Fed up from watching another insipid England performance, I felt I needed to vent my splein.
Agree or disagree? http://bit.ly/HodgsonGO" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
OPINION: Roy Hodgson
Moderators: Admin, Ralph, asl, Robin
Should have gone after the last game in Brazil. The debate we should be having is about who we will be employing as his replacement, not whether or not he should be going. It's obvious after last night that, despite having a better squad, our tournament results have barely improved. If ot for a 92nd Sturridge goal against Wales we would be out now, most likely.
Oooh.
First half we were good, couldn't find the back of the net thanks to Slovaks throwing themselves in front of shots. Second half, the same for about 15 minutes and then we started to look short of ideas and desperate. As usual, the Premier League player on the oppo side had the game of his life and Skrtel seemed to be on the end of everything. If he played like that for Liverpool every week they'd have won a few more trophies in the last 7 or 8 years.
Unfortunately, the impact players that we would have wanted to come off the bench had started the game, and the players we had on the bench, like Kane and Rooney, are not suited to coming on and making a difference.
Basically, it was a poor decision to make as many as 6 changes, it was a bad decision to play the likes of Wilshere and Henderson over Barkley, who still hasn't got on the pitch, and it was a worse decision to play those same God damned system's, with Sturridge playing wherever he wants, most of the time in midfield, leaving Vardy marked out of the game as he has 3 players constantly around him. Clyne had a good first half and maybe should have had a penalty, but the last 20 minutes he showed why Walker is a better choice at the moment by constantly receiving the ball stationary and then passing backwards, whereas walking was constantly making runs, getting the ball to the line and pulling it back, making the Welsh defence work extra hard. Flat 4-4-2 seems to be a swearword, but Iceland, with their not-so-talented group, have managed results as good as ours with it and the players would actually know where the hell they should be. As Nesty says, why Lallana was taken off for Alli instead of Henderson I'll never know. I'll also never forget Henderson dicking around with the ball, passing it backwards, in the 95th minute when the ref is about to blow the whistle, instead of hoofing it into the box for one last go. I'm sure I wasn't the only one stood up with my arms out to my sides shouting at the TV "get it into the f#!$ box you dickhead!!!!"
Having said all of that, I'm looking forward to playing a team that isn't looking to park the bus in the hope of a point against us, not that I blame other teams for doing that - it's their right.
First half we were good, couldn't find the back of the net thanks to Slovaks throwing themselves in front of shots. Second half, the same for about 15 minutes and then we started to look short of ideas and desperate. As usual, the Premier League player on the oppo side had the game of his life and Skrtel seemed to be on the end of everything. If he played like that for Liverpool every week they'd have won a few more trophies in the last 7 or 8 years.
Unfortunately, the impact players that we would have wanted to come off the bench had started the game, and the players we had on the bench, like Kane and Rooney, are not suited to coming on and making a difference.
Basically, it was a poor decision to make as many as 6 changes, it was a bad decision to play the likes of Wilshere and Henderson over Barkley, who still hasn't got on the pitch, and it was a worse decision to play those same God damned system's, with Sturridge playing wherever he wants, most of the time in midfield, leaving Vardy marked out of the game as he has 3 players constantly around him. Clyne had a good first half and maybe should have had a penalty, but the last 20 minutes he showed why Walker is a better choice at the moment by constantly receiving the ball stationary and then passing backwards, whereas walking was constantly making runs, getting the ball to the line and pulling it back, making the Welsh defence work extra hard. Flat 4-4-2 seems to be a swearword, but Iceland, with their not-so-talented group, have managed results as good as ours with it and the players would actually know where the hell they should be. As Nesty says, why Lallana was taken off for Alli instead of Henderson I'll never know. I'll also never forget Henderson dicking around with the ball, passing it backwards, in the 95th minute when the ref is about to blow the whistle, instead of hoofing it into the box for one last go. I'm sure I wasn't the only one stood up with my arms out to my sides shouting at the TV "get it into the f#!$ box you dickhead!!!!"
Having said all of that, I'm looking forward to playing a team that isn't looking to park the bus in the hope of a point against us, not that I blame other teams for doing that - it's their right.
If England had defended like Slovakia against a team that 70% possession and basically hammered us for the full 96 minutes, we'd be heralding one of the great defensive displays of all time. Not once did you see the Slovakian defenders shirk a challenge or turn their back in case the attacker kicked it very hard. The discipline they showed to avoid given away a free kick for the entire match anywhere near the front of their penalty area was quite remarkable given Skrtel's record (who I think should have been retrospectively banned for what he got away with in the Wales game.)
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29817
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Agree.
I actually think Slovakia were as good as England were poor.
They wanted a draw to qualify and that's what they got. You could see from their celebrations it was job done.
Thus I don't think either side 'dominated'.
Yes, England had a lot of possession, though in the modern game possession means nothing. Slovakia were desperate for England to have possession and encouraged England to do so so we could say their tactics dominated. Slovakia's best moments came from when England had the ball. More often than not, giving the ball to the opposition is the best way to get into offensive positions with their defence out of shape.
If it wasn't England I would have been cheering on Slovakia. I hate possession fetishists and love seeing a team with only 25-30% possession win games.
I actually think Slovakia were as good as England were poor.
They wanted a draw to qualify and that's what they got. You could see from their celebrations it was job done.
Thus I don't think either side 'dominated'.
Yes, England had a lot of possession, though in the modern game possession means nothing. Slovakia were desperate for England to have possession and encouraged England to do so so we could say their tactics dominated. Slovakia's best moments came from when England had the ball. More often than not, giving the ball to the opposition is the best way to get into offensive positions with their defence out of shape.
If it wasn't England I would have been cheering on Slovakia. I hate possession fetishists and love seeing a team with only 25-30% possession win games.
-
philster11
- Posts: 6
- Joined: 21 Nov 2015, 15:46
- Contact:
I haven't really seen anyone play that well yet, there has been a few individual performances but nothing major to talk about. In long tournaments like this you don't really want to start on fire just finish that way.
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29817
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Croatia did a good job on Spain yesterday. One of the best performances so far.philster11 wrote:I haven't really seen anyone play that well yet, there has been a few individual performances but nothing major to talk about. In long tournaments like this you don't really want to start on fire just finish that way.
Hopefully the Italians will do a classic 1-0 job on Spain in the next round we can officially announce the end of tiki-taka and the possession obsession.
We're not exactly possession fetishists - we need the opposition to have the ball more. As you yourself said, we only had the ball that much because Slovakia didn't want it. Personally, I think it's more that they were awful everywhere except in defence than they didn't want the ball.
What a difference between the passion shown by Wales and NI and our bunch of pampered prats - as I have said it comes back to our National Anthem - leave God Save the Queen as the British Empire Anthem, but can ENGLAND please have its own, and be a song about the COUNTRY and not one person!!
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29817
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
You do know what anthem NI use right?Nesty wrote:What a difference between the passion shown by Wales and NI and our bunch of pampered prats - as I have said it comes back to our National Anthem - leave God Save the Queen as the British Empire Anthem, but can ENGLAND please have its own, and be a song about the COUNTRY and not one person!!
pedant !!RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:You do know what anthem NI use right?Nesty wrote:What a difference between the passion shown by Wales and NI and our bunch of pampered prats - as I have said it comes back to our National Anthem - leave God Save the Queen as the British Empire Anthem, but can ENGLAND please have its own, and be a song about the COUNTRY and not one person!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKRHWT6xdEU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If we beat Iceland we play France or Eire. Italy and Spain play before us but we can't meet them or Germany until the semi finals.Nesty wrote:if we beat iceland we play Italy or Spain, I would say Hodgson goofed big time, sorry he should go NOW
-
confused.com
- Posts: 2666
- Joined: 04 Oct 2012, 07:16
Have been at a NI match where the 'same' anthem was played for both teams. Well the same tune. Can't for the life of me remember who it was, but it was a euro (or world cup) qualifier, a few years agoShade wrote:It's a shame we finished behind Wales and they're the ones playing NI. It would have been nice to have one anthem. Or the same one played twice?
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29817
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
The game where Healy got the winner in a 1-0 against England.confused.com wrote:Have been at a NI match where the 'same' anthem was played for both teams. Well the same tune. Can't for the life of me remember who it was, but it was a euro (or world cup) qualifier, a few years agoShade wrote:It's a shame we finished behind Wales and they're the ones playing NI. It would have been nice to have one anthem. Or the same one played twice?
-
confused.com
- Posts: 2666
- Joined: 04 Oct 2012, 07:16
RCS - no, not that glorious day when King David shoneRegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:The game where Healy got the winner in a 1-0 against England.confused.com wrote:Have been at a NI match where the 'same' anthem was played for both teams. Well the same tune. Can't for the life of me remember who it was, but it was a euro (or world cup) qualifier, a few years agoShade wrote:It's a shame we finished behind Wales and they're the ones playing NI. It would have been nice to have one anthem. Or the same one played twice?
I have a feeling it may have been Luxembourg or someone like that. Would not bet my mortgage on it-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29817
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Save that bet for referendaconfused.com wrote:
Would not bet my mortgage on it
-
confused.com
- Posts: 2666
- Joined: 04 Oct 2012, 07:16
Look, all those people in the Vatican and Korea can not be wrong, maybe we do need a second crack at it. If possible can we wait until after the Olympics and the ryder Cup. Just so that my TV viewing is not blighted by Eddie Izzard during these times.RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Save that bet for referendaconfused.com wrote:
Would not bet my mortgage on it
How he runs all that distance in high heels is beyond me
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29817
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Do people think England will play with the innovation and creativity needed to move the Iceland back nine out of position? If not it will be a long night.
Glad in a way I am not able to watch. If we win comfortably then that is run of the mill. If we struggle or lose it will be an awful game to watch.
Glad in a way I am not able to watch. If we win comfortably then that is run of the mill. If we struggle or lose it will be an awful game to watch.
Liechtenstein's anthem uses the same tune as God Save the Queen.confused.com wrote:RCS - no, not that glorious day when King David shoneRegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:The game where Healy got the winner in a 1-0 against England.confused.com wrote: Have been at a NI match where the 'same' anthem was played for both teams. Well the same tune. Can't for the life of me remember who it was, but it was a euro (or world cup) qualifier, a few years ago
But you should use those boys in their best positions. Sticking to his 4-3-3 when we haven't got the players for it, and letting/having Kane take all the free kicks is his fault. The useless and inept tactics were his fault. Playing Raheem Sterling and not taking a big lump of a centre forward to stick up front when we're desperate for a goal and we inevitably revert to lumping the ball into the box is his fault. Etc, etc, etc.
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29817
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Agreed. Putting Wilshere in the squad: his fault.Shade wrote:But you should use those boys in their best positions. Sticking to his 4-3-3 when we haven't got the players for it, and letting/having Kane take all the free kicks is his fault. The useless and inept tactics were his fault. Playing Raheem Sterling and not taking a big lump of a centre forward to stick up front when we're desperate for a goal and we inevitably revert to lumping the ball into the box is his fault. Etc, etc, etc.
Having said that, I think the abuse of the man is way over the top. Hodgson never wanted us to lose and tried his best. His best was a long way short, but he's a decent and honourable man. People these days don't seem to respect that. But a lot of people these days don't seem to have any respect at all.
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29817
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Yes, it is a sorry state of society that abuse is the default response. Ability and personality are different things; you can be tw@t and damn good at what you do, or vice versa, or any combination.Shade wrote:Having said that, I think the abuse of the man is way over the top. Hodgson never wanted us to lose and tried his best. His best was a long way short, but he's a decent and honourable man. People these days don't seem to respect that. But a lot of people these days don't seem to have any respect at all.
Why decent people trying their best get abused I do not know.
The lack of available English talent at CB wasn't Roy's fault, nor was being badly let down by his keeper. However, as others have said, letting Kane take set-pieces; picking players with no form and/or confidence; making wholesale changes to a team that won their last match - that was all his fault.
Danny Mills made the point the Stuart Lancaster, after England's exit from the rugby World Cup, fronted up and didn't shirk his responsibility to the media - to the nation. "So, Stuart...why exactly did you think the unproven Burgess was a better option than John Joseph...?" - he answered them all, explaining his thinking at the time, whether it transpired he was right or wrong. Hodgson, on the other hand, had to be dragged to a press conference, yesterday, and twice said "I weally don't know why I'm here...I thought I'd said everything I needed to say in my last pwess conferwence."
Danny Mills made the point the Stuart Lancaster, after England's exit from the rugby World Cup, fronted up and didn't shirk his responsibility to the media - to the nation. "So, Stuart...why exactly did you think the unproven Burgess was a better option than John Joseph...?" - he answered them all, explaining his thinking at the time, whether it transpired he was right or wrong. Hodgson, on the other hand, had to be dragged to a press conference, yesterday, and twice said "I weally don't know why I'm here...I thought I'd said everything I needed to say in my last pwess conferwence."
He did also make the VERY valid point that he didn't know why he was there as the media will write what they want anyway, and people have already made up their minds so what is the point of him being there and trying to argue his case now?
I have to say, the fact that the BBC knew exactly every change that was being made at least 24 hours before each match was concerning. There was a mole in there somewhere.
I have to say, the fact that the BBC knew exactly every change that was being made at least 24 hours before each match was concerning. There was a mole in there somewhere.