Maddison

[turtmcfly]

8 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

That's great for team spirit and the squad. True togetherness not what ever people say England have. 

 

Ah, to have witnessed the self-soilers in this thread had Aaron Ramsdale been given 10 minutes at the end of the Senegal game

 

[lcfcbluearmy]

1 hour ago, fuchsntf said:

That’s what international managers do,they set up basics & priorities before a ball is kicked. Then the the flexability comes ,when situations change or problems arise.It was prudent & obvious to take Maddison,but Maddison’s situation meant

he just wasn’t in the mix in the first 3 group games…

So what’s Southgate’s priorities and logical actions….it definitely isnt panicking

because FT is demanding Maddison game time..

Against France,where does he get a look in,even if Saka, AND Foden,got injured

or a virus,only then from the bench…

Circumstance not Southgate has been Maddison’s if you like nemesis..

Everything running right,then that injury ( which we still don’t know if it’s still a problem), then present front 6 players form,plus subs.

 

Look IMO, I would choose Maddison over Mount,but my preferences don’t make

Southgate wrong or making incompetent descisions…He would be plain stupid

to throw Maddison in. He would be leggy and not game fit…

Unfortunately this Wcup has sailed by for him,but he will have belong to a successfull squad…He will play in games after the Wcup,maybe get in the Euros-squad,but his past & present injuries just came at the wrong time…

One inexperienced player doesn’t define a career of a manager or path of a squad…but a Bellingham,Saka,Foden could be defining both  Southgate’s tenure

and their own individual international career…

 

 

That's why you give the minutes when you are comfortably winning a game so they can shake off the rustiness and be ready when/ if you need them. 

 

By not doing that you face a situation where something happens that means you have to play them (e.g. Illness in the camp etc) and they are still leggy because you didn't give them the minutes when you had the opportunity. That is bad management of players in the squad and that's the main annoyance not just that maddison isn't starting

[Aleksz]

Plenty of posts have got it spot on here.

 

I think he’s a better player than Mount, as we all do. I’m disappointed he didn’t get minutes against Wales (especially when he seemed to make a point of getting much needed minutes into Trent and Phillips) and Senegal. But I can certainly understand why he hasn’t. Maddison made it in to a very settled group at the last minute - and then completed all of about three training sessions throughout the group stage through injury.

 

It’s nice he’s there representing us in a group of players that are doing very well and have another great chance of going far. FWIW if they beat France on Saturday I think they’ll get to the final - I don’t see us beating that Brazil team on tonight’s evidence though. 

 

[Dan LCFC]

7 hours ago, filbertway said:

How you can look at all the evidence and think that, Southgate picked a player that doesn't fit into his system, was down to anything other than media pressure I don't know. Andros Townsend is literally more suited to the way England play than Madders is. Would be dreamy if we could get a manager that could find room for Foden, Madders and Saka behind Kane.

Thought the same thing  "Southgate hasn't said it's down to media pressure so it can't be". It's patently obvious it's why he took him. He's never been a fan, it's not a controversial assumption. He's played a bit of a blinder because he's averted the whole issue, the games got underway, England were winning them and the issue was forgotten. Even against USA it was all about Foden's absence rather than Maddison's.

 

Maddison not being involved in any of the nations league games was the final chance of him having any serious involvement. He has his favourites, I don't agree with some of them but it was only ever going to go this way. I expected nothing differently personally.

[lifted*fox]

so southgate is so stubborn, bloody-minded and so dead set on favourites he won't ever play maddison 

 

but on the other hand, he's also so mentally weak that he bows down to media pressure to take along a player he has no intention of using 

 

righty-o

 

it's absolutely inconceivable to people on here that maybe southgate thinks he's a good player who could do a job in this squad if absolutely needed but he won't chuck in a player who is borderline injured and about as late-a-comer as could be, just for the sake of minutes in a team that's performing perfectly fine as it is. 

 

so many chips on shoulders here we could set up a casino

 

 

[filbertway]

1 hour ago, lifted*fox said:

so southgate is so stubborn, bloody-minded and so dead set on favourites he won't ever play maddison 

 

but on the other hand, he's also so mentally weak that he bows down to media pressure to take along a player he has no intention of using 

 

righty-o

 

it's absolutely inconceivable to people on here that maybe southgate thinks he's a good player who could do a job in this squad if absolutely needed but he won't chuck in a player who is borderline injured and about as late-a-comer as could be, just for the sake of minutes in a team that's performing perfectly fine as it is. 

 

so many chips on shoulders here we could set up a casino

 

 

Southgate suddenly thinks Madders is a good player after passing up the opportunity to select him multiple times before. Juuuust as the media start ramping up the pressure

 

I think its you on this occasion whos so dug in that you cant see the obvious.

 

I dont think hes stubborn though and not playing Madders due to some vendetta. Madders just doesn't suit a system with 3 attackers where he actually needs to stay wide. He simply doesn't possess the running power the other 5 (4 now Sterling has gone) have 

 

[cruzFOX]

Look as foxes fans we all want madders to play. Yes we’ll even take a few glorified minutes in extra time to see him run around  and why not it’s worlds biggest sporting stage and he represents us and our club.

can he do more of course he can but in southgates grand scheme it’s not a priority.

right now it’s a case of ‘if it ain’t broke than don’t fix it!’

 

England has played very well against the opposition it’s faced. Only the USA has really tested us but it wasn’t enough to cause alarm bells. Now France will be all together very different. They will pressure our defense create chances and even score. Southgate will probably have a plan B on how to counter the French but it won’t involve madders. He will exhaust the possibilities with his regular players first before he turns to a situation where he has to throw on all his subs and one of them is madders. 
 

The way I see it is a glass half full ie if we win and don’t see madders play that’s another chance for him to make an appearance later but if we lose oh well atleast he made the squad along with the others who haven’t played.

 

As for the argument of should our aux players have had some minutes at the end kinda like Brazil did yes of course. Why didn’t gareth do that? Maybe a journo should ask him this week. However I doubt England even if winning will cruise comfortably to the end against a dangerous French side that will play to the final whistle.

[The boy Linacre]

14 hours ago, fuchsntf said:

That’s what international managers do,they set up basics & priorities before a ball is kicked. Then the the flexability comes ,when situations change or problems arise.It was prudent & obvious to take Maddison,but Maddison’s situation meant

he just wasn’t in the mix in the first 3 group games…

So what’s Southgate’s priorities and logical actions….it definitely isnt panicking

because FT is demanding Maddison game time..

Against France,where does he get a look in,even if Saka, AND Foden,got injured

or a virus,only then from the bench…

Circumstance not Southgate has been Maddison’s if you like nemesis..

Everything running right,then that injury ( which we still don’t know if it’s still a problem), then present front 6 players form,plus subs.

 

Look IMO, I would choose Maddison over Mount,but my preferences don’t make

Southgate wrong or making incompetent descisions…He would be plain stupid

to throw Maddison in. He would be leggy and not game fit…

Unfortunately this Wcup has sailed by for him,but he will have belong to a successfull squad…He will play in games after the Wcup,maybe get in the Euros-squad,but his past & present injuries just came at the wrong time…

One inexperienced player doesn’t define a career of a manager or path of a squad…but a Bellingham,Saka,Foden could be defining both  Southgate’s tenure

and their own individual international career…

 

 

You're right its sailed for him sadly.

It was always a struggle for him to get games because of the lack of experience and caps, that will always weigh against you in comparison to others, they can be trusted.

You're best chance to force your way in was in the groups, that was blown by being unavailable for the 1st 2 games due to injury and of course you are a risk because you might not be ready fitness wise for game 3, so a risk, almost whatever the score.

Though there is no doubt Southgate picks his favourites when they're out of form, he has got away with it to some extent/lucky.  Why he picked Mount (totally out of form & still came out on Sunday) and Sterling (scored) I am at a loss, BUT luckily for him, Rashford, Foden & Saka are on fire, and Henderson has appeared and played well & Bellingham amazingly!!!  And Maguire, who TBF to him was fine in the groups but struggled Sunday and I am super worried about Saturday.

So as always, his best chance is the 3rd place play off, or he won't play in this world cup, very sad.

I think IF he had been 100% all tournament, he might have got on against Wales.

Look, no logic there, why did Kane play the last 30 mins Sunday when you want to rest him, Wilson has been excellent in his 2 cameo's and deserved more game time.

We have a great if massively tough chance, but this is a very good squad and will be over the next 4 years at least.

[fox_up_north]

I do think it's a shame our best English players haven't really had their chances to shine on the world stage. Vardy for the Euros/ 2018 WC and now Maddison.

 

Whichever way you slice it, it's a damn shame. 

[lifted*fox]

4 hours ago, filbertway said:

I think its you on this occasion whos so dug in that you cant see the obvious.

tbh, i'm not remotely interested in this world cup and im not overly bothered if maddison gets game time or not. I have very little opinion on southgate as international football isn't of much concern to me.

 

I have no horse in the race. 

 

I just find it fascinating that everything is some sort of big conspiracy on here. too many men getting their knickers in a twist over pure conjecture. 

 

we see it time and time again.

 

rodgers is purposely losing games to get sacked, southgate is taking players to a world cup because of media pressure, etc. all with zero actual evidence - just pie in the sky stuff. 

 

way of the world though, everyone's 2 seconds away from raging about something that they've made up in their head whilst completely ignoring, generally what is far more sensible narrative. 

[turtmcfly]

2 hours ago, cruzFOX said:

Look as foxes fans we all want madders to play. Yes we’ll even take a few glorified minutes in extra time to see him run around  and why not it’s worlds biggest sporting stage and he represents us and our club.

can he do more of course he can but in southgates grand scheme it’s not a priority.

right now it’s a case of ‘if it ain’t broke than don’t fix it!’

 

England has played very well against the opposition it’s faced. Only the USA has really tested us but it wasn’t enough to cause alarm bells. Now France will be all together very different. They will pressure our defense create chances and even score. Southgate will probably have a plan B on how to counter the French but it won’t involve madders. He will exhaust the possibilities with his regular players first before he turns to a situation where he has to throw on all his subs and one of them is madders. 
 

The way I see it is a glass half full ie if we win and don’t see madders play that’s another chance for him to make an appearance later but if we lose oh well atleast he made the squad along with the others who haven’t played.

 

As for the argument of should our aux players have had some minutes at the end kinda like Brazil did yes of course. Why didn’t gareth do that? Maybe a journo should ask him this week. However I doubt England even if winning will cruise comfortably to the end against a dangerous French side that will play to the final whistle.

 

With respect, **** that. Any spare match minutes should be given in order of the likeliness the manager will use them against France.

 

 

[turtmcfly]

4 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

tbh, i'm not remotely interested in this world cup and im not overly bothered if maddison gets game time or not. I have very little opinion on southgate as international football isn't of much concern to me.

 

I have no horse in the race. 

 

I just find it fascinating that everything is some sort of big conspiracy on here. too many men getting their knickers in a twist over pure conjecture. 

 

we see it time and time again.

 

rodgers is purposely losing games to get sacked, southgate is taking players to a world cup because of media pressure, etc. all with zero actual evidence - just pie in the sky stuff. 

 

way of the world though, everyone's 2 seconds away from raging about something that they've made up in their head whilst completely ignoring, generally what is far more sensible narrative. 

 

This is the bane of FT.  Grown men (not being sexist - on FT it's always men) who immediately resort 'it's a fix' whenever anything, however minor, doesn't pan out the way they want. Then proudly make that petulant lack of control public (often at the same time as screeching about some third party's personal failings).

 

It's not just that they make the claims with zero evidence - they will pointedly ignore anyone showing evidence to the contrary. Nor will the engage with anyone asking them to think through their one-ply 'thinking' to its laughable conclusions.

 

Absolute thread ruiners the lot of 'em

 

 

[An Sionnach]

I wonder whether posters on here will be pushing as hard for Jimmy to get a chance when he is playing for Newcastle ( or Spurs). Somehow I doubt it.

[Ric Flair]

50 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

I wonder whether posters on here will be pushing as hard for Jimmy to get a chance when he is playing for Newcastle ( or Spurs). Somehow I doubt it.

If they support England then I'd hope so, certainly if he continues to be head and shoulders the best attacking midfielder in the Premier League, let alone the best English attacking midfielder. 

[Fox92]

55 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

I wonder whether posters on here will be pushing as hard for Jimmy to get a chance when he is playing for Newcastle ( or Spurs). Somehow I doubt it.

Probably complain Southgate only picks top 6 players.

[HybridFox]

[fox_up_north]

Nice to see we're sponsored by

ENGLAND

ENGLAND

[Corky]

1 hour ago, An Sionnach said:

I wonder whether posters on here will be pushing as hard for Jimmy to get a chance when he is playing for Newcastle ( or Spurs). Somehow I doubt it.

Fans in being biased towards their own player shock!

 

Maddison has been one of the best players in England for over a year and has not represented the national team once in that time. Fans are rightly questioning why. 

[An Sionnach]

I expect him to be a fixture in the squad but game time will depend on results. Ramsey always went with what he knew was working until it didn't of course.

[whoareyaaa]

Southgate will use Maddison if we are losing a game with 20 minutes to go, if we are winning by a narrow margin it's unlikely he will get on which is understandable.

 

He should have been in the squad long before this so that is the problem, he was never going to play a part up to now after being injured for 2 of the games and the other 2 games we was seeing games out and he can't put Maddison on and Leave others on the bench when they have been playing in the team that got to the World Cup

Edited 6 December 2022 by whoareyaaa

[Out Foxed]

5 hours ago, turtmcfly said:

 

This is the bane of FT.  Grown men (not being sexist - on FT it's always men) who immediately resort 'it's a fix' whenever anything, however minor, doesn't pan out the way they want. Then proudly make that petulant lack of control public (often at the same time as screeching about some third party's personal failings).

 

It's not just that they make the claims with zero evidence - they will pointedly ignore anyone showing evidence to the contrary. Nor will the engage with anyone asking them to think through their one-ply 'thinking' to its laughable conclusions.

 

Absolute thread ruiners the lot of 'em

 

 

considering how just about everything is rigged against the average person in life it's not that far fetched, is it...

 

better to question things than be a clueless, naïve, div. 

 

 

[Gamble92]

7 hours ago, fox_up_north said:

I do think it's a shame our best English players haven't really had their chances to shine on the world stage. Vardy for the Euros/ 2018 WC and now Maddison.

 

Whichever way you slice it, it's a damn shame. 

Just think if they were in a position to shine at a world stage i.e Vardy peaking younger then they'd not have done all they've done with us. 

 

I don't think there's anything missing from Vardys story and I'm sure Maddison will get his chance when he moves. 

[Paninistickers]

3 hours ago, TK95 said:

I always had the impression Beckham was tall ish, 5 10 ish....and that Madders was small, 5 7 ish. Obviously not going by that pic! Or is Madders stood on a box?

[don_danbury]

23 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

I always had the impression Beckham was tall ish, 5 10 ish....and that Madders was small, 5 7 ish. Obviously not going by that pic! Or is Madders stood on a box?

he must be stood on something. i think beckham is close to 6ft and madders is deffo not anyway near 6ft

Edited 6 December 2022 by don_danbury

[Diffco]

Beckham is 1.83m, Madders 1.75m