England National Team Talk/News/Rumours

bucketybuck

They are bang average, almost by definition.

I don't say they are poor or a bad team. They have far greater quality and depth than the likes of Ireland or Northern Ireland, and don't have poor players mixed with world class players like Wales do. But neither do they have very many great players of the type that generally signifies a team to be feared.

What they have is a squad of good players with a consistent level of upper to mid-table premier league quality. Not a bad team, not a great team, somewhere in the middle, sounds like the average to me?

Which is why I am interested to see Southgate go his own way, because when you talk about a solid but undefined squad such as England have then their fortunes will be heavily influenced by the planning and ethos of the manager. If he can shape them into what he wants then they could do something, if he floats along trying to please people they will go nowhere, so its interesting to see him doing his own thing.

BlazingSaddler

Is Andros Townsend in with a shout? I really think he offers something slightly different and a fantastic option from the bench, he has never let England down either. I personally would have taken Joe Hart even if not first choice, I don't really see the benefit of taking 3 inexperienced keepers with only a handful of caps between them. I have visions of Scott Carson v Croatia happening all over again.

CantGetNoSleep

Leroy42 wrote: »

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.

Yeah but, Jake Livermore

SlickRic

The conversations around why England are poor are all wrong. It's not really about the players.

Gareth Southgate is the fúcking manager.

Leroy42

SlickRic wrote: »

The conversations around why England are poor are all wrong. It's not really about the players.

Gareth Southgate is the fúcking manager.

I actually think he has done reasonably well. He has moved Rooney out without much fuss, something previous managers (certainly Allardyce should have done).

He appears to be trying to make a break with the past (he dropping of Hart & Wilshire for eg).

In saying that I don't think he has the ability or experience needed to make a big difference but then they have tried to experience route and that achieved nothing.

Of course it all comes down to tournament results. He did well with the underage teams, some of them flowing up into the senior team. That in itself can count for nothing of course.

But he has successfully lowered expectations, which may have been the goal when he was appointed.

Vincent Vega

https://twitter.com/England/status/996737073418784770

Goalkeepers: Jordan Pickford (Everton), Jack Butland (Stoke), Nick Pope (Burnley)

Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Kieran Trippier, Danny Rose (both Tottenham), Harry Maguire (Leicester), Phil Jones (Man Utd), John Stones, Kyle Walker (both Man City), Gary Cahill (Chelsea)

Midfielders: Jordan Henderson, (Liverpool), Eric Dier, Dele Alli (both Tottenham), Jesse Lingard, Ashley Young (both Man Utd), Fabian Delph (Man City), Ruben Loftus-Cheek (Chelsea),

Forwards: Raheem Sterling (Man City), Jamie Vardy (Leicester), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Marcus Rashford (Man Utd), Danny Welbeck (Arsenal).

Leroy42

So no Jake Livermore then!

FatherTed

Surprised Smalling was dropped and also 3 right backs lol.

Leroy42

FatherTed wrote: »

Surprised Smalling was dropped and also 3 right backs lol.

Southgate had indicated a few months ago that Smalling wasn't doing enough to get selected

Lyle Lanley

Well that video was annoying. Is that how the players and their families find out? Kind of ****ty if so!

Bridge93

Gary Cahill ahead of Jamal Lascelles is poor

loyatemu

Wellbeck .

also, should have taken Shelvey - is he the bald Messi? No, but he can pick a pass, is in excellent form and his disciplinary record is much improved.

Skylinehead

loyatemu wrote: »

Wellbeck .

Yeah, he's only Englands top active goalscorer!

Harry Palmr

Vincent Vega wrote: »

https://twitter.com/England/status/996737073418784770

Goalkeepers: Jordan Pickford (Everton), Jack Butland (Stoke), Nick Pope (Burnley)

Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Kieran Trippier, Danny Rose (both Tottenham), Harry Maguire (Leicester), Phil Jones (Man Utd), John Stones, Kyle Walker (both Man City), Gary Cahill (Chelsea)

Midfielders: Jordan Henderson, (Liverpool), Eric Dier, Dele Alli (both Tottenham), Jesse Lingard, Ashley Young (both Man Utd), Fabian Delph (Man City), Ruben Loftus-Cheek (Chelsea),

Forwards: Raheem Sterling (Man City), Jamie Vardy (Leicester), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Marcus Rashford (Man Utd), Danny Welbeck (Arsenal).

Welbeck must be getting picked for his earlier England scoring, doing feck all at club level. No Lallana means no creative spark if one is needed.

FatherTed wrote: »

Surprised Smalling was dropped and also 3 right backs lol.

Three right, wing and right sided centre backs probably depending on formation.

ben.schlomo

Bridge93 wrote: »

Gary Cahill is p1ss poor

Fixed your post.

BoJack Horseman

Nothing about this England squad will strike fear in the opposition.

Harry Palmr

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Nothing about this England squad will strike fear in the opposition.

That's just how we like it!

Seriously though it's a young squad which will only get younger by the euros as the last vestiges of the post Golden Generation crop are shed - Cahill, Young, Jones.

ianob7

Harry Palmr wrote:

Seriously though it's a young squad which will only get younger by the euros as the last vestiges of the post Golden Generation crop are shed - Cahill, Young, Jones.

Phil Jones is only 26

Iused2likebusts

Harry Palmr wrote: »

That's just how we like it!

Seriously though it's a young squad which will only get younger by the euros as the last vestiges of the post Golden Generation crop are shed - Cahill, Young, Jones.

All the lads that are in it now will be 2 years older at the euros

DeanAustin

That is the worst England squad I've ever seen at a finals. Full of mediocrity.

Fromvert

Sterling - Alii/Lingard - Rashford/Alli

Kane

How ever you line up those five into four they can give any team serious problems and score goals. Vardy a good option off the bench. They just have to set up the team to get the best out of those players which they probably won't. With their group and their potential first knock out opponents I'll be having a punt on Sterling being top scorer.

Berserker

DeanAustin wrote: »

That is the worst England squad I've ever seen at a finals. Full of mediocrity.

It'll surprise the opposition, that's the master plan. In all seriousness we have the bones of a squad there that can perform well at a major championship but they need to bond. Our lads don't see to bond like other teams do. You have to agree that any combination of Sterling, Alli/Lingard, Rashford/Alli Kane & Vardy have the ability to score plenty of goals. I'm more concerned about the centre of the park.

Iused2likebusts

Fromvert wrote: »

Sterling - Alii/Lingard - Rashford/Alli

Kane

How ever you line up those five into four they can give any team serious problems and score goals. Vardy a good option off the bench. They just have to set up the team to get the best out of those players which they probably won't. With their group and their potential first knock out opponents I'll be having a punt on Sterling being top scorer.

Sterling won't be getting the raft of chances he gets at man city. Although he scored a lot of goals this year his finishing is still poor. A lot of his goals came from being in the right place in the box 6 yds out to apply the finish which I think is down to peps coaching and how he sets up his team to play. I can't see him being presented with the same type of chances at international level.

thebaz

DeanAustin wrote: »

That is the worst England squad I've ever seen at a finals. Full of mediocrity.

and managed by a very mediocre manager - given the money the FA have ; with a half decent coach , the talent is ther for England to have had a decent WC

loyatemu

Fromvert wrote: »

Sterling - Alii/Lingard - Rashford/Alli

Kane

How ever you line up those five into four they can give any team serious problems and score goals. Vardy a good option off the bench. They just have to set up the team to get the best out of those players which they probably won't. With their group and their potential first knock out opponents I'll be having a punt on Sterling being top scorer.

there's no doubt England have excellent attacking players, but behind that there is a void in midfield, their defence is just OK and the best you can say about the keepers is they're better than Joe Hart.

However; international football is not all that, and a well organised team can go pretty far (witness Portugal at the recent Euros, a mediocre squad with one great player).

theoneeyedman

Fromvert wrote: »

Sterling - Alii/Lingard - Rashford/Alli

Kane

Am I right in saying Lingard has scored one goal in 2018?
Mediocrity all around, for every star, there is a clogger. Eric Dier, a mistake waiting to happen. If he's playing, he will make the mistake that knocks them out.

eagle eye

thebaz wrote:

and managed by a very mediocre manager - given the money the FA have ; with a half decent coach , the talent is ther for England to have had a decent WC

Only thing is that history will tell you that the coach has to be English as no team has won a World Cup with a foreign manager.

Loafing Oaf

loyatemu wrote: »

Wellbeck .

also, should have taken Shelvey - is he the bald Messi? No, but he can pick a pass, is in excellent form and his disciplinary record is much improved.

Yeah not sure what loftus-cheek brings to the party. Bit of audacity maybe😛

SlickRic

Ignore Sterling's form for City. He'll be asked to be a pretty much out-and-out winger in Southgate's team. It'll be a different position and expectation to his City role.

Same with Alli.

What makes these attacking players great at their clubs is in huge part down to their managers playing a pressing, on the front foot style of ball.

Won't be happening for England.

Leroy42

Also, in for example Stelings case, there is no doubt that he gains from the sheer attacking level of City. Augero, KDB, Sane, Jesus, Siiva. Any defence has its hands full with any one of them never mind the whole lot. That gives the likes of Sterling a bit more freedom as the defence struggle to keep track of all of them.

England have Kane. Alli maybe, not based on his average level this year but he might turn it on like he did on a few occasions. Rashford maybe.

But that is quite a significant difference and Sterling has a lot more responsibility on his shoulders in the England set up.

Coupled with that, England midfield is weak and so they simply will not dominate teams like City do, thereby giving Sterling even less chances

Mr. Guappa

While Ireland have gone overboard in the past in rewarding the players who got them to the dance (2012 Euros in particular), I always see England as the opposite extreme. They hand out caps way too easily to anyone who's had a good 3 or 4 weeks. We are a few weeks out from a WC, and England could line up in any of 3 or 4 formations. That seems nuts to me. Surely, the qualification process should be used to lock down a style of playing, a formation, your core group of starters?

CantGetNoSleep

I don't get the number of full backs / utility players. Usually you don't even get two back up full backs in a 23 man squad, you go for an extra attacker and hope a CB / DM could cover. But here you have Trippier, TAA, Walker (granted he might play CB but you definitely don't need two dedicated RBs if he is there), Rose, Young (has he played anywhere other than WB in the last three years?) and Delph (LB all season, granted he can cover one of the DM slots which look quite bare)? Phil Jones has covered RB in previous squads too - so you could easily have left out one or two of the six above.

DeanAustin

bucketybuck wrote: »

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.

England have an average squad. Good up top, mediocre in midfield and poor at the back. They also have a fella managing them who is well below average. In years gone by, he wouldn’t have been anywhere near that job but it’s a sign of how far the standing of international football has fallen that Gareth Southgate (and the crook before him) got what was once a prestigious job.

But my point about Wilshere is this. Like the last dozen tournaments, England will go out in the group, second round or quarters at a push. They’ll be uninspired. They’ll play against poorer sides who they may scrape a win against but will have less of the ball. And when they eventually go out people will talk about how England doesn’t develop players who are good on the ball, keep it and can pick a defence splitting pass and how the whole system of player development needs an overhaul.

Wilshere, although injury prone, is this generation’s player that can do all of the above. He is tremendous on the ball. But managers don’t trust that sort of player for some reason. It happened to Hoddle, it happened to Scholes, it happened to Carrick and now it’s happening to Wilshere.

I’m a Spurs fan and I loathe Wilshere because he loves Arsenal (which I sort of admire too) and hates Spurs. But in a million years, a combination of Dier and Henderson is not a patch on either of those two cloggers with Wilshere.

Fair enough Southgate is picking the squad he seems to want. But what he’s picked is a sign of his limitations as a manager and it’s a damning indictment of the state of talent in England.

Iused2likebusts

DeanAustin wrote: »

England have an average squad. Good up top, mediocre in midfield and poor at the back. They also have a fella managing them who is well below average. In years gone by, he wouldn’t have been anywhere near that job but it’s a sign of how far the standing of international football has fallen that Gareth Southgate (and the crook before him) got what was once a prestigious job.

But my point about Wilshere is this. Like the last dozen tournaments, England will go out in the group, second round or quarters at a push. They’ll be uninspired. They’ll play against poorer sides who they may scrape a win against but will have less of the ball. And when they eventually go out people will talk about how England doesn’t develop players who are good on the ball, keep it and can pick a defence splitting pass and how the whole system of player development needs an overhaul.

Wilshere, although injury prone, is this generation’s player that can do all of the above. He is tremendous on the ball. But managers don’t trust that sort of player for some reason. It happened to Hoddle, it happened to Scholes, it happened to Carrick and now it’s happening to Wilshere.

I’m a Spurs fan and I loathe Wilshere because he loves Arsenal (which I sort of admire too) and hates Spurs. But in a million years, a combination of Dier and Henderson is not a patch on either of those two cloggers with Wilshere.

Fair enough Southgate is picking the squad he seems to want. But what he’s picked is a sign of his limitations as a manager and it’s a damning indictment of the state of talent in England.

The problem with wilshire is when he is in midfield against better teams he ends up getting steamrolled by players that arent technically as good as him. He cant track runners and the midfield he is playing in ends up getting dominated despite his nice touches on the ball. He then doesnt contribute enough goals/assists to play as a 10 or off the front man so there is no position for him. The only games Id consider playing wilshire in would be games against lesser teams. The belgian midfield should dominate england with or without wilshire but they will have more chance of competing with them or holding them at bay with dier/henderson over wilshire and one of those two.

DeanAustin

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

The problem with wilshire is when he is in midfield against better teams he ends up getting steamrolled by players that arent technically as good as him. He cant track runners and the midfield he is playing in ends up getting dominated despite his nice touches on the ball. He then doesnt contribute enough goals/assists to play as a 10 or off the front man so there is no position for him. The only games Id consider playing wilshire in would be games against lesser teams. The belgian midfield should dominate england with or without wilshire but they will have more chance of competing with them or holding them at bay with dier/henderson over wilshire and one of those two.

In a situation like that, why not player Dier and Henderson with Wilshere. That way when they get the ball, they give it to someone who can do something with it rather than straight back to the opposition.

No point having all that talent up top if you can’t get the ball to them. Dier and Henderson don’t have the ability to turn defence into attack.

Leroy42

DeanAustin wrote: »

In a situation like that, why not player Dier and Henderson with Wilshere. That way when they get the ball, they give it to someone who can do something with it rather than straight back to the opposition.

No point having all that talent up top if you can’t get the ball to them. Dier and Henderson don’t have the ability to turn defence into attack.

So drop Alli for Wilshire?

Given time and space Wilshire can certainly do good things, but too often he is simply out of a game. Too tightly marked to allow him space and not offering anything in defence to ease the pressure.

There are of course other players like that but the problem Wilshire has he is not good enough at the playmaking to overcome the other limitations that he has. Hence his lack of assists or goals.

DeanAustin

Leroy42 wrote: »

So drop Alli for Wilshire?

Given time and space Wilshire can certainly do good things, but too often he is simply out of a game. Too tightly marked to allow him space and not offering anything in defence to ease the pressure.

There are of course other players like that but the problem Wilshire has he is not good enough at the playmaking to overcome the other limitations that he has. Hence his lack of assists or goals.

Potentially drop Alli. Maybe play him alongside Wilshere and Dier or Henderson. He showed in a few Spurs games this season that he can play that role.

Wilshere isn’t really about goals and assists so you can’t judge him by those stats.

I know we have very different opinions on him but I think you need a player like Wilshere to transition defence into attack and England don’t have that. As a result, you’ll see their attacking talent (Kane, Alli, Sterling etc.) all underperform in the WC and get **** in the media for being “flops”. In reality, they’re being set up to fail.

bucketybuck

DeanAustin wrote: »

Wilshere, although injury prone, is this generation’s player that can do all of the above. He is tremendous on the ball. But managers don’t trust that sort of player for some reason. It happened to Hoddle, it happened to Scholes, it happened to Carrick and now it’s happening to Wilshere.

Here is the thing, when it comes to Wilshire all of this is just theory. He is the great white hope, yet another example of the player who could be the answer to all problems if he just got his chance.

The problem is that in cold reality, on the football pitch itself for both club and country he has never actually realised any of that potential that people have been praising for so long now. You say he is tremendous on the ball and can do everything, I say that he can't stay fit, can't nail down a place in his own club team and has done practically nothing to demonstrate all of this ability he is supposed to have. And the fact is that there is more evidence for my claim than for yours.

Thats the player we are talking about here, its not a Gazza, Le Tissier or a Hoddle, its not somebody who has produced the goods at club level but hasn't been given the chance at International level because of outdated thinking. No, instead its an injury prone player who isn't even a definite starter at his underperforming club, who not that long ago was sent away from that club on loan, and who has had 34 chances at international level without ever making any impact worth talking about.

Thats the level of player we are talking about so while it wouldn't have surprised me to see him included, neither do I think its a big deal that he missed out, because he just hasn't earned it.

SlickRic

the fact Gary Cahill will probably be starting for England tells you all you need to know about the state of their backline.

Henderson, Delph, Dier, or whoever is protecting those CBs will need to be exemplary for them to do anything of note.

CSWS101

Can't believe Zaha didn't get a call up.

KingdomYid

CSWS101 wrote: »

Can't believe Zaha didn't get a call up.

Not sure if you are being serious here . He is an Ivory Coast international just in case you were serious.

CSWS101

KingdomYid wrote: »

CSWS101 wrote: »

Can't believe Zaha didn't get a call up.

Not sure if you are being serious here . He is an Ivory Coast international just in case you were serious.

Really? Southgate should of thought about bringing Victor Moses then

tvercetti

SlickRic wrote: »

the fact Gary Cahill will probably be starting for England tells you all you need to know about the state of their backline.

Henderson, Delph, Dier, or whoever is protecting those CBs will need to be exemplary for them to do anything of note.

I don't think Cahill will start not that it will improve them. Think it will be Walker, Stones and Maguire as the back 3 with Trippier and Rose as wing backs.

Loafing Oaf

tvercetti wrote: »

I don't think Cahill will start not that it will improve them. Think it will be Walker, Stones and Maguire as the back 3 with Trippier and Rose as wing backs.

Yeah somebody on OTB was saying this last night. I wonder is the main reason for playing a back 3 that he doesn't trust Stones in a CB pairing...

So is he going to play Dier and Henderson ahead of those? That means you're playing without a number 10. And those 'wing backs' are not the most attack-minded...

DeanAustin

bucketybuck wrote: »

Here is the thing, when it comes to Wilshire all of this is just theory. He is the great white hope, yet another example of the player who could be the answer to all problems if he just got his chance.

The problem is that in cold reality, on the football pitch itself for both club and country he has never actually realised any of that potential that people have been praising for so long now. You say he is tremendous on the ball and can do everything, I say that he can't stay fit, can't nail down a place in his own club team and has done practically nothing to demonstrate all of this ability he is supposed to have. And the fact is that there is more evidence for my claim than for yours.

Thats the player we are talking about here, its not a Gazza, Le Tissier or a Hoddle, its not somebody who has produced the goods at club level but hasn't been given the chance at International level because of outdated thinking. No, instead its an injury prone player who isn't even a definite starter at his underperforming club, who not that long ago was sent away from that club on loan, and who has had 34 chances at international level without ever making any impact worth talking about.

Thats the level of player we are talking about so while it wouldn't have surprised me to see him included, neither do I think its a big deal that he missed out, because he just hasn't earned it.

Except I’m not saying he’s the great white hope. I understand your argument and agree to an extent. Wilshere hasn’t stayed fit enough to fulfill his potential.

But when he has played he’s been good on the ball and done things that no other England player can do. And that’s why it’s a mistake to leave him out. He gives something England don’t have and Southgate has backed himself into a position where he will have to play a certain brand of football that will look terrible, make some of his talented players look poor and result in the nation saying “we don’t produce ball players.”

Wilshere hasn’t achieved enough to be in the same league as Hoddle, Carrick, Scholes or Le Tissier. But he has shown enough to say that he’s a better ball player than Eric Dier or Jordan Henderson.

Christ I’m defending Wilshere. I’m off to take a shower and have a word with myself.

bucketybuck

DeanAustin wrote: »

He gives something England don’t have and Southgate has backed himself into a position where he will have to play a certain brand of football that will look terrible, make some of his talented players look poor and result in the nation saying “we don’t produce ball players.”

I would change that to say that he "might" give England something they don't have. But that its also just as likely he will either struggle, have minimal impact even if he does well, get injured, or most likely just reproduce a club form that was nothing worth talking about in the first place.

Which comes back around to why I think this is interesting from Southgate. So many managers have felt duty bound to pick players like Wilshire because "England need better ball players", even if they happen to think that adding somebody like Wilshire would be like putting a bow tie on a baboon and make little difference to the teams fortunes anyway. They pick him, try to pretend the team can play like Barcelona and then lose their job when it turns out one player isn't enough to make that happen.

So maybe Southgate thinks "**** it", we don't have silky smooth midfielders and somebody like Wilshire isn't going to change that, so I'm just going to forget all that guff and go with my own plan".

I don't know his thinking but I do know the best teams focus on their strengths and don't try to be something they are not, so like I said its interesting to see which scenario this is.

LuckyLloyd

They could put out a very physical and pacey side who have enough quality to hurt teams on the break. Wilshere just seems like cheese to the chalk that is the squad. Completely agree about playing to your strengths and rolling the dice on what you do well.

Berserker

England 2-1 Nigeria. Played really well in the first half and Cahill opened the scoring with a nice header. Kane got a second towards the end of the half. Could have scored a few more but happy to go in 2-0 at HT. Nigeria changed formation at HT and they played better in the second half. They were woeful in the first half to be honest.

Harry Palmr

England win the Toulon for the third year in a row.

Berserker

Relieved to get the win there but we deserved it. Two goals for Kane is a bonus. First half was really good but we made hard work of the second. Felt the Tunisian penalty was generous and Kane was robbed of a penalty in the first half. Dele was very poor in the second half. Think he was carrying a knock. Anyway, onward to Panama.