England National Team Talk/News/Rumours

Berserker

Decent game so far for a friendly. Would like to see up doing a bit more in an attacking sense. They've had a lot of the ball.

FT 0-0. Didn't see all the second half. Goals in the Irish game caught my eye.

Beefy78

Only watched the first half but happy enough with that and the Germany game. On paper the attacking options are decent so it's good that defensively we stood up in those two games.

Tom Mann Centuria

Pretty good draw, you'd hope even we couldn't fluff getting out of this group.

Or could we.

irishman86

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

Pretty good draw, you'd hope even we couldn't fluff getting out of this group.

Or could we.

Why did you have to say it :pac:

Berserker

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

Pretty good draw, you'd hope even we couldn't fluff getting out of this group.

Or could we.

Would be very disappointed if we didn't get out of that group. Belgium will be a tough game but we should win the other two with a bit to spare.

Tom Mann Centuria

First decent England kit in years, home and away. Nice and classic.

https://amp.theguardian.com/football/2018/feb/07/england-world-cup-kit-2018-russia

~Rebel~

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

First decent England kit in years, home and away. Nice and classic.

https://amp.theguardian.com/football/2018/feb/07/england-world-cup-kit-2018-russia

Quite a lot like the 2014 one. Just plain white, and red. Though the 2018 red one looks a little darker now, which is nicer alright.

Tom Mann Centuria

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Quite a lot like the 2014 one. Just plain white, and red. Though the 2018 red one looks a little darker now, which is nicer alright.

Just good to get shot of the Raglan sleeves, and back to White shorts with the away kit, not like the Czech 2nd eleven they trot out in now.

Berserker

Game is on ITV with coverage starting at 7.30pm. Will be interesting to see how Southgate approaches this game.

blueser

I'd love to know how Hoddle gets the gig as summarizer on, well, any game. He was a terrific footballer. But Christ, he's grindingly (made up word?) boring to listen to.

Berserker

0-1, nice strike from the edge of the box by Jesse.

BlazingSaddler

blueser wrote: »

I'd love to know how Hoddle gets the gig as summarizer on, well, any game. He was a terrific footballer. But Christ, he's grindingly (made up word?) boring to listen to.

He’s incredibly insightful, intelligent and absolutely not boring. Much prefer watching a match with Hoddle than watching the Irish games and having to put up with Beglin, Whelan, Houghton.

blueser

BlazingSaddler wrote: »

He’s incredibly insightful, intelligent and absolutely not boring. Much prefer watching a match with Hoddle than watching the Irish games and having to put up with Beglin, Whelan, Houghton.

We'll have to agree to differ then. And saying he's better than (in particular) Whelan is the ultimate definition of "damning with faint praise"!

greendom

BlazingSaddler wrote: »

He’s incredibly insightful, intelligent and absolutely not boring. Much prefer watching a match with Hoddle than watching the Irish games and having to put up with Beglin, Whelan, Houghton.

He's the ultimate "Catchphrase" pundit. He says what he sees.

"He's crossed it and he's bundled it in at the far post"

Corholio

I like Hoddle when he's talking about the tactical side of the game, especially from his midfielder perspective. He's not always that interesting, but on passages of play in games etc he has a good knowledge. I like him in the fact that I won't notice him as much, as you shouldn't imo, I much prefer that to Neville's 'think of something extra critical/exaggerated praise to say' shtick he has developed.

Berserker

Never a penalty for Italy. Shows that var isn't going to solve all of our problems.

Leroy42

Berserker wrote: »

Never a penalty for Italy. Shows that var isn't going to solve all of our problems.

Nobody ever said it would

Stood on the ankle no?

citytillidie

Deleted User wrote: »

Stood on the ankle no?

Stood on foot and pulled the Italian player back, also was good to see a player get booked for rolling back on the pitch to stop the game when they are down "injured" and already off the pitch

citytillidie

citytillidie wrote: »

Stood on foot and pulled the Italian player back, also was good to see a player get booked for rolling back on the pitch to stop the game when they are down "injured" and already off the pitch

I still think it should be possible to give a free kick for a dive and still book someone for diving. Until he was stood on he was blatantly diving. Still a clear penalty at the end of the day though and yellow don't mean much in a friendly.

Harry Palmr

Joe Hart and Jack Wilshire will be spending the summer in front of the telly.

Berserker

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Joe Hart and Jack Wilshire will be spending the summer in front of the telly.

Little bit surprised about Jack but Joe hasn't had a good season at all, so I'm not surprised to hear that he has been left out.

Harry Palmr

Wilshire out is interesting as it means Southgate has broken free of a certain mentality - the one that demands a top six side player of some standing must be picked and so opening a berth for a relatively inexperienced tyro.

Ox out
Milner retired
Carrick retired
Lallana marginal
Drinkwater unlikely

Loftus-Cheek in? Maybe Shelvey. Who'd have seen that coming if it happens.

Lukker-

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Wilshire out is interesting as it means Southgate has broken free of a certain mentality - the one that demands a top six side player of some standing must be picked and so opening a berth for a relatively inexperienced tyro.

Ox out
Milner retired
Carrick retired
Lallana marginal
Drinkwater unlikely

Loftus-Cheek in? Maybe Shelvey. Who'd have seen that coming if it happens.

It doesn't prove anything really. He left out Bertrand for Rose, who hasn't played this season and has been sh*te when he has.


Shelvey also isn't in the squad, Loftus Cheek is though.

I don't know how Livermore got the nod, he must have nudes of Gazza

AdamD

If Wilshere was a likeable character nobody would be championing Livermore over him..

tombliboo83

Lukker- wrote: »

It doesn't prove anything really. He left out Bertrand for Rose, who hasn't played this season and has been sh*te when he has.


Shelvey also isn't in the squad, Loftus Cheek is though.

I don't know how Livermore got the nod, he must have nudes of Gazza

Didn’t think the squad announcement was until tomorrow?

Berserker

tombliboo83 wrote: »

Didn’t think the squad announcement was until tomorrow?

It's not. Sky are running with the Hart and Wilshere stories though.

Lukker-

tombliboo83 wrote: »

Didn’t think the squad announcement was until tomorrow?

It's not, but those who haven't made the cut have been informed and it's invariably leaked to the media.

tombliboo83

Haven’t heard anything on Shelvey yet but would be ridiculous if Livermore went ahead of him. RLC is certain I’d say. Either way it’s going to be an interesting squad that should be unencumbered by the expectations of previous WC squads.

Lukker-

tombliboo83 wrote: »

Haven’t heard anything on Shelvey yet but would be ridiculous if Livermore went ahead of him. RLC is certain I’d say. Either way it’s going to be an interesting squad that should be unencumbered by the expectations of previous WC squads.

The plan is Dier and Henderson in front of a back three. So they need a spare DM, that is the only way I can see Livermore being considered. That said Shelvey, although not a pure deep DM, he would bring something else to the role, but Southgate apparently just wants water carriers here it seems.

It'll be a strange WC for England, you could see it going alright for them, because they are such an unknown quantity, but it wouldn't surprise you either if it was a pure disaster.

DeanAustin

AdamD wrote: »

If Wilshere was a likeable character nobody would be championing Livermore over him..

Absolutely this.

Wilshere should be picked all day long especially ahead of an average player like Livermore or Shelvey. Jesus ****ing wept.

But England have a history of this crap. Hoddle wasn’t trusted, Carrick wasn’t trusted and now Wilshere.

They’ll go out meekly again in the last 16 or quarters at best and the media and ex players will wonder why they aren’t producing players that can keep the ball.

Iused2likebusts

DeanAustin wrote: »

Absolutely this.

Wilshere should be picked all day long especially ahead of an average player like Livermore or Shelvey. Jesus ****ing wept.

But England have a history of this crap. Hoddle wasn’t trusted, Carrick wasn’t trusted and now Wilshere.

They’ll go out meekly again in the last 16 or quarters at best and the media and ex players will wonder why they aren’t producing players that can keep the ball.

Wilshire couldn't be relied on to stay fit for a world cup campaign that might require him playing 2 games in 4 days at some stage. I wouldn't be putting Wilshire anywhere near the standard of hoddle or carrick either. He is no great loss granted the Livermore selection is laughable.

DeanAustin

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

Wilshire couldn't be relied on to stay fit for a world cup campaign that might require him playing 2 games in 4 days at some stage. I wouldn't be putting Wilshire anywhere near the standard of hoddle or carrick either. He is no great loss granted the Livermore selection is laughable.

He’s not as good as Hoddle or Carrick but he’s not a million miles away either. The point is that he’s the type of player who can keep the ball and pick good passes.

Who else have England got? Livermore? Dier? Henderson? Shelvey? Jesus Christ. I’d fancy our midfielders over that lot.

Iused2likebusts

DeanAustin wrote: »

He’s not as good as Hoddle or Carrick but he’s not a million miles away either. The point is that he’s the type of player who can keep the ball and pick good passes.

Who else have England got? Livermore? Dier? Henderson? Shelvey? Jesus Christ. I’d fancy our midfielders over that lot.

They are fairly limited in midfield alright. I've had the discussion with you before about wilshire. I don't think he is as good as you do but understand your thinking on the need for his style of footballer. I think shelvey would be a better bet to bring than Wilshire. He has a good range of passing, less likely to end up injured and better at other sides to the game than Wilshire.

callaway92

haha - What a farce if Wilshere isn't included in the squad

Leroy42

callaway92 wrote: »

haha - What a farce if Wilshere isn't included in the squad

What has done to warrant inclusion?

Bit part player that struggled to get into an underperforming team, and has a history of injuries.

When is the last full game he played from England?

I wouldn't have been surprised to see him there, but neither is it a shock that he isn't

DeanAustin

DeanAustin wrote: »

But England have a history of this crap. Hoddle wasn’t trusted, Carrick wasn’t trusted and now Wilshere.

Best of all was when Carlton Palmer strode around midfield while Paul Gascoigne couldn't make it...

callaway92

Leroy42 wrote: »

What has done to warrant inclusion?

Bit part player that struggled to get into an underperforming team, and has a history of injuries.

When is the last full game he played from England?

I wouldn't have been surprised to see him there, but neither is it a shock that he isn't

Last full game he played for England is irrelevant. Choice should be placed on club form and level they are playing at/to.

He had a great season pretty much injury free and was first-choice at Arsenal.

Not sure how you wouldn't be shocked if he isn't included in favour of fúcking Jake Livermore.

Leroy42

He was a starter for Arsenal in only 12 EPL games, subbed on in a further 8.

He wasn't even in the squad for 5 or the last 6 Arsenal league games.

The only was that his exclusion could be classed a farce is if you are basing it on potential. He has done very little to show that he is better than the other options.

callaway92

I genuinely can't believe what i'm reading haha

AdamD

Leroy42 wrote: »

He was a starter for Arsenal in only 12 EPL games, subbed on in a further 8.

He wasn't even in the squad for 5 or the last 6 Arsenal league games.

The only was that his exclusion could be classed a farce is if you are basing it on potential. He has done very little to show that he is better than the other options.

Yet he was playing their important Europa League knock out games during that period, where Wenger was pretty much resting his first team in the league. Then he didnt play the last couple of games because his wife was having a child (and they were dead rubbers..).

Misleading stats

Leroy42

callaway92 wrote: »

I genuinely can't believe what i'm reading haha

Its true, the facts are what they are.

Which part do you not believe?

He was little more than a bit part player in the Arsenal squad. Sure he is loved by the fans, and he gives it all on the pitch, but his all is not really good enough at this point. He has not get markedly better since he loan to Bournemouth. Would you be calling for his inclusion, based on the facts, if he played with a Bournemouth?

Like I said, I could easily understand if he was included, but can also understand why he isn't.

You called it a farce that he was excluded, yet have done nothing to provide anything to show why that is the case.

pjohnson

Whens it announced? Midday?

Leroy42

AdamD wrote: »

Yet he was playing their important Europa League knock out games during that period, where Wenger was pretty much resting his first team in the league. Then he didnt play the last couple of games because his wife was having a child (and they were dead rubbers..).

Misleading stats

Fine, I totally agree that stas can be misleading.

What other measurement basis do you think we should use? I mean judging players on the games they play seems like a pretty good basis for inclusion.

Again, I would have no issue if he was included, but the poster claimed it was a farce that he wasn't. I am merely pointing out that it is far from a farce.

He has had plenty of chances to prove himself and continually fails to deliver. Yes he has fleeting moments, but not enough to warrant a WC place

keeponhurling

All the above goes to show is that England have a pretty poor pick of players at the moment.
Only Kane could be considered a "top" player, at a real push maybe Vardy, Alli(?), Sterling. But a lot of very mediocre players in there.
They'll do well to get out of the group.

AdamD

Leroy42 wrote: »

Fine, I totally agree that stas can be misleading.

What other measurement basis do you think we should use? I mean judging players on the games they play seems like a pretty good basis for inclusion.

Again, I would have no issue if he was included, but the poster claimed it was a farce that he wasn't. I am merely pointing out that it is far from a farce.

He has had plenty of chances to prove himself and continually fails to deliver. Yes he has fleeting moments, but not enough to warrant a WC place

Right so instead of choosing to judge him being chosen for Quarter and Semi final games in Europe you focused on dead-rubber PL games at the end of the season...you've shown your bias here.

Leroy42

AdamD wrote: »

Right so instead of choosing to judge him being chosen for Quarter and Semi final games in Europe you focused on dead-rubber PL games at the end of the season...you've shown your bias here.

Really? So what about the other games he missed during the season? The Europa was very much seen as a second tier until the EPL was out of reach.

Arsenal have a poor midfield, yet he struggled to nail down a place. All of sudden England should be taking him to the WC? He really isn't that good. He has passion, no doubt about that, he runs around a lot, but he is flaky, caught out of position and struggles to impose himself on games.

Qtrs were against CSKA, not any better than a low level EPL team. He was taken off in the 2nd leg against AM. In a game they needed to win they took off such an incredible player?

I am not bias at all, I have stated a number of times I wouldn't be surprised if he was included. Yet I am far from surprised that he is excluded.

bucketybuck

DeanAustin wrote: »

But England have a history of this crap. Hoddle wasn’t trusted, Carrick wasn’t trusted and now Wilshere.

What they have a history of is managers picking the "names" and popular choices rather than going for the team they might actually want. I find it interesting that Southgate appears to be very blunt about deciding on who he wants and doesn't want even when it goes against the grain.

Wilshire for example has done **** all squared for most of his career and yet people are clamouring for him to be included, I think its refreshing that Southgate is going to go his own way on this.

Face it, England are going to have a bang average squad no matter who they pick, the manager might as well do it his way instead of trying to appease the masses.

LuckyLloyd

Struggle to agree that their squad is "bang average".

They lack a generational talent maybe, but they have a ton of depth and battle hardened top level players all over the pitch. It's International football, most teams are brittle to some degree or another, or have a weak player or two, or have no depth.

Sterling, Kane, Stones, Walker, Henderson have all had excellent seasons playing key roles in teams winning a lot of games. Then there are players like Ashley Young or Gary Cahill who have won titles in their careers and carry bags of experience.

You look at that squad, and there is a huge amount of flexibility offered to any manager. You could put out front lines that offer a lot of pace and ability to press aggressively (with midfield combos that can aid in that); or you can go traditional and physical. Just because the mix of players isn't there to play like Spain should be an irrelevancy: you can progress very deep in a tournament playing a different style.

The conversations on England are so binary sometimes. They have Tunisia, Panama and Belgium in their group; and they play one of Poland / Columbia / Senegal / Japan in the second round. Maybe Brazil or Germany lurk in the quarters, but that should be a national shot to nothing where you go out and make them earn it.

It's a great draw that their current squad is more than good enough for. I don't get the negativity at all.

Leroy42

I agree on both posts. Their squad is bang average. They do possess some good talent, and like other teams they also have some less than that. It is a job of any international manager to deal with the combination.

In the past, the top England players have failed to perform, leading to the whole team reverting to the level of the average player. If the likes of Kane, Sterling etc can perform they have enough to trouble any team. But I think the problem lies in the areas that they are weak, they are really weak. Last EC, Hart was simply not good enough keeper. Pickford is decent but untested at this level.

Their CB are pretty weak. Cahill is slow, Stones can't get a regular game. If they had better players (not necessarily world class) in those areas it would allow the best players to make the difference.