joey_big_nose

We could take a leaf out of England's tactic book? --------------------------------Raya ------------Lenihan----Mulgrew----Williams Bennett-----Dack-----Smallwood---Palmer----Bell ----------------------Graham------Armstong

You know what think you're into something there... But maybe more like Raya Lenihan Mulgrew Williams Bennett Evans Smallwood Bell Dack Graham Samuel Think that will suit our players well.

I think Armstrong has a lot of quality. The goals he scored last year showed that. Good finishing, good pace, technically decent. I think he can be a success if we play to his abilities as others say. Certainly deserves 10 games or so in the Championship to see how he fares before we write him off.

A bit of a weak link for me, maybe I'm being unfair?

What's the first choice XI as it stands? --------------------------Raya Bennettt----Mulgrew----Lenihan-----Bell -------------Smallwood-----Rothwell ---------Samuel ------Dack-------Palmer ---------------------------Graham Good enough subs to come in : Williams, Rothwell, Evans, Davenport?, Travis? We look very light up front and wide mid and right back. Also no decent keeper backup for Raya. Also not convinced by CB reserves. Mid table championship team, but very vulnerable to injury.

I knew we were champions of one youth world cup. I didnt realise we are champs of both youth world cups (u17 and u20) and the u19 European cup. Maybe really things are looking up?

Well France who got to the final without needing to go to extra time then easily beat Croatia. I'd say teams that can on average win games in the 90 mins are better than those that need the extra time to do it.

Sides I expect England would lose by a couple of goals to : Spain, Brazil, France, Germany (if they turned up), Belgium Sides England would have a tight game with, and probably lose in extra time or penalties : Portugal, Argentina, Italy (I know they didn't qualify!), Uruguay, Croatia Everyone else I would expect us to just about beat. Though I wouldn't be mega confident with the like likes of Colombia, Switzerland, Poland etc who are not far off us in terms of quality.

I thought it was a fair accusation in the Belgium France game where France totally strangled it. But in the final, France were very entertaining in the second half. It's hard to score 4 with anti football. They arguably could have got another 2. Sour grapes unfortunately.

Very fair article here https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44808192 Stats in this volume really don't lie. Southgate got some elements very right - three at the back, going for Pickford, choosing Maguire over Cahill, the set piece routines, selecting Trippier over Walker at wing back. However when you're getting less shots on target per game than Costa Rica and Tunisia there is a critical need to go back to the drawing board on midfield and attack. For what it's worth I'd look at moving Sterling into midfield and just play Kane up there on his own. I think it may perversely help us slightly, although it would depend on the midfield effectively supporting the striker. Also Kane's lack of mobility is a barrier to going it alone up top, but potentially that was just due to injury. Also I'd swap one of Alli or Lingard for a passer - probably Shelvey. He's got his faults but I think Alli and Lingard are too similar, and Alli in particular has been poor. Alternatively we could drop Walker and go 442/451. That would let us play Shelvey, Alli and Lingard. But I think we won't do that as 3 cb has worked pretty well. I could easily see us lose the composure and control of possession 3 at the back has given us. One good thing is we are going straight into competitive games with Spain and Croatia (the new Nations League) so we should be able to experiment a bit against high quality opposition.

Sessegnon looks a certainty for caps, the rest need to establish themselves at their clubs to see if they have the required credentials.

I totally disagree on that. Could be moody but had a lot of good games and was rightly player of the season one year. Always thought he would go on to do well. However I would not have gone so far as to say win a world cup!

It's much easier to change tactics than change the quality available. Frances issue has been not getting the tatical balance right. Now they look the part. France made the Euros final, won this one, so that's two finals in a row to start. Theyll kick on and be favourites in 2020 for sure. The quality in every position is vast and they are all so young! Only note of caution is the German team is still very young, and has loads of superb players and experience and a great manager, yet were diabolical at this world cup. Shows there are no sure things.

To be frank Belgium are a quite a few rungs better than us with the best player at the tournament in Hazard. To lose to them is no surprise at all. People should not take it too hard. It's been a good tournament. Semi finals is a fabulous outcome given the mediocre quality of the players available. Southgate now needs to look forward and figure out how possibly to do better. People will expect us now to make semis at least at the Euros. How he is going to manage that will take some considerable imagination and planning as we are unlikely to get as soft a draw again and we are so far behind Germany, Belgium, France, Spain in terms of quality available, and on a similar level to another 4 or 5 European teams. He's going to either need to wring more quality out of what he has, or find some new top players from somewhere as yet unknown.

Both teams playing close to strongest side. Very pleased about that! Should be a cracker.

Well it's a true enough stat. Compared to Germany, Brazil, Argentina, Netherlands, France etc. we really struggle in the knockout stages.

While I agree in the raw talent stakes we are a long way behind other major football nations one sliver of hope is this world cup and the last Euros suggest you don't actually need the best talent to be in with a shout. The beauty of knockout football.

Devastating summary that!

My money is on him probs dropping Alli and bringing a passer in to sit alongside Henderson. Lingard then becomes a single player in the hole behind the strikers. Alli has really offered very little at this tournament. Not looked fit or clear on his role. Lingard in fits and starts has looked very promising. Worth a place for his running and movement alone.

All formations are trade offs. He went 3 at the back to help us retain the ball, play from the back, give the full backs licence to get forward. I think he's been totally vindicated on that decision. It worked very well. If we'd gone 4 at the back I think we would have seen the same old England struggling to pass and build. On playing the quite odd midfield system and two strikers I think it's been a bit hit and miss. Worked well against weaker sides, and initially against Croatia and Colombia, but they both ultimately figured it out and took control. It leaves the middle of the park extremely thin, essentially Henderson on his own. So if you lose the control of possession you get battered. I think we went with it because he thought shoe horning Alli, Sterling and Lingard in was better than playing Dier or Deplh, and I have to agree with him. Though as others have said he could have made changes mid game quicker. Anyhow, by even going into a World Cup with such an unusual and untested system Southgate has shown his ability to make radical and broadly successful decisions based on careful thought. I think he'll tinker around to get the balance right where it is weak. To help him out we really need some promising midfielders to come through. I'm sure if we had a decent central proper central midfielder to partner Henderson we would have played them, but we didn't. Maybe Shelvey will get a go in the Autumn games to see if it helps that balance. That's the best alternative we have atm. Ultimately based on the quality available to him we did well at this tournament

Quite looking forward to the 3rd place playoff. I think both Belgium and us will want to win it. We need the experience and confidence from a good performance, so not play a second string. Not against a couple of players coming in for injuries, but don't want wholesale changes.

It's partly cultural - we don't like playing abroad - but mostly financial. Foreign clubs don't want to pay transfer fees and wages over the odds for English players. And even if they do make an offer the likes of West Ham or Leicester will beat it and the player ends up churning it out mid table rather than champions league. Very depressing.

It would have been a major risk to go to a four at level terms. We've only played as a three with that side. It would have created a lot of confusion I think. When we did eventually go to a four in extra time we didn't look any better for it. Fortune favours the brave and all that, but it would have been a radical move that could well have backfired. Over the next couple of years a key objective for Southgate will be to implement tactical flexibility, but ultimately that will need better quality and options in midfield to enable it.

Not really sure what Southgate could have done to be honest. No real personnel available to wrest back control once they settled their midfield.

One way to think about it is if England were a club side who would you change across the team. For me I think really only four players. Walker - huge credit to him coming in and doing a decent job in unfamiliar role, showed incredible recovery pace, but ultimately got shown up as a full back playing at CB. There's a lot of decent centre backs coming through so we will have options. Young - did far far better than I thought he would at the tournament. However is now 33 so end of his international career. We need to bring in a new left back. Again lots of options coming through so not a massive concern. Lingard/Alli - I would say realistically we can't play top teams with both of these on at the same time. They are number 10s, not centre mids in a midfield three. Plus in the final analysis they are just not of the highest quality. If we genuinely want to be competitive at the top table we need a midfielder (or ideally two) who can mix it with Modric, Pogba, Kroos, Kante etc. This is a huge problem for England as there isn't anyone coming through who even remotely fits the bill. Shelvey is probably the most promising of a poor bunch, but he's miles from the top players. Oxlaide-Chamberlain is a worker like Henderson. Would make us more solid but wouldn't raise the quality. Sterling - for a striker who scored no goals had an okay tournament. But it's pretty clear if we had someone who could finish as well as the pace and movement then we would be a far more successful side. The obvious candidate is Rashford but his goal scoring record is as poor for England as Sterling's. To kick on he needs to move away from Utd - ideally abroad - to where he can be the main striker and prove that he can do it. Outside of him there aren't to many top options. To sum up key things are to find a couple of midfielders and a striker. We can definitely build and improve for 2020, but unless we can find real first rate talent in those positions we will always be a second tier nation in the odds.