

Did Hargreaves start on the left v Argentina actually?

kryogen

England fan being interviewed has just said they were desperately unlucky because neither team had a clear cut chance during regulation time, he must have had some dodgy seat to miss some of Balotellis chances!

super_furry

wonderfullife wrote: »

Hodgson knew it yet stuck with 4-4-2 and what do you know they were over-run and outplayed. Poor Stevie G had cramp after 70 mins!! Chasing shadows, they made Italy look like Spain. If/When Germany dismantle Italy it will sink in how poor England were.

And that's Hodgson in a nutshell. He thinks it's still 1981, he plays 4-4-2 and never, ever anything else and he has zero tactical nous. His stone age football is fine for teams battling relegation, but he will never win anything with it.

wonderfullife

Anybody blaming Hodgson for Englands style of play needs to think of the alternative he has. It's like blaming Trap for Irelands style of play. Amazing how 2 managers with amazing CV's - Capello and Trap - both take technically limited teams to good results and the fans blame them for the style of play as opposed to the technically limited players at our disposal.

The "British" style of play, the high tempo sort of stuff going back to the classic days of the mid-90s e.g. Liverpool v Newcastle, out and out attack, that only worked at all because neither team cared much about possession. Nowadays possession is King and you can't play a high tempo end-to-end style if you dont have the ball!!!!

The Premier League is probably the most exciting in the world - due to the amount of class foreign talent and an inability to keep the ball. Barring Swansea and Arsenal, it's still high tempo stuff, which is arguably better to watch than 2 technically gifted sides passing it to death. But to win things at the highest level it simply won't work, they won't give you the ball back to do that and if you can't pass the ball you end up chasing shadows all game.

Ireland chased shadows all game v Spain.
England chased shadows for most of the game v Italy.

Italy showed against Spain it's not illegal or ugly to watch to sit back and soak up pressure and actually pass the ball to each other in possession and create chances. Ireland and England can't do it, we can only keep possession passing it across the back 4 or going sideways or backwards.

wonderfullife

super_furry wrote: »

And that's Hodgson in a nutshell. He thinks it's still 1981, he plays 4-4-2 and never, ever anything else and he has zero tactical nous. His stone age football is fine for teams battling relegation, but he will never win anything with it.

totally agree he got the formation wrong but i find it funny that people think the negative style of play is all Hodgson, England have not been good to watch in so long.

The man on the moon could have told ya to go 4-5-1 tonight. Madness.

kryogen

Possession is king, and to think that deploying 2 players against Italys midfield and standing off them was going to win the battle for possession is a bit mad is it not?

You are defending Hodgson based on the fact that football has moved on tactically yet are also defending his outdated tactics?

kryogen

wonderfullife wrote: »

totally agree he got the formation wrong but i find it funny that people think the negative style of play is all Hodgson, England have not been good to watch in so long.

The man on the moon could have told ya to go 4-5-1 tonight. Madness.

The negative style is Hodgson though, regardless of the players that is how he plays, that is his system.

Look at the teams he has managed and watch how they played. He even did it with Liverpool even though they had a squad with good players in it.

sReq | uTeK

I Don't understand it, people just seem to contradict themselves on post by post basis.

you say Hodgson is limited with the players he's got, that may well be, you say he's a good manager as he setup England as hard to break down with 2 banks of 4 and 2 forwards up top and that nothing he could do would have changed the game, that's horse****.

Being technically limited team doesn't stop the manager adopting a like for like 3 man center in order to deal with 3 Italians passing the ball around Gerrard or Parker for 120 minutes as if they weren't even there. You don't need to be technically gifted to put in a good ****ing graft and get in peoples faces. I.E Stephen Hunt

Being technically limited doesn't justify his decision in bringing on Carroll for Wellbeck when it should have been Rooney going off (I'm a united fan btw)
Not only that bring on and putting Carroll deep and having Rooney running off him with no energy left, whilst Rooney drops back and links up the play arguably being his best position.

I wonder what actual top managers say when they see these things, is Fergie, Pep and Jose at home with tears of laughter running down their face?

Anyway, mind boggling.

Renn

SharpshooterTom

Hodgson's pretty much the same as Capello and Sven, offers nothing different it appears. I hear a lot of "hard to beat" "well organised" etc but they were like that under Sven in the three QF's he played in, sit back, soak up the pressure against Portugal. Didn't work either.

TheTownie

Renn wrote: »

Sure didn't I predict it! :pac:

TheTownie wrote: »

Either way JT will be celebrating at the end...

aidan24326

Tactical this or that aside England just weren't good enough. Fergie or Mourinho could be manager and it would make no difference.

Glen Johnson, James Milner, Danny Welbeck and Ashley Young were all very poor, and Milner is generally a very mediocre player at this sort of level (has there ever been a player more lucky to be earning 100K per weeK??)

Then you add in Rooney having an absolute stinker and that's half the team that were nowhere near good enough.

markie29

aidan24326 wrote: »

Tactical this or that aside England just weren't good enough. Fergie or Mourinho could be manager and it would make no difference.

Glen Johnson, James Milner, Danny Welbeck and Ashley Young were all very poor, and Milner is generally a very mediocre player at this sort of level (has there ever been a player more lucky to be earning 100K per weeK??)

Then you add in Rooney having an absolute stinker and that's half the team that were nowhere near good enough.

Glen Johnson was one of Englands better performers over the 4 games...Welbeck showed signs of promise during the tournament too.

But you are right with Milner and Young they were awful during each game they contributed nothing going forward and they should have been on the bench for last nights game.

Orando Broom

markie29 wrote: »

Glen Johnson was one of Englands better performers over the 4 games...Welbeck showed signs of promise during the tournament too.

But you are right with Milner and Young they were awful during each game they contributed nothing going forward and they should have been on the bench for last nights game.

:eek:Be jaysus! He was woeful! Last night Italy ran almost every attack down the inside left channel knowing that he lacked the wit to close down the positions and Terry lacked the legs. He is an awful, awful player and one of the primary causes why the the defensive England team can't actually defend.

The lack of balance in that side caused by himself Terry and Milner is a damning indictment of how poor England really are.

aidan24326

markie29 wrote: »

Glen Johnson was one of Englands better performers over the 4 games...Welbeck showed signs of promise during the tournament too.

But you are right with Milner and Young they were awful during each game they contributed nothing going forward and they should have been on the bench for last nights game.

Maybe I was harsh on Johnson but he wasn't 'one of England's better performers'. Micah Richards is a better player anyway. I'd stand by what I said about the other players. Welbeck wasn't awful and yes he has some potential but he's still a fair bit short of what's needed at this level. Whether he'll be the man for the job in future is debatable I think. It's a far cry from the days when they could choose from Shearer, Sheringham, Fowler, Owen, Cole and Ferdinand.

Roy had a bit of the Trappatonis about him in his refusal to change things around or alter the system, or use his squad more effectively. Not much point in bringing players that you clearly have no intention of using.

Jimmy Iovine

Paul Tergat wrote: »

Aye good shout that was the WC that Butt and Sinclair were really good for us

Don't forget that Pele said that Butt was one of his players of the tournament for the holding role that he played in the England team.

Butt is the player who has been consistent with his good marking, pressure and passing

Great praise no doubt, but it is marred a little by some of Pele's other claims over the last few years.

Renn

NSFW


https://p.twimg.com/AwOvuHnCIAAk4Fo.jpg:large

El Weirdo

http://www.wsc.co.uk/forum-index/35-euro-2012/682682-euro-2012-match-report-england-v-italy

INCREDIBLE ENGLAND SHATTER ITALY INTO A THOUSAND TINY PRINCIPALITIES 0-0

The mystery of what has happened to Italy over the last two thousand years is one that has baffled historians and evolutionary theorists alike. Centuries ago, Italy was home to the Roman Empire, which stretched from Gaul to territorial holdings in Africa and Asia. They might even have conquered Britain had Boudicca not driven these short skirted invaders back into the channel, having first confiscated all their Latin books for the future education and benefit of English schoolboys. How did this noble imperium degenerate into the oilslicked, girl-man, caterwauling shambles of a nation set before England today, a nation whose cars are in almost all instances smaller than their mothers, in which it is necessary to enrol in the Mafia in order to acquire the services of a plumber, a nation whose economy consists of a people extorting, bribing, waiting tables upon one another? At the rate at which the Italians are un-evolving, at a species, there is conjecture among experts that by the year 2500, they will be struggling to be classified as chickens.

To say that Italy has had an undistinguished past hundred or so years is a gross understatement. Had it not been for Mr Joe Dolce at the tail of the century, which is saying very little indeed, the entire period would have been a washout. Their military record; proud conquerors of Abyssinia. This is the equivalent of boosting your self esteem by going out into the street and randomly beating up an elderly African man. Having done this many times, I can assure both Italy and the reader that it is no substitute for the rigours and rewards of empire and conquest. But then, war is war. As Mussolini found to his cost, it is no use writhing around on the floor hoping to be awarded a free kick by the War Crimes Tribunal when you are being overrun by the allies.

(Speaking of which, I stage an affecting ceremony in the local village each year in which, for the education of local children, I re-enact the defeat of the axis power Italy in World War II. Seppings, head shaved and pillows stuffed up shirt, plays Mussolini, whom I proceed to hang upside down from a lamppost, with the children encouraged to go at him, Mexican style, with sticks. It is both enjoyable and instructive, reinforcing in the youth a sense of what it takes to defeat those who stand in the way of Allied forces.)

It is as well that Italy were subsumed into the Euro, for prior to its introduction, the lire was in danger of becoming the world's first homeopathic currency. But gross fiscal incompetence is the least of this nation's worries. Italy is, the map shows us, the most effeminately shaped country in the world. It is in the shape of a woman's knee length high heeled boot, about to slip in the cowpat that is Sicily and fall over comically. Appallingly, one of its principal cities is called Florence. To put this in context, this is the equivalent of our own Birmingham being called Jemima, or the city of Nottingham being known as Melanie. This would not stand. Newcastle, Beryl. You see my point.

In short, then, a blubbering, imploring, dough-throwing, volubly jabbering, nipple tweaking, pointlessly gesticulating, manbag wielding, gelato-guzzling, match fixing, power ballad murdering, Berlusconi electing, homophobic yet homosexual being, crocodile skinning, women-minding-their-own-business annoying, against themselves betting, octopus boiling, opera ruining, prostitutes for referees arranging, artichoke drowning, banker assassinating, flare throwing, jumper around neck draping, law of the land flouting, mother suckling, moped worshipping, building code violating, dog maltreating, still volubly jabbering, calf slaughtering, corruption-to-the-level-of-haute-cuisine-elevating, freely urinating, Corsica fearing, too many children having, far too old growing, olive oil lacquering, checked scarf around mouth wrapping, red trousers tolerating, horse abusing, Germany helping, as-a-result-of-the-television-stations-broadcasting-nothing-but-crap-outdoors-all-the-time-staying, goat from tree hanging, around-London-in-loud-groups-of-sixty-wandering, zucchini munching, Zucchero-producing, tight shiny suit wearing, caffeinated tar slurping shower of effluent in sub-human shape, and rotten rascals to boot.

The national anthems were the measure of our two nations and our utter disparity. We, the English, who in recent years have enjoyed dominion across the entire globe, the Italians who enjoy dominion over the cake trolley. Our own was brayed with unflinching, patriotic, rabid fervour, the force of which doubtless prompted a watching Prince Phillip, as it rang in his ears, to slide into his slippers, don his gown, and tiptoe across the corridor to demand, for the first time in 40 years, his conjugal rights with Her Majesty. The Italians' puffed up, tinpot brass emission, by contrast, sounded like the sort of thing the Freedonia Marching Band would strike up prior to an inspection by Mr Groucho Marx.

There had been talk prior to the game that the Italians would be too frightened to emerge from their dressing room, or would only do so that they be allowed to come onto the pitch holding the hands not of the team escorts but their mothers. Eventually, however, they strode out, typically giving no sign of the drama that had most probably taken place minutes earlier.

The game began at a cracking pelt – so much so that it was almost necessary for a man waving a red flag to walk in front of both sides' rapid advance up the pitch. Italy could be said to have dictated the game but dictatorships are the Italian way – England were Prime Ministerial by contrast. Indeed, it would not be too high praise to describe them as Cameronesque at times. Scott Parker proved his absolute complete and total utter usefulness as he reluctantly collected the ball from a throw-in deep in the Italian half, did a three point turn and then lost possession. In this respect he exhibited true English values of modesty and generosity. Some officious blighter put up a statistic suggesting that England had completed far fewer passes than the Italians but this is to overlook two things; that as any visitor to the Via Veneto will confirm, Italian passes are always obscenely high in number, while Gerrard's perfectly placed deliveries, the equivalent of trying to sink a six yard putt by flying off a ramp Evel Knievel style on a motorcycle, crashing onto the green and then hurling a number six iron in the general direction of the ball, would have broken the needle on UEFA's pass-ometer and therefore not have registered.

As Italy persisted with the dangerous Negro experiment Balotelli (it is no coincidence that his name rhymes with Mary Shelley), England sported with their opponents, even sarcastically inviting them into their own penalty box. Granted, there were miscommunications out on the left wing – Ashley Young at times appeared to be getting himself mixed up with Ashley Cole but this is an understandable error to which I am generally prone, so no blame should be attached to him. It has been an excellent idea for young Young to be allowed along to spectate at these games, running up and down the channel and observing proceedings – it will set him in good stead for future tournaments such as 2024 when he might have matured into some sort of a feckful, remotely functional non-liability.

With England's dominance assured (even a draw would have seen us go through on the countback system, having won one more world war than the Italians), we could afford to enjoy watching Rooney put on an exhibition – he certainly is an exhibit of some sort, his entire body a future bequest to the Pitt Rivers museum in the making. As the poor Italian fans in the likes of Bologna crowded round the town radio in anxiety, we English could put our feet up in utter relaxation at England's ability to advance inches at a time, for seconds at a time without once losing possession, even allowing Andy Carroll (an excellent animal, owned by an American consortium) to enjoy the going at a canter. Mr Mark Lawrenson, listening to whom is by no means like having the pub bore at your elbow as you watch the match, provided excellent commentary. “Health and safety, no doubt,” he quipped at one point as a stretcher was brought onto the pitch. I laughed so hard I defecated, bloodily. Come the final whistle and England whimsically agreed, as they have in the past, to put on a penalty exhibition, strictly for fun, in which it is considered good form to allow the opposition to win, and go on to enjoy some chimpanzee's tea party of celebration.

The game having gone to extra time, and myself in urgent requirement of an extended toilet break, I shall allow Seppings to conclude the formalities of this report, which will essentially consist of summarising remarks regarding the semi-final and perhaps a precis of tonight's Shipping Forecast. He will then submit it for publication.

FOR ****'S SAKE, ENGLAND, YOU TECHNICAL ****ING TROGLODYTES, THERE ARE ****ING LABORATORY ****ING GORILLAS WITH ELECTRODES ATTACHED TO THEIR GONADS WHO'VE ****ING COTTONED ON QUICKER THAN YOU GORMLESS, BUTTOCKWRINKLED FLESHLUMPS OF INCOMPREHENDING ****ING AGONY WHY WE **** UP AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN! DON'T ****ING CHARGE AT THE ****ING BALL LIKE IT'S A ****ING SASSENACH AND YOU'RE ****ING MEL GIBSON IN BRAVEHEART, JUST LEARN TO STEER THE **** THREE YARDS IN THE DIRECTION OF THE ****ING WHITE SHIRTED ****ING MOUTHBREATHING ****ING MILLIONAIRE STANDING ****ING ADJACENT TO YOU! KNOW WHY WE KEEP ****ING LOSING ON PENALTIES? IT'S NOT BECAUSE IT'S ****ING WRITTEN IN THE ****ING STARS! NOTHING IS WRITTEN IN THE ****ING STARS, YOU SMEGMA-WITTED, INEPTLY PROPITIATING, STONEAGE ****ING FATALISTS! THE REASON YOU **** UP AT PENALTIES ISN'T THE UNIVERSE ****ING WITH ENGLAND'S HEAD, IT'S CAUSALLY ****ING CONNECTED TO THE FACT THAT, AS YOU DEMONSTRATE IN GAME AFTER GAME AFTER GAME, YEAR IN, YEAR OUT, YOU CAN'T ****ING KICK A BALL STRAIGHT BECAUSE YOU'VE STILL GOT THE WORDS “GET RID!” ECHOING IN YOUR ****ING EARS FROM WHEN YOU WERE SOME LITTLE WHELP RUNNING AROUND AN UNDER 7'S GAME IN ****ING 1992 WITH YOUR MULLET-HEADED, PUCE-FACED, PANIC-STRICKEN DADS SCREAMING AT YOU IN SOME ****ING ENGLISH, SEX-FAMISHED FRENZY! EVEN WHEN YOU TAKE A ****ING PENALTY, THE WORDS “GET RID” ARE PUMPING ROUND YOUR ****ING BLOOD-ADDLED HEADS! YOU **** UP BECAUSE YOU'RE ENGLISH! A NATION OF PINCH-FACED, CLARKSON-IDOLISING, HOSEPIPE BAN-RESENTING, GNOME HOARDING, CUL-DE-SAC-INVENTING, GREGGS-ENRICHING, **** DECISION-MAKING, BLOTCHY PACK OF RUNT***** WHO'D STILL BE RIDING AROUND IN SQUARE-WHEELED WAGONS ****TING IN YOUR FRONTYARDS IF IT HADN'T BEEN FOR THE FOREIGNERS YOU DESPISE SHOWING YOU THE VERY BASIC ****ING ART OF PLUMBING! WHILE ENGLAND IS ENGLAND THIS WILL NEVER, EVER, ****ING END, EVER!

Gbear

wonderfullife wrote: »

Amazing how 2 managers with amazing CV's - Capello and Trap -

You're killing me.:D

Trap has won 6 Italian league titles. Also a German, a Portuguese and an Austrian one.
He's won a European cup, and 3 UEFA cups.

The Hodge has won some obscure nothing-leagues. An utterly hilarious comparison.

England had less of the ball against Italy than Ireland did.

The problem wasn't that evident last night though. You could play better than England did and still lose to Italy.

It's that Hodgson also played this reactive kind of football against the Ukraine. Ukraine had 60% possession against England. England should be dominating a team as ****e as the Ukraine.

Ultimately, group D was a farce. Sweden were awful, France were pretty ****e as well and the Ukraine aren't very good at football in general. The absolute minimum would've been getting out of that group. Having done so is no achievement.

If England keep playing this way for the WC qualifiers then I don't think they'll qualify.

28064212

Gbear wrote: »

wonderfullife wrote: »

Amazing how 2 managers with amazing CV's - Capello and Trap

You're killing me.:D

Wait for it...

...


Wait for it...

Orando Broom

Wonder will there be any retirements form the England Squad? Gerrard? Terry?

kitakyushu

Renn wrote: »

NSFW


https://p.twimg.com/AwOvuHnCIAAk4Fo.jpg:large

I think the goalkeeper jersey was off-putting enough, never mind the rest. Hart probably should have chosen to wear that one for the game itself.

cgpg5

Orando Broom wrote: »

Wonder will there be any retirements form the England Squad? Gerrard? Terry?

JT's only 31. Has another major in him yet definitely. Gerrard is hard to know, I'd imagine he'll find it hard to get into the team what with lads like Barry and Wilshere to come back but I guess it'll depend on formation used.

wonderfullife

England were summed up by a brief passage of play last night. John Terry makes a great tackle, gets the ball, beats a man and kicks it 15 yards to an Italian foot.

People laud Scott Parker at times for his work rate and ball-winning skills but his distribution was awful. No wonder he's so good at winning the ball back, every time he gets it he gives it away so he's plenty of practice at winning it back.

None of the back 4 seemed able to pass it to their midfielders feet, and none of the midfielders seemed to be able to take it to feet, pick their head up and use the ball.

Every time i watch Xavi play, he does something i very rarely see English players doing. When the ball is being passed to him he seems to always have his head on a swivel checking who is around him and he's deciding what to do with the ball based on how much space he has.

Pirlo was magnificent and he played some sumptuous balls over the top of the English defence but a large % of his passes were simple and to the feet of team-mates, going forwards. Stevie G in a similar role, looked for the Hollywood ball so often, and when he did pass it to feet it was inevitably sideways or backwards.

We all criticised Stephen Ward and John O' Shea for hoofing the ball aimlessly up the wing, well in effect England did the same thing all evening.

People talk about Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney being amazing players but time after time on the world stage they have been found wanting in a big way. Stevie G will go down as a "great" player and people will remember the Hollywood balls or the Scholes-esque piledrivers, but alongside Lampard his technical limitations are evident on the world stage. It's simply because the English style of high tempo attacking football suits their games and they have plenty of gifted foreign players to link up with.

_Bella_

Gbear wrote: »

If England keep playing this way for the WC qualifiers then I don't think they'll qualify.

Have you seen their qualifying group? They will definitely qualify.

Ping Chow Chi

28064212 wrote: »

Wait for it...

...


Wait for it...

the penny will drop any time now

G.K.

Completely disagree with whoever called Johnson and Welbeck poor. Along with Lescott, Terry and Gerrard they were England's among 5 best players.

Welbeck in particular should now be cemented as #1 forward.

kryogen

G.K. wrote: »

Completely disagree with whoever called Johnson and Welbeck poor. Along with Lescott, Terry and Gerrard they were England's among 5 best players.

Welbeck in particular should now be cemented as #1 forward.

Did you think Terry had a good tournament?

thought he got badly exposed a fair few times myself

G.K.

He got exposed, I agree, but his blocks were vital.

Skylinehead

Gbear wrote: »

You're killing me.:D

Trap has won 6 Italian league titles. Also a German, a Portuguese and an Austrian one.
He's won a European cup, and 3 UEFA cups.

The Hodge has won some obscure nothing-leagues. An utterly hilarious comparison.

England had less of the ball against Italy than Ireland did.

The problem wasn't that evident last night though. You could play better than England did and still lose to Italy.

It's that Hodgson also played this reactive kind of football against the Ukraine. Ukraine had 60% possession against England. England should be dominating a team as ****e as the Ukraine.

Ultimately, group D was a farce. Sweden were awful, France were pretty ****e as well and the Ukraine aren't very good at football in general. The absolute minimum would've been getting out of that group. Having done so is no achievement.

If England keep playing this way for the WC qualifiers then I don't think they'll qualify.

:pac:

Gbear

28064212 wrote: »

Wait for it...

...


Wait for it...

Have I been wooshed?

That is seriously deft and subtle wumery if I have.

kitakyushu

What was that advice they gave for the leaving cert? Something like "answer the question on the page, not the one you presumed they asked".

Corholio

G.K. wrote: »

Completely disagree with whoever called Johnson and Welbeck poor. Along with Lescott, Terry and Gerrard they were England's among 5 best players.

Welbeck in particular should now be cemented as #1 forward.

Welbeck played good, but good relative to the rest of the team and opposition, i dont think he was outstanding, won headers and laid off balls etc, but his shooting is still quite poor.

Will I Amnt

G.K. wrote: »

He got exposed, I agree, but his blocks were vital.

For every heroic block or last ditch tackle by Terry,there is a slip on his arse or caught out trying to play offside or being totally embarassed for pace.
If I was a Chelsea fan I would be extremely concerned about his form over the past year or so.
His game is very patchy these days,it's more bad than good imo.

G.K.

I agree, frankly. The thing is Terry was vital for England at this Euros due to his blocks.

Orando Broom

G.K. wrote: »

He got exposed, I agree, but his blocks were vital.

Blocks required because he was caught for pace and Johnson for positioning. It was embarrassing the freedom Italy had down the inside left channel last night. Honestly in the first half almost every attack was down that channel and there were chances created. Had Balotelli not stopped for Ice-cream or to give a hobo money Terry would not have been within an asses roar of making that block. Balotelli's second touch was chronic on that.

Orando Broom

cambo2008 wrote: »

For every heroic block or last ditch tackle by Terry,there is a slip on his arse or caught out trying to play offside or being totally embarassed for pace.
If I was a Chelsea fan I would be extremely concerned about his form over the past year or so.
His game is very patchy these days,it's more bad than good imo.

Absolutely for a 31 year old his legs are shot to shït. You'd feel Chelsea need a stopper to complement Cahill and phase out Terry. I don't think he has the full season in him.

Having said that he won't be playing that high line shïte this coming season.

G.K.

I'm not just talking about the Italy game. Over the whole Euros, Terry has made more blocks per game than any other player in the Euros bar 3 (2 of which incedentally are Sledge and Dunne). Whatever the context, his blocking has made him a critical player for England at this Euro.

LuckyLloyd

kryogen wrote: »

Did you think Terry had a good tournament?

thought he got badly exposed a fair few times myself

He was a tower of strength last night tbh.

johnners2981

Not sure why Terry is getting such a hard time, the reason why englands defence (not just terry, where was lescott when balotelli was clean through?) were out of position a lot was because the team kept giving the ball away cheaply. Any centre back would have a tough time if their team gave the ball away so cheaply and only had 36% possession.

Out of all of Englands players he would be one of the last I'd criticise for his performances in the tournament

Samich

Some stats - I love stats I do :P

85 - Joe Hart's total of 85 touches vs Italy is only nine fewer than Spain's Iker Casillas has made in four games at Euro 2012.

4 – Only four of 37 attempts direct from free kicks have hit the target so far at Euro 2012.

18 - Steven Gerrard has made more tackles than any other player at Euro 2012.

86/29 - England have made more tackles (86) than any other team at Euro 2012 & blocked more opposition shots (29)

29 - Of the 29 crosses delivered by Ashley Young and James Milner at Euro 2012, only three reached a team-mate.

39% - England averaged 39% possession at EURO 2012, their lowest ratio at a EURO finals (since 1980)

15 - England made only 15 passes in 15 minutes in the second period of extra-time last night

2.75 - England managed only 2.75 shots on target per game in Euro 2012; only Ukraine, Greece & Republic of Ireland produced fewer.

33 - Glen Johnson (37) was the only England player to have more touches than goalkeeper Joe Hart in the first half against Italy

Some really interesting stats. It's like a slightly better Ireland :P

ankles

England should have the guts to pick their ball players, and ignore the old guard. remember when Germany picked their young players and threw them in last time? England should be playing (when fit), Wilshere, Cleverley, Rodwell, Oxlade Chamberlain and maybe Young (for the lack of anyone better) in midfield, up front Welbeck if you want ( as a United supporter I'm still not sold) and your pick of Lescott, Jagielka, Jones and Smalling at CB, with Walker and A.N. Other (Richards? Gibbs? ) at RB. Rooney of course as well. so you have a squad of recently produced skilful ball players, not the old guard (Parker FFS) who are a busted flush. Now that could be an exciting team.

Can't see Hodgson picking them though, or putting them in the right formation.