Thought Sterling was a class apart, 2nd name on the teamsheet, so clever between the lines. Stones was awful, all for passing out from the back but theres a line. Does that in the world cup like he did tonight and we will soon be going home. Dier again very little use, in contrast to henderson the other night whose limited but fitted the style of play much better.

I personally wasnt convinced last season either.

Think its just his loan that ends. Besides, had a poor season.

I don't understand the point of the discussion if rather than picking the team you'd play, you are just discussing what team you think Southgate will play and agreeing with that. You also said the other day that you wouldnt pick Smalling. If people would prefer a different formation, or players that are unfavoured by Southgate, it still doesnt change peoples opinions that theyd prefer someone else.

No it doesnt! You are picking the squad that YOU would take, so you dont consider it at all. I wouldnt have him anywhere near, and if he does IN MY OPINION itd be a mistake.

My point was that history suggest that the likelihood is that he will be unable to reach expectations as a manager, hence why people are so dubious of him, no idea how he got the job. Your point on Livermore is crazy. It suggests that all of your opinions are not your own, you are second guessing Southgate. If you dont rate Livermore then why do you think he should be in the squad?!

Id love to know how different decent and competence are in your mind. My doubts on Southgate are not based on yesterday, please dont take my comments out of context. Hes not a good manager based on his CV. I dont feel he knows his best 11 either, I think thats a valid criticism, theres so much uncertainty. Hes also got faith in some players such as Livermore who ill come onto which is crazy. I do give him credit for attempting to create some sort of identity, the 3 at the back at the passing it out, whether we have the players to do it v the big teams, id certainly doubt but to be fair it is brave. How can you argue against the lack of fluidity in attack. We dont create many clear cut chances, weve scored I think 3 in 5, and in attack we have many players, Kane, Vardy, Rahford, Sterling, Alli, Lingard etc all have such good numbers, goals and assists for their clubs that youd think we could get plenty of goals for England. If Eric Dier is 2nd on your team sheet then id hate to see the 9 after that, definitely have him in the squad but hes so average. Lack of depth point, I think wing back and front 3, we look strong even beyond first choice. Goalkeeper theres a big problem as none of them have made the shirt their own, I'd go with Pickford and not even consider taking Hart, that said I dont feel that Southgate knows his best keeper. Centre back, only Stones (whose in poor form and out of Citys team) and Maguire I am 100% on, Ive no idea what Joe Gomez has done to become first choice, and many of the others you mention are steady Prem players at low clubs, but they are a step down from the first 2. The most obvious lack of depth is in central midfield. Henderson and Wilshire are the best 2, both flawed and injury prone. Beneath that, theres Dier, and then the well runs dry. Chamberlain is out of position playing in a central 2, dont remember him playing there for his club, Cook again id probably take but hes a big step down in quality, then theres nothing really. You suggest taking Livermore, can you please tell me what he offers to England?

Decent performance from what I saw that owed as much to Hollands incompetence I think. Dont think Southgate knows his best team which is a major worry, I do feel that when we get to Russia, his managerial incompetence coupled with an obvious lack of playing experience, and the lack of depth that may well be exposed with any injuries, they are 3 major reasons why we are limited in how far we can go, with what is actually a first team containing players that are perhaps slightly better than most give them credit for. Henderson played well last night, I do feel in general hes a very flawed player but hes a step up from the massively overrated Eric Dier. That centre of midfield looks the weakest out of all positions really, and for me our best bet is a massively injury prone Wilshire and a limited Henderson, which tells you everything. Got big problems both there and at centre back. I don't think we look anywhere near fluent enough going forward considering thats where our obvious strengths are, changing from 2 playing either side of a number 9, to a number 10 playing behind 2, I'd hope that maybe Kane and Sterling with Alli in support, and Rashford and Vardy on the bench. Think our best team overall is, assuming hes stuck with 3 at the back, Pickford / Jones Stones Maguire / Walker Henderson Wilshire Rose (or Young) / Alli / Sterling Kane Under a competent manager, and with no injuries, thats still not an elite team like Spain, Germany or Brazil, but potentially part of the bracket underneath.

Not many, solely used as back up there, appearances tend to be 10 minutes at the end. Akpan, probably the worst of the lot was signed by penniless Burton, amidst the likes of Varney in a squad scrambled together, Lowe not getting a sniff at Birmingham in what was a signing of desperation by Redknapp and Mahoney likewise at Barnsley, very strange loan deal. None of the 4 players would make our 18 now.

Incredible how Mahoney, Akpan, Lowe and Feeney have all been taken a chance on by Championship sides. That said, based on the gametime and success they are having, it suggests their current managers have seen what we have all seen.

If Southgate is picking solely on clubs, please explain the following: Joe Hart - One of a needlessly high number of keepers, has been in terrible form for years now, and dropped for the average Adrian, given a chance at the weekend and made a big error again. Shouldnt even be considered for the World Cup. Jake Livermore - Performances particularly poor even in a woeful team, dropped as a result and also recent shenanigans in Barcelona suggest hes not the best professional either. No idea why he Adam Lallana - barely played in months. Talented but not playing games. Danny Welbeck - ravaged by injury, and very poor goal record, granted he got a couple last night after the squad announcement (after a clear dive for the first) but not good enough. Chris Smalling - Not a big fan, but not sure how you can justify leaving out a regular starter for the 2nd highest team in the Premier League, yet can justify players like Joe Gomez being in. I appreciate that you can say hes not the best on the ball but you cant pick defenders solely on that. Not sure with the lack of depth that we can rule anyone out solely on lack of appearances, assuming they offer something extra, for example Lallana and Rose. Dont agree with Loftus-Cheek, Hart, Gomez or Welbeck being in the squad, Ashley Young in with a shout of left wing back over Bertrand on form, Lewis Cook maybe in there too, and Henderson. Youve only included 2 central midfielders that can play in a 2. One being injury prone and one being Eric Dier. Otherwise in the main its a pretty small pool to choose from but agree with most of the others. Harry Kane point is nonsense, look at his goal record in all competitions. Eric Dier is very lucky that England are bereft of depth in central midfield. Massively overrated, Id suggest even Hendersons a better bet.

Starting 12 you mean? Haha Squads been announced. A massive worry that Hart, Welbeck and in particular Livermore are all in, no idea what Southgates thinking is with any of them. Surprised Cahills not in, glad Keane isnt near the squad, think Lewis Cook and Alfie Mawson could be good picks though. I know its only a friendly but we are at the stage now where anyone being picked could go to Russia.

Wonder if that will end any chance of Chapman making the squad at he weekend.

I agree that managers may have preferred formations, but on the international stage as you infer you cant go out and buy players to suit your chosen system, you have to have the flexibility of playing whatever system that gets the best from your key players. As you say no square pegs and round holes.

For his club! And because youve since edited your post, I didnt even see that post initially. To clarify, youve said 2 things that dont make sense to me. "I decided my formation cos I want to 2 strikers up top and 3 at the back. Fit the players into the system." The reason I dont agree with this is because you pick a formation to get the best out of your best players, not the other way round. If you think our best 3 attackers are Rashford, Kane and Alli, then I disagree but your choice of formation is fair enough. It suggests that youve picked the players then a formation to best suit them, which is correct, HOWEVER it then renders the above statement meaningless, because it means that even you dont believe it. "No my stats proved that club stats means nothing in international terms" This is a crazy statement, what else do you go off if not club performances?

For his club? So his stupidly high goal ratio for Tottenham has NO bearing on his international selection? (Where to be fair hes yet to hit the same heights) I obviously would start him, just showing you the stupidity of totally discounting club stats, what else is there to base international selection on.

It wasnt a serious suggestion, it was based on the foolishness of saying things like "No my stats proved that club stats means nothing in international terms"

The reason that I've been saying that you need to pick a formation that best suits the players you have, is because you said "I decided my formation cos I want to 2 strikers up top and 3 at the back. Fit the players into the system." which is in my opinion is an incredibly flawed way of thinking, and the reason that weve had to fit all the players you mentioned into the wrong positions, your 2 arguments are totally contradictory to one another. Totally agree on Rashford, played the vast majority of his games from the left. Also agree on stats, presumably we will leave Kane out as this ridiculous goalscoring stats are meaningless.

I agree it was poor management. Do you understand my point though, that in those times, we picked a formation (4-4-2) and then squeezed players into that, rather than picking a formation to suit our best players? Which is similar to you, picking a formation first, then players second in that formation. Its the way of thinking that im disputing. If you had said, I think our best 3 attacking players are Rashford, Kane and Alli, and id play 3-4-1-2 to best suit them, I would disagree with the first bit but understand your way of thinking at least. But the way youve suggested picking a formation first is totally flawed, and the same way of thinking that caused us to fail in the past with better players. You didnt provide any stats. Besides, its not just stats, out of them 3, Sterling has had his best ever season, Alli has massively dipped and Rashford has been a bit part player, add the stats in and youve got a strong argument that Sterling is the most important of the 3. Youd be in a small minority wanting him near that plane, hes been a laughing stock for years.

How are stats meaningless? If anything your example backs up my point. You are suggesting that we pick a formation, then players to then fit that formation. Thats exactly what we did when we had those players. Our managers refused to deviate from the 4-4-2 formation we presumed to be the best way of playing, meaning that we didnt get the best out of our numerous top class central midfielders, we played our best one in Scholes wide, and didnt play a system to allow Gerrard and Lampard the license to do what they did for their clubs. We should have picked a more suitable position based on the personnel, not the other way round. As an aside, I see Joe Hart is back in the West Ham team doing what he does best. Useless.

But he hasnt, so its irrelevant. That second line makes absolutely no sense. You pick a formation to best suit your players, not the other way round.

But why, baring in mind how good hes been, whereas Rashford has rarely started and Alli has dipped so much from last season, especially with the stats I gave you? Feel like you are picking players to fit a formation, rather than a formation to best suit our key players.

You wouldnt start Sterling? Bar Kane, hes been by far and away the best English attacker this season, hes been phenomenal, stats prove it. 15 goals and 9 assists in 25 league games, 5 goals and an assist in 11 in other competitions, involved in a goal every 92 minutes. Rashfords been a sub for most of the season, hes involved in a goal every 107 minutes, did well today to be fair. Alli has been poor this season, miles off what he did last year, that said hes got 9 goals and 15 assists in 40, a goal involvement every 129 minutes. Sterlings been a key player for City this season and brilliant to watch. Im amazed that you wouldnt play him. (worked out through transfermarkt)

Would play 3-4-3, not 3-4-1-2, Sterling is one of the first names on the team sheet, as one of 2 either side of Kane. Welbeck is horrendous, Calvert Lewin and Abraham are unproven players who arent even playing for their clubs, id probably take just Kane, Rashford and Vardy to cover that 1 central position.

Thats fair enough, but when other people attach value to other competitions, and show dissapointment, even if its the u23s, responding by telling them to stop moaning is ignorant, rude and counterproductive of an internet messageboard.