What is normally meant it that strikers told to play that role are told not go looking for the ball all over the pitch and just make sure they're ready when needed. He had a quiet game, though was unlucky not to have scored with his big chance being turned onto the bar.
It really is remarkable how generation after generation of fantastically talented England footballers manage to be so uninspiring. For me it feels like a game I have seen many, many times before.
"It's all the same, only the names will change."
Turns out Jon Bon Jovi was an England fan this whole time!
Yes it was a tough watch, and if we replicate the bulk of the second half fare vs a quality team we could be in serious trouble, but we did the job.
Just.
Hopefully this group grows together more in the coming games, but some of the passing in the first half was great, and I liked a lot of the play from Bellingham and (in the first half) Saka.
Nice positional rotation in the first 25 mins. Foden and Bellingham were picking up spaces all over the pitch and Trent and Tripper we're getting high up the pitch.
After that it wasn't great. Can't understand why Pickford kicked every ball long. We made very little of those balls up to Kane.
Worry a bit about Bellingham trying to do too much. He was incredible tonight but can't do it all on his own for the whole tournament.
Not at all sure about Trent in midfield. Gave the ball away a lot. We struggled for a pivot in midfield at times and ended up kicking it long rather than pop it into feet in a midfield to a player with their back to goal.
Anyway, not a disaster. Serbia were half decent and the first game of any tournament isn't always a good guide to which teams will go far. Plenty of teams have won tournaments playing pretty cautious football and it's no surprise to see us play in a relatively cagey style.
I thought Tripper had an awful game and he did in the warm up against Iceland. I know he's a right-back playing at left-back but he is so useless / scared to use his left foot that when he gets the ball, the attack stops straight away because he has to turn back to go onto his right foot!
I thought all professional players should have the ability to use both feet but having him at left back is NOT the answer
Remember when I said the group stages are always shit? At least we won the first game but that does set things up for two more games where we just do enough but everyone is bored and write us off again.
first 30 mins and the rotation over the pitch look very good. Then we stopped/were stopped.
True! These tournaments do follow a formula, generally:
Everyone begins to convince themselves before the tournament England are genuine contenders, all history to the contrary.
When anyone disputes the notion that England are contenders given the underachieving history and massive mental block on the national sporting psyche in this regard, they are given many reasons why England should be taken seriously.
A poor friendly or two before the tournament allows a measure of doubt to creep in.
England generally have a forgiving group, but make turgid work of it (the odd bright spot aside), including a soul-destroying draw in one of the games where England fans question their life choices and wish they had followed curling from an early age instead.
England still win the group and make the knockouts, and are drawn against a secondary nation, who England dispatch fairly comfortably. If it is a longer tournament this step may be repeated once or twice.
England lose against the first real contender they play, often in heartbreaking circumstances as the more open game means England's attack can finally breath, and they tend to make a very close game of it. This valiant effort makes it seem as though England were everything the initial hype said they were.
Those who said England will never win anything say "I told you so" while those who claimed England were true contenders go on about how England fans are arrogant to think they have a right to contend for trophies, even though they were the ones who claimed England were contenders.
Rinse. Repeat.
I feel like this basic script has been followed a lot, though with the odd wrinkle thrown in to keep us guessing (were Germany contenders at the last Euros?).
I would love to be wrong, and to calmly eat my hat joyfully as Harry Kane hoists his first ever career trophy despite being unlucky enough to jinx Bayern into losing their first Bundesliga in over a decade to first time winners who go unbeaten.
Is this mere coincidence or could it be that the English coaching courses/ St George's Park HQ way of playing that is filtered down is at such a high intensity from the start that players are knackered in the 2nd half? I don't know, just pondering.
At club level Southgate had a win rate of 29% and the one team he managed got relegated. Perhaps it's in his managerial DNA to try to defend a lead at all costs.
It's well known that crap footballers can be great managers and maybe in a few weeks time we'll have the first crap league manager becoming a great national manager.
(Unless someone on here can give examples that have already happened)
Bellingham is probably England's best player at the moment.
Foden is an outstanding player in that same position and would play there if Bellingham was not available.
All of which ignores Cole Palmer -
Question is are England better
1) with Bellingham in middle and Foden on left
2) with Bellingham deeper and Foden central
3) with Bellingham in middle and either Gordon or Eze on left.
Given we have probably already qualified, I would like to see either Gordon or Eze start next game with Wharton in midfield to see how that looks. If a couple of goals up I would try Palmer as a false no 9 second half as an option if Kane got injured /doesnt deliver.
It's very unfortunate for Foden that Luke Shaw is injured and there is no other attacking left back to provide the width on that side. Whilst that is the case I think I'd pick Anthony Gordon.
I've a feeling that if we can get Luke Shaw back then that might be the key to unlock Foden
The Foden question should be the Lampard/Gerrard question all over again, but somehow Southgate has managed to turn it into the Paul Scholes question instead. The big difference though is that Sven had Carlton Palmer as his option on the left whereas Southgate is opting to not play Grealish, Eze and Gordon.
He’s already proven himself as a great national manager. In three years and 37 games he had a win percentage of 73% with England U21's and only lost 13% of those games. No other U21 England manager has such a low loss rate.
Foden appears to be getting a lot of negative comments on the Gasroom today. Maybe if Southgate actually played him in his club position he may show what he can do.
Comments
There's a debate about Rice being a defensive midfielder? My word, people will argue anything won't they!
Kane is so slow and has anybody told him that he is allowed to jump for the ball.
Painful second half but a win I suppose.
Reminds me of the time that someone made up that Hayes for us was told not to jump for aerial balls due to his injury concerns.
Obviously made up, but some genuinely believed it.
Watching Antiques Roadshow now, much more interesting.
I was wondering if England could pull a Greece 2004 and bore their way to the trophy but they’d need to be a lot better in defence.
What is normally meant it that strikers told to play that role are told not go looking for the ball all over the pitch and just make sure they're ready when needed. He had a quiet game, though was unlucky not to have scored with his big chance being turned onto the bar.
It really is remarkable how generation after generation of fantastically talented England footballers manage to be so uninspiring. For me it feels like a game I have seen many, many times before.
"It's all the same, only the names will change."
Turns out Jon Bon Jovi was an England fan this whole time!
Wasn't he plagued by achilles problems, which would affect his ability to jump considerably.
Yes it was a tough watch, and if we replicate the bulk of the second half fare vs a quality team we could be in serious trouble, but we did the job.
Just.
Hopefully this group grows together more in the coming games, but some of the passing in the first half was great, and I liked a lot of the play from Bellingham and (in the first half) Saka.
Bon Jovi would have been a real asset in a downpour though, nightmare for defenders to pin down in such circumstances
Sorry, meant Semi Final
Nice positional rotation in the first 25 mins. Foden and Bellingham were picking up spaces all over the pitch and Trent and Tripper we're getting high up the pitch.
After that it wasn't great. Can't understand why Pickford kicked every ball long. We made very little of those balls up to Kane.
Worry a bit about Bellingham trying to do too much. He was incredible tonight but can't do it all on his own for the whole tournament.
Not at all sure about Trent in midfield. Gave the ball away a lot. We struggled for a pivot in midfield at times and ended up kicking it long rather than pop it into feet in a midfield to a player with their back to goal.
Anyway, not a disaster. Serbia were half decent and the first game of any tournament isn't always a good guide to which teams will go far. Plenty of teams have won tournaments playing pretty cautious football and it's no surprise to see us play in a relatively cagey style.
As much validation as I could have wished for
I thought Tripper had an awful game and he did in the warm up against Iceland. I know he's a right-back playing at left-back but he is so useless / scared to use his left foot that when he gets the ball, the attack stops straight away because he has to turn back to go onto his right foot!
I thought all professional players should have the ability to use both feet but having him at left back is NOT the answer
Remember when I said the group stages are always shit? At least we won the first game but that does set things up for two more games where we just do enough but everyone is bored and write us off again.
first 30 mins and the rotation over the pitch look very good. Then we stopped/were stopped.
True! These tournaments do follow a formula, generally:
I feel like this basic script has been followed a lot, though with the odd wrinkle thrown in to keep us guessing (were Germany contenders at the last Euros?).
I would love to be wrong, and to calmly eat my hat joyfully as Harry Kane hoists his first ever career trophy despite being unlucky enough to jinx Bayern into losing their first Bundesliga in over a decade to first time winners who go unbeaten.
So ... we dominate the first half hour, playing high up the pitch, and take a 1-0 lead.
Then we sit back for the rest of the half, and everyone is relieved when we get to half time with the lead intact.
Second half is spent mainly defending, and our keeper makes a couple of crucial saves to keep a clean sheet.
Does any of this remind us of games we have watched at AP recently?
Is this mere coincidence or could it be that the English coaching courses/ St George's Park HQ way of playing that is filtered down is at such a high intensity from the start that players are knackered in the 2nd half? I don't know, just pondering.
At club level Southgate had a win rate of 29% and the one team he managed got relegated. Perhaps it's in his managerial DNA to try to defend a lead at all costs.
It's well known that crap footballers can be great managers and maybe in a few weeks time we'll have the first crap league manager becoming a great national manager.
(Unless someone on here can give examples that have already happened)
Anyone else thinking that Foden's Man City form isn't going to translate into England form?
Southgate has managed in three major tournaments with England
2018 WC - reached SF
2020 Euros - lost final on penalties
2022 WC - lost (narrowly) to arguably best team in tournament
All the other previous England managers have a record of 1 Final (won) and three losing semi finals
He's done pretty well.
Strikes me that the Foden question is Lampard/Gerrard all over again, except at least Southgate has got the best out of Bellingham.
I think you might be right, Floyd
Bellingham is probably England's best player at the moment.
Foden is an outstanding player in that same position and would play there if Bellingham was not available.
All of which ignores Cole Palmer -
Question is are England better
1) with Bellingham in middle and Foden on left
2) with Bellingham deeper and Foden central
3) with Bellingham in middle and either Gordon or Eze on left.
Given we have probably already qualified, I would like to see either Gordon or Eze start next game with Wharton in midfield to see how that looks. If a couple of goals up I would try Palmer as a false no 9 second half as an option if Kane got injured /doesnt deliver.
It's very unfortunate for Foden that Luke Shaw is injured and there is no other attacking left back to provide the width on that side. Whilst that is the case I think I'd pick Anthony Gordon.
I've a feeling that if we can get Luke Shaw back then that might be the key to unlock Foden
The Foden question should be the Lampard/Gerrard question all over again, but somehow Southgate has managed to turn it into the Paul Scholes question instead. The big difference though is that Sven had Carlton Palmer as his option on the left whereas Southgate is opting to not play Grealish, Eze and Gordon.
Carlton Palmer?
He hasn’t opted yet not to play Eze or Gordon.
Foden was largely anonymous wide left. Trent Alexander Arnold looked uncomfortable as an inside midfielder. Could Foden replace him?
He’s already proven himself as a great national manager. In three years and 37 games he had a win percentage of 73% with England U21's and only lost 13% of those games. No other U21 England manager has such a low loss rate.
Foden has learned from watching De Bruyne how to go missing in the big games.
Foden appears to be getting a lot of negative comments on the Gasroom today. Maybe if Southgate actually played him in his club position he may show what he can do.