Engerland v The Sweaties

001 Taxis - 10% discount for forum members
Like Oxford on a bad day! That overcomplicated passing style must be hard to get right when you only get together every few months . Do we have anyone fast on the bench?
 
bazzer9461 said:
Grealish didn’t look that great a couple of paces and that was that and people keep saying he is always being fouled if he’s that good enough he should be able to ride some of those fouls
Click to expand...
I thought Grealish looked ok, he danced his way past a few challenges, no-one was amazing but he was better than most. And free kicks are very valuable at international level where you don’t always get a lot of chances
 
Happy with that result. Fingers crossed we can get a bore draw out of the Czechs on Tuesday for a favourable draw in the next round, and then we can get the best players doing what they doing. Kane lulling everyone into a false sense of security perfectly.
 
HampshireYellow said:
Sterling was playing poorly, Foden was looking dangerous and attacking, and Southgate brings Foden off. Now there’s sticking by a player, being loyal, and then just stubborn silliness. Foden should have stayed on.

And then, the game ends with England having THREE subs still able to come on… why not give Sancho the last ten-fifteen minutes?

Southgate needs to get Grealish in the team and work out a way of England playing more attacking football and getting more players forward. The 4-3-3 is looking like it does at times for Oxford when things aren’t clicking and the centre forward looks terribly isolated and alone.
Click to expand...
You’ve absolutely nailed it with those comments. I also saw those shades of us when playing poorly and Taylor isolated, all backwards/sideways.
 
ZeroTheHero said:
That was hard to watch.

I can forgive lack of skill, but where was the fire in their bellies? Lethargic, feeble with the ball, unaggressive without it. There are some serious gaps in that team.
Click to expand...
Answer: Gareth Southgate. Nice guy but just too damn ‘safe’.
 
QR said:
Steve Clarke deserves praise. You don't take Kilmarnock to a third place finish by being an average manager. What are Southgate's notable achievements as a manager?
Click to expand...
Waistcoat sales?
 
All criticism of England on here. No praise for Scotland?

They played so much better than the game against the Czechs. Che Adams was a nuisance, Robertson’s crossing was miles better than anything England offered and they pressed, chased and stifled England first minute until last.

They played well above their level at Wembley. Moan all you like about Southgate (and England fans will in the weird belief that sacking him and starting again will bring untold riches - Southgate is the first manager in a long time who manages the whole process rather than throwing England’s best 11 players on the pitch and crossing his fingers) but give the opposition due credit. That was not a Sweden-style holding on for dear life effort. They have England a damn good game. Better than Croatia did for certain.
 
Last edited:
If England truly have a world class team, it would be really nice if they turned up once in a while.
We just proved that we do not possess that extra 1% that separates the okay from greatness.
 
I do think Southgate got drawn into more of a thought process that it would be a disaster to lose to Scotland rather than being more positive in thought around how we could best beat them. The end result was a manager, and subsequently his tactics and team, lacking in confidence and giving Scotland too much respect. You could see the negativity in the team manifest itself with them looking to pass backwards rather than forwards most of the game.
 
When you analyse the actual performance of each England game in tournaments over the last few years, it hasn’t been great.

World Cup 2018:

Tunisia - injury time winner, two goals from set pieces that were each about two yards out, huffed and puffed all game long without cutting open a pretty poor team

Panama - worst team to qualify in decades, two penalties, two set pieces, a 25-yarder and a goal that deflected off Kane’s heel made it look more rampant than it was, didn’t even keep a clean sheet

Belgium - was for the best that England lost but were slapped around without the Belgians even getting out of second gear regardless

Colombia - scored a penalty and then ended up holding on for dear life all the way through extra time to finally win a knockout game via a shoot-out

Sweden - probably the most convincing performance, unspectacular but fairly solid, couple of headers to win it

Croatia - fluffed it against a team who played 120 minutes previously, while England played a fairly comfortable 90 and had an extra day’s recovery

Belgium - dismantled with ease in the third place play-off, child’s play for the second time that tournament


Nations League 2019:

Holland - turned over by a distinctly average Dutch side in the opening game despite taking the lead, couldn’t even get to a final when the first game was a semi and therefore only required winning a single match

Switzerland - had to go to penalties just to beat them to third, really dire match


Euro 2020/21:

Croatia - did a job but Croatia weren’t anywhere near as good as they were in 2018, was the definition of getting the job done by a single goal but in no way looking like real contenders

Scotland - poor, the Scots probably had the more meaningful chances second half, never looked like beating one of the worst sides in the competition

Something I said to my brother after the game tonight: nearly every country knows they’re unlikely to win a tournament, but at least they get to enjoy the wins along the way. You might think you’ve got a chance and can get to a semi, or a final if you’re really lucky, but almost everyone expects to not win the trophy unless you’re one of the two best teams competing. Watching England in tournaments just isn’t enjoyable. Even when you see a win, it’s usually tight and professional at best. You won’t walk away going, “I really enjoyed that, the team played really well and it was good to see a few goals against a fairly decent side / it was good to see them really put a weaker team to the sword.”

You look at Italy hitting three goals past both Turkey and Switzerland, or Holland scoring three and then two in their opening games while attacking - both decent teams who a lot of people would say they think England are comparable to bracket wise - and it’s night and day. They’re enjoying their wins even if they don’t win the whole thing (although I nearly stuck £20 on Italy before the tournament started). You don’t get that with England. You do a job once or twice, it’s all very tight and unadventurous, and then you go home.

Ultimately it’s about results, so let’s see what happens come the eventual end of the road, but I do feel like unless you’re going to win something you have to at least give people something to enjoy, even once. Fingers crossed that’s the name of the game against the Czechs. I’m not convinced by Southgate’s approach at all, but the end result will prove him right or wrong. See what happens and have a couple of pints along the way. It’s not as important as Oxford anyway.
 
If getting a nil nil is a great result that leaves you bottom of a group is a great result then you are Scottish, skirt wearing jokes.
 
So I am unapologetically an absolute tournament nerd, and I love thinking through all the permutations and possibilities.

Right now this leads to two thoughts:

1) England are probably through already.
Firstly, there's only one way we can even finish third in the group, and that's if we lost to the Czechs and Scotland beat Croatia and there's at least a three goal swing in goal difference (the first tie-breaker is head-to-head results, so if we lose and Croatia win, then we're 2nd).
But even if that happens, last time 3 points was enough to qualify for two of the third place teams (including Portugal, of course, who went on to win it). There is a combination of results that could see us go out if we lost to the Czechs (especially if we lost heavily) but it is extremely unlikely.

2) I think it's absolutely wrong to think that it's better for England to finish 2nd in the group.
Yes, it may well mean an easier second round game than winning the group (most likely winning the group means Germany or Portugal next, whereas coming second means most likely Sweden......although it could still be Spain if they only get their act partially together). But it will put us in the top half of the draw, which (barring France messing things up against Portugal) is where Italy, Belgium and France are probably going to be - in my mind, the best three teams in the tournament.

Win the group, and if you can get past Germany/Portugal, then most likely it's Spain or Sweden in the Quarters and maybe the Dutch in the semis. Much more manageable.

Weirdly, finishing 3rd (as long as we qualify) could be the easiest route through the tournament - although there's lots of permutations then, we probably end up in the bottom half of the draw and don't play anyone from Group F. But as I said in point one.....that's pretty unlikely.
 
RyanioBirdio said:
When you analyse the actual performance of each England game in tournaments over the last few years, it hasn’t been great.

World Cup 2018:

Tunisia - injury time winner, two goals from set pieces that were each about two yards out, huffed and puffed all game long without cutting open a pretty poor team

Panama - worst team to qualify in decades, two penalties, two set pieces, a 25-yarder and a goal that deflected off Kane’s heel made it look more rampant than it was, didn’t even keep a clean sheet

Belgium - was for the best that England lost but were slapped around without the Belgians even getting out of second gear regardless

Colombia - scored a penalty and then ended up holding on for dear life all the way through extra time to finally win a knockout game via a shoot-out

Sweden - probably the most convincing performance, unspectacular but fairly solid, couple of headers to win it

Croatia - fluffed it against a team who played 120 minutes previously, while England played a fairly comfortable 90 and had an extra day’s recovery

Belgium - dismantled with ease in the third place play-off, child’s play for the second time that tournament


Nations League 2019:

Holland - turned over by a distinctly average Dutch side in the opening game despite taking the lead, couldn’t even get to a final when the first game was a semi and therefore only required winning a single match

Switzerland - had to go to penalties just to beat them to third, really dire match


Euro 2020/21:

Croatia - did a job but Croatia weren’t anywhere near as good as they were in 2018, was the definition of getting the job done by a single goal but in no way looking like real contenders

Scotland - poor, the Scots probably had the more meaningful chances second half, never looked like beating one of the worst sides in the competition

Something I said to my brother after the game tonight: nearly every country knows they’re unlikely to win a tournament, but at least they get to enjoy the wins along the way. You might think you’ve got a chance and can get to a semi, or a final if you’re really lucky, but almost everyone expects to not win the trophy unless you’re one of the two best teams competing. Watching England in tournaments just isn’t enjoyable. Even when you see a win, it’s usually tight and professional at best. You won’t walk away going, “I really enjoyed that, the team played really well and it was good to see a few goals against a fairly decent side / it was good to see them really put a weaker team to the sword.”

You look at Italy hitting three goals past both Turkey and Switzerland, or Holland scoring three and then two in their opening games while attacking - both decent teams who a lot of people would say they think England are comparable to bracket wise - and it’s night and day. They’re enjoying their wins even if they don’t win the whole thing (although I nearly stuck £20 on Italy before the tournament started). You don’t get that with England. You do a job once or twice, it’s all very tight and unadventurous, and then you go home.

Ultimately it’s about results, so let’s see what happens come the eventual end of the road, but I do feel like unless you’re going to win something you have to at least give people something to enjoy, even once. Fingers crossed that’s the name of the game against the Czechs. I’m not convinced by Southgate’s approach at all, but the end result will prove him right or wrong. See what happens and have a couple of pints along the way. It’s not as important as Oxford anyway.
Click to expand...

Portugal and Greece won the thing by boring everyone to death of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom