Uruguay Vs England 8pm (RTE/BBC/ITV) Group D

SlickRic

also, anyone who thinks Terry would've made a huge difference (e.g. Dunphy last night) is barking up the completely wrong tree.

the Chelsea back 4 is the most protected back 4 in the world. England's is certainly not.

Will I Amnt

Alonso77 wrote: »

Right now as in right now after a full season and during this world cup. Hes the best there is at the moment.

So Ronaldo had the better season and 1 poor World Cup game but Suarez's one World Cup game trumps the full season.
Great stuff :pac:
By that logic, Robben sh*ts all over both of them.

Maximus Alexander

Suarez is the best player in the world until he leaves Liverpool. Then he suddenly won't be anymore.

SlickRic

Alonso77 wrote: »

Is Ronaldo better than him? Right now?

as of the very last game they played, yes.

under any other criteria you care to mention, no.

and I think Suarez is magic. but Ronaldo and Messi are on another planet entirely.

Leftist

SlickRic wrote: »

what's really depressing is that you're serious.correct

not depressing imo

Chucky the tree

SlickRic wrote: »

also, anyone who thinks Terry would've made a huge difference (e.g. Dunphy last night) is barking up the completely wrong tree.

the Chelsea back 4 is the most protected back 4 in the world. England's is certainly not.

I think he would have done a much better job organising the defence than Cahill or Jags. I think Baines would have been in better positions, I think Terry wouldn't have been caught out like Jags for the first goal as well. I also think he would have shouted early and went to head the ball for the second goal instead of Gerrard.


One of Englands problems is that they had no vocal leaders or organisers on the pitch for the World Cup.

SlickRic

Chucky the tree wrote: »

One of Englands problems is that they had no vocal leaders or organisers on the pitch for the World Cup.

this is actually an excellent point.

obezyana

Just watching the World Cup report on SSN and they say Suarez needs to be more humble after his comments about his last couple of years in England.

They just can't accept defeat at all such sore loosers.

mike65

England used to churn out central defenders by the dozen now they can't buy one but there are No 10s coming out of their ears.

Nuri Sahin

SlickRic wrote: »

also, anyone who thinks Terry would've made a huge difference (e.g. Dunphy last night) is barking up the completely wrong tree.

the Chelsea back 4 is the most protected back 4 in the world. England's is certainly not.

No idea what Dunphy said, but Terry and Cole should have went. Former said without hindsight, the latter, well.. I was surprised with how bad Baines has been.

Alonso77

SlickRic wrote: »

as of the very last game they played, yes.

under any other criteria you care to mention, no.

and I think Suarez is magic. but Ronaldo and Messi are on another planet entirely.

I agree Messi yes, not on current form but yes in general , Ronaldo no not at all. If you'd offer me a Ronaldo or a Suarez in my team, id be Suarez every day on guts and determination alone.

bucketybuck

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Considering Hodgson picked all of these players then of course you can blame him.

Especially when you think of all those world class players he left at home...

Dolph Starbeam

mike65 wrote: »

England used to churn out central defenders by the dozen now they can't buy one but there are No 10s coming out of their ears.

They don't have any number 10s, not real ones anyways. None of their players are creative enough to be classed as a number 10s.

jonneymendoza

SlickRic wrote: »

also, anyone who thinks Terry would've made a huge difference (e.g. Dunphy last night) is barking up the completely wrong tree.

the Chelsea back 4 is the most protected back 4 in the world. England's is certainly not.

na you cant have terry in the squad sleeping with his team mates wife's

Cole should have gone though. Still our best LB in the country

ronjo

bucketybuck wrote: »

Especially when you think of all those world class players he left at home...

Exactly, I think even Fergie would have struggled with this squad.

Bowlardo

How come no one celebraed with Rooney after the goal?
Did anythign come out yet?

Chucky the tree

bucketybuck wrote: »

Especially when you think of all those world class players he left at home...

You don't need 11 world class players to look half-decent at football. Well Hodgson probably does.

mike65

YayaBanana wrote: »

They don't have any number 10s, not real ones anyways. None of their players are creative enough to be classed as a number 10s.

Sterling will be a brilliant no 10, the pity for him was that this World Cup arrived a year or two too soon. Also he has to work under Hodgson who wouldn't even stick with his opening gambit due to media pressure re Rooney.

jonneymendoza

bucketybuck wrote: »

Especially when you think of all those world class players he left at home...

Like Andy Carrol? Peter crouch?

jonneymendoza

Chucky the tree wrote: »

You don't need 11 world class players to look half-decent at football. Well Hodgson probably does.

Costa Rica has like one world class player if that and still spanked Uraguay

bucketybuck

Chucky the tree wrote: »

You don't need 11 world class players to look half-decent at football. Well Hodgson probably does.

You do need quality if you want to beat good teams at a world cup, there is no getting away from that fact.

Maybe you think that a limited side can rock up and with good organisation plus some elbow grease can compete with the best teams, but by large that simply doesn't happen. Those limited teams that try to look half-decent still go home in the group stages.

If England were in another group they very well may have qualified for the last 16, but at some stage they would have played an Italy or a Germany and received another football lesson because thats the level they are at. A very limited side player wise.

bucketybuck

jonneymendoza wrote: »

Costa Rica has like one world class player if that and still spanked Uraguay

You are proving my point. If Costa Rica are the model to follow then don't ignore that fact that they too will probably be going home early.

aodea

MagicIRL wrote: »

England need to get off their high horse and expand the squad, and that includes Championship players. Just because you play in the Premier Leage does not mean you deserve an automatic call-up.

And who exactly in the championship would warrent a call up to the England squad? will hughes? Rob green? Danny drinkwater? Dean marney? Danny ings? joey Barton?

Thier are no players in the Championship that would command a place in the England squad. There is a few promising lads there no doubt but Top players in championship struggle in the prmier leauge often look at Zaha, Tom Ince so im not sure who you think you can find there. its second tier for a reason.

Chucky the tree

bucketybuck wrote: »

You do need quality if you want to beat good teams at a world cup, there is no getting away from that fact.

Maybe you think that a limited side can rock up and with good organisation plus some elbow grease can compete with the best teams, but by large that simply doesn't happen. Those limited teams that try to look half-decent still go home in the group stages.

If England were in another group they very well may have qualified for the last 16, but at some stage they would have played an Italy or a Germany and received another football lesson because thats the level they are at. A very limited side player wise.

Good managers make the most out of their limitations though. Hodgson is the type of manager who compounds the limitations of a team with his one as a manager. I'm not saying England are amazing, but neither are Uruguay. They conceded three goals to Costa Rica.


Sure if England are going to come up against a better team at some stage then why bother turning up for the World cup if that's the attitude?

greendom

aodea wrote: »

And who exactly in the championship would warrent a call up to the England squad? will hughes? Rob green? Danny drinkwater? Dean marney? Danny ings? joey Barton?

Thier are no players in the Championship that would command a place in the England squad. There is a few promising lads there no doubt but Top players in championship struggle in the prmier leauge often look at Zaha, Tom Ince so im not sure who you think you can find there. its second tier for a reason.

Absolutely, cream rises to the top - unfortunately Championship players are there because they are not good enough to play at a higher level. Some of them will improve and will become good enough (The Southampton boys have proved this).

Leslie91

The Manager yet again has let England down massively. Eriksson, McClaren, Hoddle, Keegan and now Woy. Who the hell is in charge at the Eng FA? All disastrous appointments.

No leadership, no fight.... check out Joey Bartons tweets last nite.

Having said all that I'd disagree with the notion that they don't have the players. Imho they do if organised/selected in the right manner. There were at least 3 players in that starting 11 last night that are simply not up to it at this level, perhaps 4.

I feel for Cahill, he is the only decent defender on the pitch last nite and because he was closest to Suarez (check out where Jagielka was for 2nd goal) he gets the stick.

Barkley, Cahill, Sturridge, Lallana, Sterling, Henderson... lads like these are the now and the future.... Get them into the team in the right spots and go from there. Make Henderson captain.

bucketybuck

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Good managers make the most out of their limitations though. Hodgson is the type of manager who compounds the limitations of a team with his one as a manager. I'm not saying England are amazing, but neither are Uruguay. They conceded three goals to Costa Rica.


Sure if England are going to come up against a better team at some stage then why bother turning up for the World cup if that's the attitude?

I never said they shouldn't bother or anything close to that, my point is simply that people have to be realistic. You can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear and no manager was ever going to be successful with the current crop of England players.

Good managers do make a difference, but even they need something to work with, Hodgson could have gotten every player playing at 100% and they still would have struggled.

NIMAN

Leslie91 wrote: »

The Manager yet again has let England down massively. Eriksson, McClaren, Hoddle, Keegan and now Woy. Who the hell is in charge at the Eng FA? All disastrous appointments.

Yeah an idiot yet he sits on the ITV panel and tells us all how wrong the tactics were and what bad decisions were made.

Leslie91

NIMAN wrote: »

Yeah an idiot yet he sits on the ITV panel and tells us all how wrong the tactics were and what bad decisions were made.

That's how you make it onto the ITV panel though. Those who are not idiots need not apply.

Chucky the tree

bucketybuck wrote: »

I never said they shouldn't bother or anything close to that, my point is simply that people have to be realistic. You can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear and no manager was ever going to be successful with the current crop of England players.

Good managers do make a difference, but even they need something to work with, Hodgson could have gotten every player playing at 100% and they still would have struggled.

But Hogdson was never going to get every player at 100% because he's a poor manager. It's not about playing at 100% either, it's about playing at 100% in a system that suits his first 11. His selection and tactics never make any sense at all, it's a bizarre combination. Chile has arguably one world class player in Sanchez, not sure they have many more. They've look like one of the best teams so far and are qualified already.

OwaynOTT

ronjo wrote: »

Is this answer a question with a question day?

bucketybuck

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Chile has arguably one world class player in Sanchez, not sure they have many more. They've look like one of the best teams so far and are qualified already.

If England had Arturo Vidal perhaps we wouldn't be having this conversation.

They have Gerrard in central midfield for gods sake, he is horribly overrated there but the worst part is that there aren't really all that many alternatives. Its either him or Carrick/Barry, and they're muck too.

ronjo

Chucky the tree wrote: »

But Hogdson was never going to get every player at 100% because he's a poor manager. It's not about playing at 100% either, it's about playing at 100% in a system that suits his first 11. His selection and tactics never make any sense at all, it's a bizarre combination. Chile has arguably one world class player in Sanchez, not sure they have many more. They've look like one of the best teams so far and are qualified already.

Plus the best midfielder in the world possibly

eyescreamcone

Rooney missed 2 super chances (hit the bar with a header and the keeper saved a shot from close in). He also went within inches of scoring from a free kick. A little bit more composure/luck and it would have been sunny days for England.

I felt the RTE panel made some good points last night. Uruguay were very tough. It looked like a game between lads from a posh part of town and a rough part of town. England were too nice. Nice guys finish second.

vidor

mike65 wrote: »

England used to churn out central defenders by the dozen now they can't buy one but there are No 10s coming out of their ears.

Who are these No 10s?

Chucky the tree

bucketybuck wrote: »

If England had Arturo Vidal perhaps we wouldn't be having this conversation.

They have Gerrard in central midfield for gods sake, he is horribly overrated there but the worst part is that there aren't really all that many alternatives. Its either him or Carrick/Barry, and they're muck too.

I wouldn't say they're muck. I mean, at least Barry is actually a DM so playing him as DM would make a lot more sense. However if you're going to play Gerrard then at least play two mobile CM next to him, doing anything else is just stupid.

Bacchus

egghead. wrote: »

They just don't have the players, it's always blamed on the manager, but the truth is they are a poor footballing nation.

They have the players to get to the last 16 and with a bit of luck the QF. I thought they played well against Italy but they were poor last night (dire in the 2nd half).

bucketybuck wrote: »

They're not though.

So who should have played?

Carrick instead of Gerrard?
Milner instead of Henderson?
Walker instead of Johnson?
Phil Jones instead of Jagielka?

Because none of those alternatives would have made that team any better.

As another poster pointed out, I think it's more to do with trying to fit Wellbeck, Sturridge, Sterling and Rooney all in the same side.

Rodgers has shown how to use Gerrard effectively and putting him as part of a two man midfield is not how to do it.

I'd have dropped one of the strikers (Wellbeck perhaps) and brought in Barkley or Lallana to play alongside Henderson with Gerrard in that DM role he plays at Liverpool. You can then have a floating front 3 of Rooney, Sterling and Sturridge.

There was no fight in that side last night either. That's part down to the players but also down to Roy. Having experienced Roy as a Liverpool manager, I've seen this before. If plan A does not work, he has nothing and does not inspire confidence in the team. So I think it's fair to place a considerable amount of the blame at Roy's feet.

GBXI

I know he hasn't played a lot of football in the season gone by, but I can't understand how Wilshere doesn't start for England in mid-field.

He's technically excellent, pacy, he would give England that tenacity and bite in mid-field that they seemed to lack in their two games so far, and he's more of an attacking threat than Henderson and Gerrard put together.

Playing 3 in mid-field would protect England's defence more and allow the full-backs to get forward and support the front three. That's the team I would be playing at this World Cup. I think Hodgson will take a large amount of blame or them going home at the group stages (which they probably will now), and in my opinion , rightly so. England have a better team than Costa Rica and Uruguay on paper, and definitely as good as Italy. They should be getting out of their group.

Knex*

bucketybuck wrote: »

If England had Arturo Vidal perhaps we wouldn't be having this conversation.

They have Gerrard in central midfield for gods sake, he is horribly overrated there but the worst part is that there aren't really all that many alternatives. Its either him or Carrick/Barry, and they're muck too.

You could switch Gerrard with Pirlo, and nothing changes. Honestly.

The set up, the role he's asked to play, and the roles and personnel around him just aren't conducive to a good performance.

Pirlo has De Rossi, Veratti and Marchisio providing a very solid platform for him to play his game. Now, I'm not saying England should lineup the same as Italy, but they shouldn't be trying to play Gerrard in the same CM role he played two years ago.

It wasn't working at the start of this season for Liverpool, and his form only turned a corner when this was identified and he was moved into an almost sweeper type role.

He should have played the same for England. Put Lallana and Henderson alongside him, Sterling as the AM, and let Sturridge and Rooney play up top.

Having those two up top stops teams from pressing up and swamping you in your own half, as they are too dangerous. Lallana and Henderson do the same as Allen and Hendo did in countless games for Liverpool, and provide the energy and pressing that's required. Sterling showed in the Italy game he can play centrally at the highest level.

The only reason I can think of for not doing this (aside from not bringing Barry and letting him play there), is that the CB's are not used to being pushed further wide and being a little more exposed.

Still, the set up killed them in the end regardless, so why not try it.

IgnatiousReily

Henderson was good. Gerrard and Johnson abysmal. Sterling shouldn't have been on the wing or substituted. Very sad day for England.

eyescreamcone

It says a lot when Glen Johnson was England's best defender

Henderson and Welbeck were very poor

The rest were only average

joe123

Chucky the tree wrote: »

But Hogdson was never going to get every player at 100% because he's a poor manager. It's not about playing at 100% either, it's about playing at 100% in a system that suits his first 11. His selection and tactics never make any sense at all, it's a bizarre combination. Chile has arguably one world class player in Sanchez, not sure they have many more. They've look like one of the best teams so far and are qualified already.

Ah here Vidal would want to say hello there!

Lennonist

Alonso77 wrote: »

I agree Messi yes, not on current form but yes in general , Ronaldo no not at all. If you'd offer me a Ronaldo or a Suarez in my team, id be Suarez every day on guts and determination alone.

Agree with this. Will Suarez stay at Liverpool for next season? He wont care about the dogs abuse he'll get around England in the Autumn, but I wonder will he head for Real, Barca or PSG after the World Cup. It'd be nicer to live in Paris than Liverpool.

He wasn't fully match fit last night, it makes you wonder what he might have done to England if he was.

Billy86

Leslie91 wrote: »

Having said all that I'd disagree with the notion that they don't have the players. Imho they do if organised/selected in the right manner. There were at least 3 players in that starting 11 last night that are simply not up to it at this level, perhaps 4.

I feel for Cahill, he is the only decent defender on the pitch last nite and because he was closest to Suarez (check out where Jagielka was for 2nd goal) he gets the stick.

Barkley, Cahill, Sturridge, Lallana, Sterling, Henderson... lads like these are the now and the future.... Get them into the team in the right spots and go from there. Make Henderson captain.

Henderson as captain... seriously?

Out of interest, if you think it is all down to the players and that England do have the talent to compete, what team would you have played last night (include no players not at the WC if you like, if there are others you would have brought).

I put the blame for Suarez' second on Gerrard more than anyone. Both centrebacks could have done better but that header backwards was just bizarre and left everyone stranded and up the creek.

From this point on I think Hodgson should put Sterling at 10 with Rooney just over his shoulder fighting for the spot. If they keep Rooney there (and they will) they are basically letting everyone know that they are rewarding name power and not the quality of performances put in.

bucketybuck

Bacchus wrote: »

Rodgers has shown how to use Gerrard effectively and putting him as part of a two man midfield is not how to do it

Personally I don't belive that Gerrard was that important to Liverpool last year and that he wasn't really effective at all, he is hyped because of his name and his history rather than because of his actual performances. He wasn't really any better or worse for England than he was for Liverpool.

But thats by the by, because even thinking that there still weren't many alternatives to him, which is the real problem instead of formations.

Knex. wrote: »

You could switch Gerrard with Pirlo, and nothing changes. Honestly.

The set up, the role he's asked to play, and the roles and personnel around him just aren't conducive to a good performance.

Pirlo has De Rossi, Veratti and Marchisio providing a very solid platform for him to play his game. Now, I'm not saying England should lineup the same as Italy, but they shouldn't be trying to play Gerrard in the same CM role he played two years ago.

It wasn't working at the start of this season for Liverpool, and his form only turned a corner when this was identified and he was moved into an almost sweeper type role.

He should have played the same for England. Put Lallana and Henderson alongside him, Sterling as the AM, and let Sturridge and Rooney play up top.

Having those two up top stops teams from pressing up and swamping you in your own half, as they are too dangerous. Lallana and Henderson do the same as Allen and Hendo did in countless games for Liverpool, and provide the energy and pressing that's required. Sterling showed in the Italy game he can play centrally at the highest level.

The only reason I can think of for not doing this (aside from not bringing Barry and letting him play there), is that the CB's are not used to being pushed further wide and being a little more exposed.

Still, the set up killed them in the end regardless, so why not try it.

Sure, try it. But if they had done what you suggest here they still wouldn't have done anything at this world cup. Gerrard, Henderson and Lallana still aren't going to control midfield, Rooney, Sterling and Sturridge still aren't going to rip teams apart.

Said it before as well. Italy provide a solid platform for Pirlo because he is worth it, but why exactly should England be deciding on formations to accommodate Gerrard? Because Gerrard sure as hell ain't no Pirlo.

TimeToShine

England need to clear out.

Base the team around Sterling, Sturridge, Lallana, Wilshere, Henderson, Ox, Walcott, Shaw etc. Don't be afraid to pick and choose from the Championship if needs be. Gerrard was poison in that team last night. He was poison for most of the season for Liverpool as well but a string of good performances + his reputation had the fans going mental. He needs to go. Jagielka and Johnson were woeful. Welbeck I'm at a loss for words for. Don't care if he's young he is absolutely terrible.

Can't help but think if Rooney were firing on all cylinders, Walcott + Ox available and Cole/Terry brought along then they could have put quite a dent in this WC.

If Ramsey were English they'd be a completely different beast.

stooge

the biggest mistake last night was changing the team to accomodate Rooney. Sterling was probably their best player in the first match playing behind Sturridge, but then Roy changes him to the wing and subs him. madness. Gerrard looked out on his feet with 10-15 to go and you could see him calling lads back into midfield to help out just before Uruguay got their second.

Will I Amnt

It seems people just want England to be Liverpool, play the same system and have the same players in the same positions they are in at Liverpool and other players doing the same job covering as the Liverpool players that aren't available?

GreeBo

I dont blame Gerrard for the second goal, centre backs just abandoned Suarez behind them, which is suicidal play.

However Gerrard did little all night. I watched him plenty of times just standing in midfield not looking for the ball or trying to find some space to take a pass. A few times the player on the ball was in trouble and still nothing, these 5 foot passes straight back to where it came from dont add anything.

Gringo180

Surely Lampard sitting deep could of done a better job than Gerrard. Looking at the England captain last night he just looks awkward and lethargic in possession. Besides Lampard is a much much better player.