Jump to content

joey_big_nose

Members
  • Content Count

    10135
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

joey_big_nose last won the day on September 28 2020

joey_big_nose had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3305 Excellent

About joey_big_nose

  • Rank
    World Cup

Profile Information

  • Location
    London

Recent Profile Visitors

8752 profile views
  1. Agree with you, but I get it's difficult for the manager. Southgate was getting a lot of criticism playing 343 earlier in qualifying. He can't win really. But that's the same for any manager, particularly international ones. But basically if I was him I would be looking at what has happened to England against Scotland, France Vs Hungary, Spain Poland, Germany Portugal and think this is a tournament that three at the back is going to do well. Why? I agree it's overlap in wide areas. Italy and Germany have absolutely tormented teams with it. I reckon Southgate will switch. In
  2. My general impression is 433 / 4231 is struggling at this tournament against back threes (similar to Rovers last season in that regard) - France, Portugal, Spain have all suffered. Italy and Germany are playing well with 343. And England got to the semis at the world cup with 352 under Southgate so it's hardly new to us. I'd change up, with the option to go back to a 433 if it's a mess. Pickford Stones Rice Mings Trippier Mount Phillips Shaw Stirling Kane Grealish We have played three at the back frequent
  3. I think they said on an earlier game that FIFA have changed the rules for offside again just before the tournament, saying the line off offside does not include arms I think or something like that. So that could be the reason.
  4. This made me laugh a lot! Very true. I quite like him to be honest, he doesn't offer much analysis but he does give a real insight into what its like to be a player and just seems like a good guy. Similar to Peter Crouch on his podcast.
  5. That said the Portuguese for some bizarre reason just didn't press the Germans at all which was really odd.
  6. Interesting that the Germans just decided to not bother with any holding midfielders at all. Very ballsy move considering the group they're in but they just went for it. Quite a different philosophy to England playing two holding midfielders against Scotland. England could (sort of) emulate it by dropping Rice into a back three and play Foden and Mount in centre mid. Wacky but after watching the first two games I am inclined to think we need to switch to 343.
  7. I don't really see why we should think we should win it with these players. We have a small chance as do a lot of teams with similar quality squads. It's unrealistic to think we should win. We could with a fair wind and a bit of luck but the same is true of 8-9 sides. The only team that should think it should win it is France. All that said obviously the performance needs to be a lot better than last night.
  8. I think basically the thinking would be " 1 point gets us through, why take off a defensive mid and endanger that" We were prioritising not losing over winning, as were Scotland. As said above I don't really think formations were the issue, but we could have gone 343 or 352 to get some proper width. But then in those formations you lose an attacker for an extra defender which is a tough tradeoff.... What's obvious is the likes of France and Italy have a really clear idea who their best XI is. Southgate is a long long way away from knowing his. Even Kane, the one person you would
  9. On the positive side we are through, and another clean sheet. On the negative side basically everything else. No one, except Pickford, came out with much credit. I'm inclined to agree with Gary Neville's comments. It's not really about whose picked, the players were good enough to play much much better than that, it was more about the intensity. At the most basic level we didn't press and we didnt pass the ball quickly. Why we didn't is hard to understand.
  10. I reckon they'd rather use the games to play bigger teams than trot out against Gibraltar or whoever. I can see the Nations league and an expanded Euros being used to eliminate qualifying
  11. Are qualifying games against San Marino Monet spinners?
  12. As an aside with 24 teams in the Euros is there any real point in qualifying? The only significant nations that missed our were RoI, Norway, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece Belarus, Serbia, Bosnia. Why not just expand it to 32 teams and get rid of qualifying? You'd end up with the teams playing the same number of games just not have the daft third place qualifying setup. Maybe a bit harsh on tiny nations like Iceland and Lithuania. Sure something could be worked out. Something needs to be done, burning 10 games to qualify for a tournament youre almost guaranteed to play in seems ridiculous
  13. First major opinion revision for me. Had Belgium as second favourites but theyre never winning this with that defence. So I'm promoting Italy to second favourites behind France and demoting Belgium to the pelaton (England, Spain, Netherlands, Portugal, Germany).
  14. https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/sport/wales-arrogantly-expecting-to-win-whole-thing-as-usual-20210617209245?fbclid=IwAR3oQpRSd3BdCLLc08Io9vJUXzbZkSR_Ll-grmF3Bca-zi2AXgMqz26a728 Made me laugh!
  15. It was a really good set, but miles away from that Spanish side - not because the management was poor, but because the players didn't compliment each other well. No width, no holding players, a lack of balance across the side. Spain had players who worked together so fluidly and effectively, England had a lot of players who just got in each others way. One thing that the current England side does have in it's favour is the balance and technical flexibility is a lot better than the 04-06 side. Lacks the defenders though.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.