joey_big_nose

The stats tell a pretty damning story. I have to say I am surprised just how much in favour of Croatia they are. It looks like were totally overwhelmed. http://www.skysports.com/football/croatia-vs-england/stats/385230 Bizarrely I might watch the game back in replay. Why I'm not totally sure.

I don't think anyone had it down as an easy win for England unless I missed something?

Walker was having a stormer right up until the goal. Then he ended being at fault for both.

Personally I think he's been great with his running and movement. Hardly Pogba, but I'd take him over Dier any day of the week.

It was a 50 50 game today in terms of quality so no shame in being shaded out over a 120 mins. We controlled it till they scored then it was all Croatia. In reflection I think Southgate has done magnificently. Only Kane, Sterling and maybe Walker were considered top players before the tournament and we made the semi final (albeit with a luck draw). He had a lot of players considered weak links previous to the tournament like Pickford, Stones, Young. Others like Maguire virtually untested. And he's made stars out of Trippier and Lingard. So to get as far as we did is a huge credit to everyone involved. What I would say is we shouldn't focus too much on this individual defeat, they happen. Great sides like Spain got knocked out by Russia for example. The real issue is why the likes of Spain, France or Belgium have such a large volume of top players we have so few. When you get to the final analysis it comes down to so few off our players playing top grade champions league fooball. Key talents for England like Maguire, Lingard and Rashford will sit on the bench for their clubs or play mid table football, rather than move abroad to find CL clubs where they get regular games. And without that experience they cannot progress. We really need to change that if we want to level the playing field internationally. As long as out best players would rather stunt their careers by staying in the premier league we are buggered. But with all the £££s floating around it's hard to see how that changes.

Nah, theyd be daft to sit back as our main threat is set plays and crosses. They'll fancy on the front foot Persic and Rebic will batter us down the channels and they can get Modric and Rakitic to dictate centrally with the space in midfield. I reckon both sides will come out hammer and tongs. Neither side likes defending. It'll be frantic I think.

I don't think anyone really saw Rooney as anything other than a very promising player outside of the English press. He, like Beckham, was someone who was picked up and ability was estimated above their performances merited in this country. He had a great Euro 2004, but in the same way Owen had a great WC 1998 or Villa a great WC 2010. A top player but not the highest grade. Mbappe conversely is absolutely first rate and will certainly join Neymar, Messi and Ronaldo at the top table. He's got a ruthlessness that Rooney just didn't have at any stage. What's I find interesting is Kane is kind of an anti Rooney/Beckham. His allround quality gets consistently under estimated despite already being a better player than both those mentioned. Its something about the unspectacular way he plays the game. He always looks less effective than he actually is. He's a very unusual player in that regard.

The thing France have is options. If for whatever reason plan A isn't working they can switch up. Strong on set plays, counter attack, can score from range, can get the ball in the box, can control the ball and play a possession game. Every single player in their team has goals in them and they defend as a tight unit. It's hard to see how any team can manage that. The main hope for whoever gets to the final is that the weight of expectation will trip them up like it did in Euro 2016. Their fans are quick to get on their back so if they are frustrated or concede early it could be possible to get the psychological upper hand. And ultimately it's only XI against XI so there's always a chance.

Though he lost I thought the best player was Hazard. He was let down by Lukaku and De Bruyne. Mbappe looks fantastic too though. If they get their tactics sorted this France team could dominate like Spain did 10 years ago. Only weak link is Giroud and they have the talent to replace him easily.

That's basically my assessment. If you had a combined England France XI only Kane and Tripper would get in it. The rest all French players and by absolutelu miles too. It's a real shame that tactically Deschamps is so conservative as off the leash that is some team. If we make it through to the final I guess we'll just have to go in defensive and hope to get something from a set play. If we attack them on the front foot they will absolutely crucify us on the break.

I'd take Belgium too. Fantastic forwards but we're setup to handle them better than Frances midfield. Henderson, Alli and Lingard against Kante, Pogba and Matuidi. Gulp...

Player for player there is not much between us, but if anyone shades it it's Croatia. Theres about a 50/50 chance they'll knock us out. That's a fair assessment in my book. It's a very even game.

I respectfully disagree. That Argentina were crap was indeed a significant factor, but also a significant factor was the back three allowing Persic and Rebic to absolutely annihilate their centrebacks in the channels, while loads of room was also afforded to Modric and Rakitic in front of the defence. I do agree Southgate is likely to stick with the same team. I just think the Croats will have a big advantage with the way they line up.

Tactically Croatia are very very tricky for us. The only play one up, pack the midfield, have great talent in there. Theyre perfectly set up to disrupt our 532/352. They absolutely battered Argentina's three at the back. Conversely they struggled against Russia and Denmark's flat back fours .... If we had more time changing to 442 or 4231 would make sense. The current 532 gives them an extra two men in midfield which could be lethal... and I don't think we really get any advantage from our system to be honest. The oppo playing 451 is our kryptonite I think. Very tricky situation for Southgate with so little time to change things. My guess is he will stick with our current system, but get Sterling to drop off and pick up Modric when we don't have the ball, and brief Alli and Lingard to drop in tight alongside Henderson when we are defending. When we have the ball we should have the luxury to play out through Maguire and Walker who will have a huge amount of space with only Manzukic up front for Croatia. Should be a very open game, as I think both sides will see offence as the best form of defence. Got a feeling we might well be under the kosh for long periods. Edit - the more I think about it the more I think Southgate might do a Martinez and suprise everyone and change the system. He must know Croatia are perfectly set up to hurt us, so he may have a plan B. Maybe go 4231? Not sure we really have the personnel for it though... -----------------------Pickford Trippier-----Stones----Maguire----Young ------------------Delph---Henderson ------Sterling---------Alli-------------Lingard ------------------------Kane

Well all I can say is Alli, Young and Lingard hardly put a foot wrong yesterday. Player for player it was a weak Sweden team but they put Italy and Netherlands out and ran Germany very close. I think the only reasonable question is do we have better players to swap them out for, and I would say definitely not for Lingard and Alli. Maybe for Young and Sterling. Will France or Belgium have a better midfield than us if we reach the final? Absolutely. Enormously better. But since we don't actually have any superior players to put in ahead of Alli and Lingard then I wouldn't fret too much about it.

For me Lingard is a certain starter. Hes a critical part of the team with his running and passing. I don't understand this stick he gets at all. Hes a top player. Alli has the goal now so definitely will keep his place imo. The expectation will be with a bit more fitness now and confidence from the goal we should see an uptick in his performances. Certainly there is little on the bench you could argue is better than him. Young and Sterling are interesting ones as we do have other good options to bring in. That said Young's delivery yesterday was excellent (Maguire scored from his corner), as was his covering down the left so he's not going to be dropped for Rose at this stage. Which leaves Sterling who is very frustrating. Throughout the tournament his running off the ball has been superb, and he's been solid dropping in and defending. But his final ball and finishing has been very very poor. He could have had a hat trick yesterday and a couple of assists, but they all came to nought. I think he will definitely play, Gareth has shown he wants to stick with the same team, and I guess the manager really rates his off the ball work. But if any of those four players were to be swapped out Raheem would be the one.

You could argue in Kane we've got a world class player like Croatia have Modric. Id say it is a very even game. They've got much more quality in midfield, we have better strikers (well, Kane) and defenders. Genuinely 50-50 in my opinion. Should be a cracker.

I think it's just being realistic. We are not a top team in terms of quality. Everyone on here still wants us to win, just being realistic about it.

I think putting Dier in is pretty much the only option we have to make us more solid. Comes down to not actually have a very good squad unfortunately. Shelvey could have done a job in that role. But its well off having the likes of Dembele to roll off the bench. Edit - actually Delph could drop in too. He's back from the UK after his wife gave birth. Hunk I would prefer him to Dier in the midfield as he is much more mobile.

The Alli, Sterling and Lingard numbers are appalling, didn't realise it was that bad! Needs to be addressed desperately. The one goal in four hours one is a bit daft. In the three hours before we scored eight! That's just cherry picking. Edit - I just checked the official stats. Lingard has actually had eight shots. Just only two on target. Which is somewhat a different message. Sterling has had 5. Alli has had a pathetic 3 in total! And Kane has only had 9. But he scored 6 of them! And three of them penalities. Shots on goal by out forward players does seem a significant issue even if not quite as bad as you made it sound!

Somewhere around zero I would say. Despite having a really quite good international goal scoring record. Maybe he's England's Klose but we will never find out because he never plays? Actually thinking about it we might give him a spin in the last 30 if Sweden defend deep as he is okay in the air. I'm just always confused by what type of stirker he actually is.

I think part of it is 1) Sterling's goal stats are terrible for someone playing striker 2) Rashford and Vardy present genuine alternative starters who have vastly better goal scoring record 3) while I personally think Sterling has done much better than he is made out to by many on here he hasn't ever had an excellent game for England. Lingard has. Alli has had quite a few good ones (seem a long time ago now). That gives you something to point to and warms the fans to you. All that said Southgate has stuck with him to this point and I can't see him being dropped. He's said from the outset that his picked a system and a team to fit that system. And he obviously feels that Sterling is the right man. So he's got at least one more game to prove the doubters wrong.

Don't agree on this at all. Vardys game is play on the shoulder, so every time he's been on the gap between our midfield and strikers expands hugely which is a major issue as we only have three mids. I'd put Rashford in ahead of him as he can drop off and link up too.

If you look at the squads on paper we really should beat Sweden. Colombia are a considerably better team in my book. Colombia have one superstar (luckily out injured against us) and four or five high quality Champions League players. I genuinely thought Colombia could send us out even if we played to our best ability if they turned up. On the other hand Sweden have zero super stars and zero regular Champions League players. Obviously theyve had a great tournament and are very astute tactically but in the cold light of day we really should beat them or something has gone wrong. No disrespect to Sweden meant at all, they've had some cracking players in the past, and we'll have to play at our best to not get beaten like Germany, Switzerland Mexico before. But if we do play at our best we should win because of the gap in quality. But again same was true against Iceland two years ago, so let's not count our chickens...

Agree that Walker is not convincing, we don't seem to be getting the benfits of his recovery pace or overlap in attack . Plus his passing range seems limited. Arguably we could move Dier in there. More composed, and will pass his way out like Stones and Maguire. Not quick though if we get caught on the break. Jones and Cahill both just don't have the quality on the ball to slot in.