Group B: England, Iran, USA, Wales

[Samilktray]

46 minutes ago, tom27111 said:

I think Southgate has had an easier ride because of the way society is now.

 

Could you imagine if The Sun superimposed his face on a root vegetable?

 

Not allowed nowadays 

 

But seriously, I think political correctness has a tiny bit to do with it.

What does political correctness have to do with it? 
 

the sun probably won’t superimpose his face on a root vegetable because it isn’t very funny.

 

Who wouldn’t allow it?  

[tom27111]

Just now, Samilktray said:

What does political correctness have to do with it? 
 

the sun probably won’t superimpose his face on a root vegetable because it isn’t very funny.

 

Who wouldn’t allow it?  

 

I'm not saying it is funny, but didn't stop them doing it to Graham Taylor 30 years ago.

 

Everyone gets offended by everything nowadays, so you can't slate an England manager incase some precious soul takes it the wrong way.

 

[spacemunky]

Times like these make me glad my dad's not alive.

[Deeg67]

5 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

Kante is not a box to box midfielder. Jude Bellingham is. 
 

Tyler Adams has scored five goals in 235 games of his entire career. 
 

Still NGolo Kante has 24 goals in 424 career games (which if we look at his PL career only is 13 goals from 262 games) 
 

 

 

 

Bellingham is a phenomenal talent but he doesn't play the same role (or position) as Adams.  Higher up the pitch, much more attacking.  Adams basically plays positionally where N'didi does, as a bulwark in front of the back four.  He's box to box because he has a great engine (third in the PL in distance covered).

[StriderHiryu]

54 minutes ago, tom27111 said:

 

Would be great if @StriderHiryu would do some of his tactical analysis on England.

 

I don't think Southgate would agree!

That was absolute shite. The tactics were don’t lose. One of the best generations of players England has ever had and he plays handbrake on, safety first football. Maybe he goes onto win the trophy outright (I highly doubt it), but Southgate won’t be fondly remembered. 
 

This isn’t a case of years gone by where we’ve had a poor crop of players. We have players who are fully fit and who play high press, high intensity football 3 times a week. We just sat off USA the entire game! Pathetic. 

[JimJams]

So that's Maddison starting in place of Mount for the Wales game then yeah?

[CosbehFox]

19 minutes ago, Deeg67 said:

Bellingham is a phenomenal talent but he doesn't play the same role (or position) as Adams.  Higher up the pitch, much more attacking.  Adams basically plays positionally where N'didi does, as a bulwark in front of the back four.  He's box to box because he has a great engine (third in the PL in distance covered).

A box to box midfielder affects the game in an attacking process alongside the defensive work Hence the name because they go in both penalty areas. They score goals, set up goals but they are capable of getting the defensive work done.
 

Coincidentally Bellingham is 6th in Bundesliga distance covered, has won the most duels in the Bundesliga yet still scored 3 and set up 2
 

Adams, NDidi, Kante are screens/defensive midfielders. Adams does not have an attacking output - the fact you’ve mentioned N’Didi in the same breath says it all. 
 

Weston McKennie is a box to box midfielder. Steven Gerrard probably the greatest example in a generation 

 

Also I don’t know where you’ve got Adams as high as that for distance covered - https://www.premierleague.com/news/2910633

 

Notably Aaronson is in there and I’d describe him as a box to box mid

Edited 26 November 2022 by CosbehFox

[tom27111]

2 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

That was absolute shite. The tactics were don’t lose. One of the best generations of players England has ever had and he plays handbrake on, safety first football. Maybe he goes onto win the trophy outright (I highly doubt it), but Southgate won’t be fondly remembered. 
 

This isn’t a case of years gone by where we’ve had a poor crop of players. We have players who are fully fit and who play high press, high intensity football 3 times a week. We just sat off USA the entire game! Pathetic. 

Bloody hell mate, I was hoping for some tactical analysis.

 

But you've just confirmed exactly what I think, so I'll take it.

 

Are you Southgate lovers listening? 

[tom27111]

2 minutes ago, JimJams said:

So that's Maddison starting in place of Mount for the Wales game then yeah?

Even on one leg.

 

Couldn't be worse.

[filbertway]

Nothing more frustrating than a manager being allowed to waste the talent available. 

 

Makes me sick that this knob still has the gig. Tragic

[Deeg67]

 

23 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Nothing more frustrating than a manager being allowed to waste the talent available. 

 

Makes me sick that this knob still has the gig. Tragic

Well, you had two of them in this match.  Southgate has more talent but Berhalter has plenty, and left most of his attacking firepower on the bench in a game where only a win really helped their chances.

[StriderHiryu]

41 minutes ago, tom27111 said:

Bloody hell mate, I was hoping for some tactical analysis.

 

But you've just confirmed exactly what I think, so I'll take it.

 

Are you Southgate lovers listening? 

@Col city fan’s post sums it all up. Southgate plays pragmatic football.
 

So did Claude Puel. 
 

Some people will be ok with that, but most won’t. We know how good these players are. In my lifetime I think I’ve only seen only one genuinely good England team and that under Venables in 96. We started that tournament slowly but attacked Holland, Scotland and went for it in extra time against Germany. We only got to the semi finals that year but that was a team you could feel proud of. Southgate got 4th and 2nd and yet fans won’t remember him fondly. 
 

Italy didn’t even qualify under Mancini, but they were electric in the Euros. His team will be fondly remembered in years to come. 
 

 

 

Edited 26 November 2022 by StriderHiryu

[HybridFox]

The most painful thing is this game was crying out for Maddison

[Deeg67]

44 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

A box to box midfielder affects the game in an attacking process alongside the defensive work Hence the name because they go in both penalty areas. They score goals, set up goals but they are capable of getting the defensive work done.
 

Coincidentally Bellingham is 6th in Bundesliga distance covered, has won the most duels in the Bundesliga yet still scored 3 and set up 2
 

Adams, NDidi, Kante are screens/defensive midfielders. Adams does not have an attacking output - the fact you’ve mentioned N’Didi in the same breath says it all. 
 

Weston McKennie is a box to box midfielder. Steven Gerrard probably the greatest example in a generation 

 

Also I don’t know where you’ve got Adams as high as that for distance covered - https://www.premierleague.com/news/2910633

 

Notably Aaronson is in there and I’d describe him as a box to box mid

Aaronson is a basically either a mislabeled winger who runs a lot or a #10.

 

Part of this comes down to Marsch liking “positionless football”, where guys interchange constantly during the match. I certainly don’t disagree that McKennie is a box to box (and a good one, with the talent to be more).

Edited 26 November 2022 by Deeg67

[tom27111]

3 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

@Col city fan’s post sums it all up. Southgate plays pragmatic football.
 

So did Claude Puel. 
 

Some people will be ok with that, but most won’t. We know how good these players are. In my lifetime I think I’ve only seen only one genuinely good England team and that under Venables in 96. We started that tournament slowly but attacked Holland, Scotland and went for it in extra time against Germany. We only got to the semi finals that year but that was a team you could feel proud of. Southgate got 4th and 2nd and yet fans won’t remember him fondly. 
 

Italy didn’t even qualify under Mancini, but they were electric in the Euros. His team will be fondly remembered in years to come. 
 

 

 

I don't think an England team has played good football since Venables and Hoddle.

 

Hoddle was a strange one, I think had he kept his mouth shut, we could have gone on to something very good, he could have got that generation playing exciting, progressive football.

 

I actually think fondly of that 98 team.

[filbertway]

14 minutes ago, Deeg67 said:

 

Well, you had two of them in this match.  Southgate has more talent but Berhalter has plenty, and left most of his attacking firepower on the bench in a game where only a win really helped their chances.

Reyna and Foden starting on the bench. Football is slowly dying due to an obsession with defending and preventing other teams from doing stuff. I hope it goes full cycle and we start seeing managers and players encouraged to try and score goals again.

[Aus Fox]

We were shite, they were shite, both teams played not to lose, rather than to try and win the game.

The draw suits us better in the overall scheme of the group. 
I can’t see Wales beating us in the final game, they look devoid of any quality. Based on the last two games, I’d say Iran go into the final game as slight favourites, I just don’t see USA scoring and Iran look to have more quality going forwards.

[tom27111]

1 minute ago, filbertway said:

Reyna and Foden starting on the bench. Football is slowly dying due to an obsession with defending and preventing other teams from doing stuff. I hope it goes full cycle and we start seeing managers and players encouraged to try and score goals again.

 

Clean sheets are great, but unless you can score, they don't win you games.

 

I'd rather win 4-3 than keep a clean sheet!

 

On the other hand, Italy perfected the smash and grab 1-0 wins with 'catenaccio', which literally means bolt the door.

 

Get a goal, then don't concede.

 

We don't seem capable of grabbing the goal and I wouldn't trust the defence to bolt the door.

 

Just go out and fvcking play.

[leicsmac]

26 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

@Col city fan’s post sums it all up. Southgate plays pragmatic football.
 

So did Claude Puel. 
 

Some people will be ok with that, but most won’t. We know how good these players are. In my lifetime I think I’ve only seen only one genuinely good England team and that under Venables in 96. We started that tournament slowly but attacked Holland, Scotland and went for it in extra time against Germany. We only got to the semi finals that year but that was a team you could feel proud of. Southgate got 4th and 2nd and yet fans won’t remember him fondly. 
 

Italy didn’t even qualify under Mancini, but they were electric in the Euros. His team will be fondly remembered in years to come. 
 

 

 

 

21 minutes ago, tom27111 said:

I don't think an England team has played good football since Venables and Hoddle.

 

Hoddle was a strange one, I think had he kept his mouth shut, we could have gone on to something very good, he could have got that generation playing exciting, progressive football.

 

I actually think fondly of that 98 team.

Interesting thoughts these and I've been doing some thinking myself.

 

I wonder how much of the appreciation of the Euro 96 side is representative of their actual skill and how much of it is just rose tinted admiration of a time when England football was "simpler" among folks of a certain age?

 

As good as that team was (and I'm of the age where I saw them and reflect on them fondly too), the semi final was Venables furthest reach, whereas Southgate has taken the England team to a final and a semi final. And for me personally, it is where you finish that (mostly) matters, not how you get there (because the sides playing truly gifted football often also tend to pick up a big tournament more often than not).

 

Of course, I know for others football is more about the entertainment rather than the result, and that's totally valid too. Perhaps I look at it too "nuts and bolts".

[filbertway]

11 minutes ago, tom27111 said:

 

Clean sheets are great, but unless you can score, they don't win you games.

 

I'd rather win 4-3 than keep a clean sheet!

 

On the other hand, Italy perfected the smash and grab 1-0 wins with 'catenaccio', which literally means bolt the door.

 

Get a goal, then don't concede.

 

We don't seem capable of grabbing the goal and I wouldn't trust the defence to bolt the door.

 

Just go out and fvcking play.

I hate it. Id genuinely rather lose 4 3 in an entertaining game than win 1 0 in an absolute dire waste of time.

 

Football is entertainment for me overall, I want my team to entertain and try and score. 

 

Ill never respect defensive football, especially when the manager has an array of top quality creative talent at their disposal.

[yorkie1999]

Kinda ironic that the English players took the knee but the yanks didn’t 

[StriderHiryu]

44 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

 

Interesting thoughts these and I've been doing some thinking myself.

 

I wonder how much of the appreciation of the Euro 96 side is representative of their actual skill and how much of it is just rose tinted admiration of a time when England football was "simpler" among folks of a certain age?

 

As good as that team was (and I'm of the age where I saw them and reflect on them fondly too), the semi final was Venables furthest reach, whereas Southgate has taken the England team to a final and a semi final. And for me personally, it is where you finish that (mostly) matters, not how you get there (because the sides playing truly gifted football often also tend to pick up a big tournament more often than not).

 

Of course, I know for others football is more about the entertainment rather than the result, and that's totally valid too. Perhaps I look at it too "nuts and bolts".

The Dutch team in 96 had the cream of the crop from the Champions League winning Ajax team. They had Kluivert, Seedorf, Bergkamp, the de Boer twins, etc, etc. England totally dismantled them with electrifying football. They played well against eventual Champions Germany and decently enough against Spain too. Compare extra time in 96 against Germany to extra time against Italy last year. One England team went for it, the other one played it safe.

 

Notice I didn't say the 96 team were world beaters, or even better pound for pound than our current team. But I did say they would be remembered fondly because of the way they played, which is true. Even Hoddle can claim fond memories with winning Le Tournoi where England looked great despite missing key players and then despite having an indifferent 98 went out with a blood and guts performance against Argentina. 

 

Southgate is like a worse version of Eriksson, he plays not to lose rather than to win. Even if he goes on to win the World Cup, if he does it in this way he'll be considered overrated. England fans aren't so disillusioned to think the team should play like vintage 1970's Brazil, but the way Italy played in the recent Euros, or Germany in 2014 is not so ridiculous to want to see.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

The Dutch team in 96 had the cream of the crop from the Champions League winning Ajax team. They had Kluivert, Seedorf, Bergkamp, the de Boer twins, etc, etc. England totally dismantled them with electrifying football. They played well against eventual Champions Germany and decently enough against Spain too. Compare extra time in 96 against Germany to extra time against Italy last year. One England team went for it, the other one played it safe.

 

Notice I didn't say the 96 team were world beaters, or even better pound for pound than our current team. But I did say they would be remembered fondly because of the way they played, which is true. Even Hoddle can claim fond memories with winning Le Tournoi where England looked great despite missing key players and then despite having an indifferent 98 went out with a blood and guts performance against Argentina. 

 

Southgate is like a worse version of Eriksson, he plays not to lose rather than to win. Even if he goes on to win the World Cup, if he does it in this way he'll be considered overrated. England fans aren't so disillusioned to think the team should play like vintage 1970's Brazil, but the way Italy played in the recent Euros, or Germany in 2014 is not so ridiculous to want to see.

I would agree with all of this apart from the bolded which I must disagree with - as per above, for me, the winning is the most important thing and the thing that the history books (mostly) remember.

 

Of course, the viewpoint here is equally valid and this is all subjective anyway.

[The_77]

2 hours ago, tom27111 said:

 

Everyone gets offended by everything nowadays, so you can't slate an England manager incase some precious soul takes it the wrong way.

 

Yeah, man. That’s definitely it. 
 

I think I’ve had enough internet for the night.  

[Detroit Blues]

The England game really suits the US. We are kind of set up to play our best pressing an opponent that wants to have the ball. Where we struggle is beating a discipline low block team that does not want any part in the ball.

 

I'm worried our deficiencies will be on full display against Iran, but I am glad that we have the opportunity to control our own destiny. No matter what goes on in the Wales-England game, the US has only Iran in it's path to get to the knockout states. If we don't win, we don't deserve to advance and we will have nobody to blame but ourselves (and the refs )