International Football thread

[st_brendy]

Rooney will start if fit. Whether he should, possibly not. Another good thing about last night is Sterling's place is in serious doubt.

Lallana was the worst player on the pitch, he was utterly redundant. Sterling is arguably still Englands best player, and has been when he has played recently. If Sterling is fit, he starts on the left.

I thought Lallana had an alright game. Not magical, but alright. I'd certainly say that Cahill and Henderson, as a minimum, were worse than him.

That said, when everyone is available, I'm not sure he'd get into my starting XI. My squad yes, no doubt, but probably not my starting XI.

We could do with Sturridge playing as much as possible for Liverpool between now and the summer, to see if he and Lallana (plus Henderson - although he doesn't get into my team, I suspect he'll get into Roy's) can build up the sort of relationship that Kane and Alli have. In fact, if you throw in the likes of Dier, Rose, Clyne, Walker and Milner, the team could be almost exclusively made up of Liverpool and Spurs players (keeper and CB aside).

[Aidan11]

Strange isn't it?

We beat Germany in a friendly and people get carried away.

We beat them 5-1in a qualifying group once but guess which team later went on to reach the WC final a year later.

I'm not sure too many people are getting carried away. I don't see many people suddenly saying we're going to win the Euro's. In fact, if anything, most people seem to still be downbeat in the expectation that the likes of Rooney and Milner will soon be right back into this team when fit.

There's nothing wrong with celebrating a one-off comeback win from 2-0 down away to the world champions, or celebrating the success of some young players who could be our future. I've got a much bigger issue with people who only really comment when we lose; people who just love to be negative.

Maybe people aren't saying it on here but various other forums and social networking sites are full of people who feel we've only to turn up now to win the trophy. Even Geoff Hurst has said we need to reach the semi-finals.

As for people who comment when we lose. That is the nature of message boards. The British love to moan.

As for me personally I saw less than 5 minutes of the game. I've long since ceased to take an interest in our national football team. That includes the matches at the last world cup.

[sussexpob]

I'm not sure too many people are getting carried away. I don't see many people suddenly saying we're going to win the Euro's. In fact, if anything, most people seem to still be downbeat in the expectation that the likes of Rooney and Milner will soon be right back into this team when fit

Well, indeed. Roy has his boys he likes, and most of them arent worthy of getting into the team at the moment.

England can do very well, but nights like last night will only serve to show what you can achieve when you are forced to be adventurous. We will end up in the first match against Russia with Wazzer being a dead weight in the centre, Sturridge out of position on the wing, Oxlade-Chamberlain on the other unable to keep a ball, and Jack Wilshere unable to run the full length of the pitch being subbed off for James "I dont do anything" Milner.... while the resorted Joe Hart throws in Russias winner calamitously.

[sussexpob]

I thought Lallana had an alright game. Not magical, but alright. I'd certainly say that Cahill and Henderson, as a minimum, were worse than him

It is those three that I highlighted as the weakness. Henderson was the worst right until he actually got a dead ball delivery remotely near an England player for the winning goal. And moaning about Cahill is a little like moaning about the weather, because there are that few players about in the centre back position, we just have to take our rubbish pairing and do as we can with it.

If Roy had the balls, and people in the press had the sense to pressure him to call for it, last night we solved a few questions.

Kane has to be the lone forward.
Dele Alli justified his position in the 10.
Welbeck has now convinced me (and that really took something in the last weeks) he is effective and needs to start in the wide role.
Eric Dier should be the first name on the team sheet
The two full backs have booked themselves on the plane, and I also think Smalling has nailed down his starting spot
Rooney is no longer in the top 2, arguably 3, first choice strikers to play in Kanes place...

[st_brendy]

Strange isn't it?

We beat Germany in a friendly and people get carried away.

We beat them 5-1in a qualifying group once but guess which team later went on to reach the WC final a year later.

I'm not sure too many people are getting carried away. I don't see many people suddenly saying we're going to win the Euro's. In fact, if anything, most people seem to still be downbeat in the expectation that the likes of Rooney and Milner will soon be right back into this team when fit.

There's nothing wrong with celebrating a one-off comeback win from 2-0 down away to the world champions, or celebrating the success of some young players who could be our future. I've got a much bigger issue with people who only really comment when we lose; people who just love to be negative.

Maybe people aren't saying it on here but various other forums and social networking sites are full of people who feel we've only to turn up now to win the trophy. Even Geoff Hurst has said we need to reach the semi-finals.

As for people who comment when we lose. That is the nature of message boards. The British love to moan.

As for me personally I saw less than 5 minutes of the game. I've long since ceased to take an interest in our national football team. That includes the matches at the last world cup.

And is that particularly unrealistic? Given that in most groups, three out of four sides will progress, qualification for the last 16 is pretty much a given. And so long as we finish 1st or 2nd, it is almost certain that our last 16 game won't be against a big name. So really, all Geoff is asking of us is to win our QF.

And even that isn't certain of being a big side. Even if Germany, Spain, Italy, France, Portugal, Belgium were to all progress to the QFs, as well as ourselves, that still leaves one other QF place (and given that it's almost certain that Spain will play Italy or Belgium in the last 16, it's almost impossible that all of those 6 will make the QF - so two other QF places available, as a realistic minimum).

[st_brendy]

I thought Lallana had an alright game. Not magical, but alright. I'd certainly say that Cahill and Henderson, as a minimum, were worse than him

It is those three that I highlighted as the weakness. Henderson was the worst right until he actually got a dead ball delivery remotely near an England player for the winning goal. And moaning about Cahill is a little like moaning about the weather, because there are that few players about in the centre back position, we just have to take our rubbish pairing and do as we can with it.

If Roy had the balls, and people in the press had the sense to pressure him to call for it, last night we solved a few questions.

Kane has to be the lone forward.
Dele Alli justified his position in the 10.
Welbeck has now convinced me (and that really took something in the last weeks) he is effective and needs to start in the wide role.
Eric Dier should be the first name on the team sheet
The two full backs have booked themselves on the plane, and I also think Smalling has nailed down his starting spot
Rooney is no longer in the top 2, arguably 3, first choice strikers to play in Kanes place...

That's what I'm still unsure on. I'm undecided if I want us to go the Spurs route of playing two fullbacks who bomb on, with Dier (and maybe one other) sitting in to help the CBs, or if I want us to go down the Leicester route of playing a back four who defend almost religiously whilst backing the guys at the other end of the pitch to get the job done without fullback assistance (but still with Dier in the centre. As you say, he has to play).

Clyne really highlighted the debate for me. Assisted Vardy's goal by getting forward, but kept Gomez onside for the wrongly ruled out goal, and was the wrong side of Gomez for his header (and even if he had been the right side, I still think that Gomez would have beaten him in the air - whereas someone like Stones at RB would be much less likely to get beaten in the air).

[Aidan11]

Strange isn't it?

We beat Germany in a friendly and people get carried away.

We beat them 5-1in a qualifying group once but guess which team later went on to reach the WC final a year later.

I'm not sure too many people are getting carried away. I don't see many people suddenly saying we're going to win the Euro's. In fact, if anything, most people seem to still be downbeat in the expectation that the likes of Rooney and Milner will soon be right back into this team when fit.

There's nothing wrong with celebrating a one-off comeback win from 2-0 down away to the world champions, or celebrating the success of some young players who could be our future. I've got a much bigger issue with people who only really comment when we lose; people who just love to be negative.

Maybe people aren't saying it on here but various other forums and social networking sites are full of people who feel we've only to turn up now to win the trophy. Even Geoff Hurst has said we need to reach the semi-finals.





As for people who comment when we lose. That is the nature of message boards. The British love to moan.

As for me personally I saw less than 5 minutes of the game. I've long since ceased to take an interest in our national football team. That includes the matches at the last world cup.

And is that particularly unrealistic? Given that in most groups, three out of four sides will progress, qualification for the last 16 is pretty much a given. And so long as we finish 1st or 2nd, it is almost certain that our last 16 game won't be against a big name. So really, all Geoff is asking of us is to win our QF.

And even that isn't certain of being a big side. Even if Germany, Spain, Italy, France, Portugal, Belgium were to all progress to the QFs, as well as ourselves, that still leaves one other QF place (and given that it's almost certain that Spain will play Italy or Belgium in the last 16, it's almost impossible that all of those 6 will make the QF - so two other QF places available, as a realistic minimum).

Since we won the WC in 1966 we have only beaten a high ranking nation once in the KO stages of either the Euros or the WC - Spain in 1996 on penalties at Wembley. I'm not optimistic of us getting any further. If we do then great but history is not on our side. I have no confidence in a bunch of overpaid PL footballers who are allegedly told by their managers and chief executives not to play flat out as it is they who pay their wages and they don't want them getting injured missing vital club games. Or maybe they just don't give a s*** themselves.

I'd be happy for them to prove me wrong of course but I doubt it.

[sussexpob]

For me, its option Tottenham for three reasons.

Firstly, Rose and Dier are use to the system and well be better playing it. Dier is good enough to start at CB and can drift into that position comfortably, and has enough about him with the ball in CM ( unlike someone like Jones when United have tried him there) to not be a weakness.

Secondly, I think in the leicester system you need two DM's in the centre to maintain that defensive shield, which England dont have, and you need someone in the air at the back who is a beast because for the tactic to work, what usually happens is the opposition end up flinging balls into the box. Cahill is proving this year to be very weak to air attacks, this could force teams to exploit a weakness.

Lastly, do England have two full backs with defensive strengths? Personally I think all of the fullbacks near the team and on form are good because of their attacking instincts.

[sussexpob]

Since we won the WC in 1966 we have only beaten a high ranking nation once in the KO stages of either the Euros or the WC - Spain in 1996 on penalties at Wembley. I'm not optimistic of us getting any further. If we do then great but history is not on our side. I have no confidence in a bunch of overpaid PL footballers who are allegedly told by their managers and chief executives not to play flat out as it is they who pay their wages and they don't want them getting injured missing vital club games. Or maybe they just don't give a s*** themselves.

I'd be happy for them to prove me wrong of course but I doubt it.

Im not sure this means anything. Argentina would consider themselves failures in recent decades, Spain were the perennial underachievers before dominating world football recently, the French had the "magic square" teams that failed and before 1998 had blown through generations of teams that underachieved, Holland redefined failure over and over again..... even people in Brazil and Italy would claim to have failed in recent times.

History doesnt mean anything. Only one team can win a tournament, meaning most major tournaments are failures.

I dont think you can say it doesnt mean anything

[st_brendy]

For me, its option Tottenham for three reasons.

Firstly, Rose and Dier are use to the system and well be better playing it. Dier is good enough to start at CB and can drift into that position comfortably, and has enough about him with the ball in CM ( unlike someone like Jones when United have tried him there) to not be a weakness.

Secondly, I think in the leicester system you need two DM's in the centre to maintain that defensive shield, which England dont have, and you need someone in the air at the back who is a beast because for the tactic to work, what usually happens is the opposition end up flinging balls into the box. Cahill is proving this year to be very weak to air attacks, this could force teams to exploit a weakness.

Lastly, do England have two full backs with defensive strengths? Personally I think all of the fullbacks near the team and on form are good because of their attacking instincts.

On your first point (and your opinion overall), I would argue therefore that surely Walker should play ahead of Clyne? He is a Spurs player after all. Before this season, I was a big critic of Walker's (as I was of Rose's - I didn't think either of them could defend), but he has improved this season.

On your second point, surely we need to give Drinkwater a go first before commenting? He is, afterall, one of Leicester's own two players in there. Yes Cahill is an issue, but he's a potential issue whatever system we play.

On your third point, as I say I think Stones fits that bill as a RB. As for LB, well Bertrand's defensive game has improved this season due to regularly playing as the left of three CBs. And even when we have reverted to a back four (we don't play a back three/five every game), with him reverting back to his usual LB position, he hasn't bombed forward quite so much. So like Fuchs for Leicester, I think Bertrand would be happy to stay at home for 90% of the match, only very occasionally making a break forward (but when he does go forward, he's still got his attacking ability in there.)

Ultimately though, I'm still in my position of being undecided.

[Durhamfootman]

For a change, I saw some of last night's friendly. I watched the first half live, and the highlights later. I was pretty happy with what I saw, tbh, although I confess to being surprised that England managed to pull that one out of the fire.

I liked the way they pressed the Germans, giving them little time to playl, and often robbing them of the ball. Not so keen on how many chances were blazed over the bar in the first half.

Like others, I'd expect England to go back to their old ways when the usual suspects return.... which is a shame.

(note to Roy.... Smalling? really?)

[sussexpob]

For me, its option Tottenham for three reasons.

Firstly, Rose and Dier are use to the system and well be better playing it. Dier is good enough to start at CB and can drift into that position comfortably, and has enough about him with the ball in CM ( unlike someone like Jones when United have tried him there) to not be a weakness.

Secondly, I think in the leicester system you need two DM's in the centre to maintain that defensive shield, which England dont have, and you need someone in the air at the back who is a beast because for the tactic to work, what usually happens is the opposition end up flinging balls into the box. Cahill is proving this year to be very weak to air attacks, this could force teams to exploit a weakness.

Lastly, do England have two full backs with defensive strengths? Personally I think all of the fullbacks near the team and on form are good because of their attacking instincts.

On your first point (and your opinion overall), I would argue therefore that surely Walker should play ahead of Clyne? He is a Spurs player after all. Before this season, I was a big critic of Walker's (as I was of Rose's - I didn't think either of them could defend), but he has improved this season.

On your second point, surely we need to give Drinkwater a go first before commenting? He is, afterall, one of Leicester's own two players in there. Yes Cahill is an issue, but he's a potential issue whatever system we play.

On your third point, as I say I think Stones fits that bill as a RB. As for LB, well Bertrand's defensive game has improved this season due to regularly playing as the left of three CBs. And even when we have reverted to a back four (we don't play a back three/five every game), with him reverting back to his usual LB position, he hasn't bombed forward quite so much. So like Fuchs for Leicester, I think Bertrand would be happy to stay at home for 90% of the match, only very occasionally making a break forward (but when he does go forward, he's still got his attacking ability in there.)

Ultimately though, I'm still in my position of being undecided.

When I said "booked on the plane" I meant in the squad. The exact selection on who starts is something that can still be decided. Personally, I believe Clyne is a better defensive player than Walker, but not as good going forward. But I think England need more rigidity at the back, so I favour Clyne over Walker. I am a big fan of Bertrand, and is better than Rose for me, but Rose has the form. That is a tough choice.

Stones cant even lock down a start at Everton, and seems to since Christmas be struggling for form. Personally I wouldnt take him. He has many years to come good, if Martinez cant even keep him on a pitch for Everton, I dont see what good taking him will do.


Drinkwater is part of an effective system, but as a player he is no where near the team for me. Id rather pick Wes Morgan at CB than take him in the squad (did I really just say that? this year has been a crazy year for football)

[sussexpob]

Coming back to the point made about England fans negativity, it does make me laugh when the British Press talk about Belgium as this team to wet the bed over, but the press find it utterly impossible to be objective.

Are Belgium really that good compared to England at the moment? Courtois hasnt had a brilliant year, in the last World Cup they had that few FB's they played a 4 CB's and had no width going forward. Axel Witsel is rubbish, Felliani is even worse, De Bruyne is injured and probably wont play much part, Hazard has had one of the most disappointing seasons a player has ever had in the Premier League era, Vermalen has started only 7 league games this year, Lukaku has been outscored by Kane, Kompany cant get fit to the point you forget he even exists and Benteke has been terrible
Yet you read the press or message boards, and people talk about belgium like they are the Brazil 1970 team

[st_brendy]

Oh I accept that for any chance of Stones to start (whether at RB or CB), he first needs to get back into Everton's team. Can't be playing a rusty player in the team, when they're inexperienced.

But at the same time, if there's one PL manager out there who I wouldn't be listening to when it comes to their view on defending (be it system or personal), it is Martinez.

[sussexpob]

Oh I accept that for any chance of Stones to start (whether at RB or CB), he first needs to get back into Everton's team. Can't be playing a rusty player in the team, when they're inexperienced.

But at the same time, if there's one PL manager out there who I wouldn't be listening to when it comes to their view on defending (be it system or personal), it is Martinez.

Thank god, I have found another person with a similar opinion on Martinez. People talk about him like he is a tactical football god, but I just dont see him doing anything.