World Cup 2018

[roversfan99]

48 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Not in my opinion but hey ho, but we the really good up and coming players we have coming from under 21 level and under there is plenty of optimism and quality players coming there. Plus other players not picked. The next few years could be very good going forward. Southgate performed better than most people gave him and instead the fan base have really took to him and his manner with them

going 4-4-2 last night wasn't the answered but That's said the players will learnt from this experience and it will help them in the future. 

You can back a manager, you can rate him and still occasionally think that he gets things wrong, because he is human.

I think Southgate has done all the things you said, used young players, performed better than people expected, taken the fan base with him etc.

I also think he was slow in his subs, in particular in midfield, and out thought by the Croatian manager last night. But overall, impressed for sure.

If you cant make sensible constructive criticism, whether it be Mowbray or Southgate, 2 managers I am happy with, then it invalidates your stance because it shows that you can only accept the side of the argument that suits you.

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

You can back a manager, you can rate him and still occasionally think that he gets things wrong, because he is human.

I think Southgate has done all the things you said, used young players, performed better than people expected, taken the fan base with him etc.

I also think he was slow in his subs, in particular in midfield, and out thought by the Croatian manager last night. But overall, impressed for sure.

If you cant make sensible constructive criticism, whether it be Mowbray or Southgate, 2 managers I am happy with, then it invalidates your stance because it shows that you can only accept the side of the argument that suits you.

I wouldn't have change tactically yesterday. I didn't agree with the Vardy sub. probably would have brought on Loftus Cheek for Ali but the other 3 I agree with. 

I will make sensible constructive criticism when I feel it is need and not constantly nick pick IMO 

[Audax]

28 years ago, England played in the 3rd place game and lost, 32 years ago, in 1986, Belgium played in the 3rd place game and lost.

With that time gone by, do people still not care about that match? Just my opinion, I think they should. Something is better than nothing.

 

[Audax]

In '90, it was a big let down to England to not make the final, go out on penalties... in 2018, I'd think giving a full effort against Belgium and perhaps winning would be going out on a high note.

[AllRoverAsia]

It will be a 2nd Eleven game. Probably a good thing for those players who take it serious and want to impress. They are wearing the shirt so must try 100%.

I noticed that Lineneker and Neville were a bit dismissive of it.

I will watch and hope we win

[AllRoverAsia]

6 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

I wouldn't have change tactically yesterday. I didn't agree with the Vardy sub. probably would have brought on Loftus Cheek for Ali but the other 3 I agree with. 

I will make sensible constructive criticism when I feel it is need and not constantly nick pick IMO 

So you were quite ok with losing the midfield, being pushed back into, at least, 5 at the back and playing hoofball to Kane who had to be knackered or injured and would have not tried any tactical/ formation change at all. Ok.

Example: Young was poor throughout his time onfield. Indeed he progressively got worse during this game and had a new hole torn in the second half resulting in the cross for the Croatian equaliser. He could have been replaced from halftime. However that is just a like for like sub.

Second half we were being over run in midfield but still trying going nowhere poorly executed tippy tappy triangles and flicks and also making virtually no progress down either flank.

Basically coming up short against the first decent team we met and bar like for like subs trying nothing to change rhe direction of the match.

Don't let desirable and applauded National pride negate good sense.

[Stuart]

Had to google the team England faced in 1990 and the score*. Nobody remembers third place. The anti-climax after the semi final drama killed any enjoyment of potentially finishing third.

There is so little to look forward to now this weekend. I’m not sure if I’ll watch either match. France v Croatia doesn’t capture the imagination. It’s a second rate friendly game.

If England put out a second string side then they would be rightly hammered by Belgium. It would even more serve us right if Lukaku got a hat trick and overtook Kane in the golden boot stakes. If we are honest it’s probably the least deserving in memory. 6 goals. 3 penalties. One flying in off his heel without his knowledge. Yes, penalties take nerve but for a striker they are a gimme. He has faded badly in the last two games - so much so that’s Gary Neville was convinced he had an injury. I’m not sure that he wasn’t just lucky we were playing Panama and Tunisia and we got those penalties.

Bring on the start of Rovers’ season!

Edited July 13, 2018 by Stuart
*Lost 2-1 to Italy. Scillachi with an 86th minute winner.

[K-Hod]

There's nothing wrong with criticising a manager, club or country, I'm not sure why folk are so sensitive to criticism of a manager where it is justified.

Pre-tournament, we wouldn't have argued with the semi finals, but the way it transpired, it's only natural to wonder what might have been if we'd done things differently. 

I.E.- from the second half onwards, if we could all see we were getting battered, surely Southgate could, so why didn't he make a change to counter it? The criticism of having no Plan B is totally justified IMO.

 

Edited July 13, 2018 by K-Hod

[Giant]

3 minutes ago, OnePhilT said:

Personally looking forward to this weekend. If we manage to finish third, that'll be the best we've done at a World Cup in my lifetime. And then Croatia in the final... It's been an unbelievable and thoroughly enjoyable tournament. And I've watched every single match. ?

In reality, both finalists have been involved in one good game each, France v. Argentina in The Round of 16 and Croatia v. England.  Hope you enjoy it, Phil, but from a neutral point of view I think both sides will be very cautious, so it won’t be much of a spectacle. There is one world class player on show, Modric, Mbappe is nowhere near that yet. 1 0 to France.

[tomphil]

2 hours ago, Stuart said:

Had to google the team England faced in 1990 and the score*. Nobody remembers third place. The anti-climax after the semi final drama killed any enjoyment of potentially finishing third.

There is so little to look forward to now this weekend. I’m not sure if I’ll watch either match. France v Croatia doesn’t capture the imagination. It’s a second rate friendly game.

If England put out a second string side then they would be rightly hammered by Belgium. It would even more serve us right if Lukaku got a hat trick and overtook Kane in the golden boot stakes. If we are honest it’s probably the least deserving in memory. 6 goals. 3 penalties. One flying in off his heel without his knowledge. Yes, penalties take nerve but for a striker they are a gimme. He has faded badly in the last two games - so much so that’s Gary Neville was convinced he had an injury. I’m not sure that he wasn’t just lucky we were playing Panama and Tunisia and we got those penalties.

Bring on the start of Rovers’ season!

Vaguely remember watching it and I don't think there was more than a few hundred English left there by then, crap game as well I think. All pointless really although I did notice on Swedens Wiki page it boldly states 3rd place in the World cup lol

Can't see Southgate telling his grandkids in years to come hey I managed England to 3rd place in the 2018 WC although I got England to the semis sounds quite good.

[Tom]

Saw that we tried to kick off when all the Croatia players were off the pitch, discussion around that it’s legal (Panama tried it vs us)

Even if it was legal though Lingard passed it forwards and would have been offside!

[joey_big_nose]

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.

[Silas]

5 hours ago, Audax said:

28 years ago, England played in the 3rd place game and lost, 32 years ago, in 1986, Belgium played in the 3rd place game and lost.

With that time gone by, do people still not care about that match? Just my opinion, I think they should. Something is better than nothing.

 

I understand that we're in a massive minority but I just don't get the apathy to coming 3rd. 

They've invested months of time and effort into preparing for this tournament to achieve the best they can. 

We were all talking about quarters being a fairly good return at one point,  so 3rd place is outstanding compared to that it.

And it would be our best result in over half a century of World Cups.  

The only caveat to that is I feel for the players that have sat on the sideline patiently watching it all happen and playing very little part. Do they maybe deserve a run out on the pitch as way of reward?

BUT,  as the old phrase goes, there's no room for sentiment in competitive sport so I say let's get our best team out there, go all guns blazing and try and finish on a high.

I'd way prefer to come back after a win with 3rd place bagged, rather than trudge back after 2 disappointing losses. 

It's a no brainer surely. 

[DaveyB]

I think England did incredibly well, albeit they rode their luck at various stages, and it does feel like a golden opportunity missed - I remember in 1990 as an 11-year old thinking that it was just the start and that we would build on the semi-final appearance and, especially with Gazza, that the future was bright. 28 years of misery and underachievement followed, so I'm more than a little cautious about all the talk of coming back stronger in 2020/2022.

Also, I'm far from convinced by the 3-5-2 formation going forward. I just don't think it plays to our strengths at all. Our key players don't play that system week in and week out and it seems to force too many of them to play out of their preferred position. I'd like to see us play 4-2-3-1 - Walker is one of the best attacking full-backs in the world and we should play him in his best position, Kane looks far more dangerous for Spurs when he is the focal point up front rather than dropping deep and so we should play him there, Sterling plays week in week out from a deeper position, coming in from the wing and looking a threat, so we should play him there, Dele Ali's biggest asset at Spurs is knowing when to arrive in the box playing as a number 10, so we should play him there. 

I like Southgate and think he has brought a real integrity back to the national team which was sorely missing under previous managers (and I'd much rather him be in charge than someone like Pardew or Dyche), but I do worry that if he persists with playing so many players out of position and essentially wasting their talents, they might eventually get fed up and turn on him and it might all end in tears.

[DE.]

3 hours ago, K-Hod said:

There's nothing wrong with criticising a manager, club or country, I'm not sure why folk are so sensitive to criticism of a manager where it is justified.

Pre-tournament, we wouldn't have argued with the semi finals, but the way it transpired, it's only natural to wonder what might have been if we'd done things differently. 

I.E.- from the second half onwards, if we could all see we were getting battered, surely Southgate could, so why didn't he make a change to counter it? The criticism of having no Plan B is totally justified IMO.

If Southgate has any sense or ambition he will watch that Crotia match back and pinpoint exactly when we lost the game and why. He'd do well to watch the Colombia match as well because there were similarities in how we lost control of a match we were dominating. His inability to react to Croatia's tactical changes are undoubtedly a big part of why we ended up losing, and he needs to learn from it if he wants to be successful going forward.  

[joey_big_nose]

1 hour ago, DaveyB said:

I think England did incredibly well, albeit they rode their luck at various stages, and it does feel like a golden opportunity missed - I remember in 1990 as an 11-year old thinking that it was just the start and that we would build on the semi-final appearance and, especially with Gazza, that the future was bright. 28 years of misery and underachievement followed, so I'm more than a little cautious about all the talk of coming back stronger in 2020/2022.

Also, I'm far from convinced by the 3-5-2 formation going forward. I just don't think it plays to our strengths at all. Our key players don't play that system week in and week out and it seems to force too many of them to play out of their preferred position. I'd like to see us play 4-2-3-1 - Walker is one of the best attacking full-backs in the world and we should play him in his best position, Kane looks far more dangerous for Spurs when he is the focal point up front rather than dropping deep and so we should play him there, Sterling plays week in week out from a deeper position, coming in from the wing and looking a threat, so we should play him there, Dele Ali's biggest asset at Spurs is knowing when to arrive in the box playing as a number 10, so we should play him there. 

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

 

 

[Husky]

Maybe it's just me. But I don't have any interest in the 3rd placed match or the final. . . and that's after watching pretty much every game, give or take a missed start here and there.

Perhaps it's because normally when England go out there's still half a tournament still left to play. This time it's pretty much all over, so it is basically all over.

[Husky]

23 hours ago, Silas said:

And people say the English are overdramatic. 

C'mon,  beaten by a single goal 10 mins from the end of extra time hardly qualifies as a "huge capitulation". 

Calm yourself.

 

Certainly.

But I know where he's coming from. I think it was more the first half second half (and some) shocker rather than the closeness of the final result.

I'm sure if it was Rovers we would all have been wondering what the hell 'Bowyer' said at half time to then come out after dominating and be a completely different (useless) team.

[OJRovers]

I'd agree that Southgate has got the 3 at the back formation to work for England. I normally hate it, but I think it seemed to give us an extra man where it counted in defence and midfield. Apart from that losing goal v Croatia, we were really solid as a unit at the back. Walker wasn't 100% comfortable in his role, which is down to the individual not the formation.

The problem with 3-5-2 is that it is quite defensive. England's shots on goal from open play in the whole tournament were something like 6 or 7 (the lowest).

I think Mowbray will try again with the formation. I'd rather he didn't, because every time we've played it half the team look like the don't know what they are meant to be doing and we ended up with 5 strung across the back defending in League One. It will be different in the Championship where we will be up against stronger teams, but we can't afford to lose games whilst the players get used to the new formation. 

Edited July 13, 2018 by OJRovers

[Mike E]

32 minutes ago, OJRovers said:

I'd agree that Southgate has got the 3 at the back formation to work for England. I normally hate it, but I think it seemed to give us an extra man where it counted in defence and midfield. Apart from that losing goal v Croatia, we were really solid as a unit at the back. Walker wasn't 100% comfortable in his role, which is down to the individual not the formation.

The problem with 3-5-2 is that it is quite defensive. England's shots on goal from open play in the whole tournament were something like 6 or 7 (the lowest).

I think Mowbray will try again with the formation. I'd rather he didn't, because every time we've played it half the team look like the don't know what they are meant to be doing and we ended up with 5 strung across the back defending in League One. It will be different in the Championship where we will be up against stronger teams, but we can't afford to lose games whilst the players get used to the new formation. 

I would stick with it in future if we have a more varied middle 3. A holding passer, a tackler, and a 'driver'.

The driver would be the player capable of bombing forward, turning 352 into 3412 or 343. To keep us on the front foot. One could argue he thought Lingard or Alli could do this, but both were lightweight. I feel Loftus-Cheek's strength may have helped us do this more.

Without that variation (as we saw) we end up falling back into a defensive 532.

[perthblue02]

FIFA have announced that the 2022 World Cup in Qatar will take place between November 21st and December 18th.

Edited July 13, 2018 by perthblue02

[joey_big_nose]

36 minutes ago, Mike E said:

I would stick with it in future if we have a more varied middle 3. A holding passer, a tackler, and a 'driver'.

The driver would be the player capable of bombing forward, turning 352 into 3412 or 343. To keep us on the front foot. One could argue he thought Lingard or Alli could do this, but both were lightweight. I feel Loftus-Cheek's strength may have helped us do this more.

Without that variation (as we saw) we end up falling back into a defensive 532.

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.

[Silas]

1 hour ago, Husky said:

Certainly.

But I know where he's coming from. I think it was more the first half second half (and some) shocker rather than the closeness of the final result.

I'm sure if it was Rovers we would all have been wondering what the hell 'Bowyer' said at half time to then come out after dominating and be a completely different (useless) team.

Fair enough, but folk are out there acting like this is some strange phenomenon. 

There's a reason one of the most famous quotes in football is "game of 2 halves". 

Cos it happens all the time week after week in all the various domestic leagues we all watch. 

Remember Rovers v Wigan last season? 2-0 at half time. And I reckon that cost us the title. And IMO, if that game had gone 30 mins extra time they would have probably won it.

Not saying it's right and we should sit back and accept it. Of course it needs analysed to try and prevent in future.

But this - "Oh my God, I can't believe England didn't make it to the final after that dominant 1st half" - is pretty niave. 

[perthblue02]

1 hour ago, Husky said:

Maybe it's just me. But I don't have any interest in the 3rd placed match or the final. . . and that's after watching pretty much every game, give or take a missed start here and there.

Perhaps it's because normally when England go out there's still half a tournament still left to play. This time it's pretty much all over, so it is basically all over.

I feel the same, bit too much of a everyone gets a prize about it ,we are all winners etc

Not good enough to get to the final, go home and try harder next time

What next with the World cup expansion? 23 rd place play off?

Edited July 13, 2018 by perthblue02

[Husky]

Just now, Silas said:

But this - "Oh my God, I can't believe England didn't make it to the final after that dominant 1st half" - is pretty niave. 

I can't believe Kane missed that absolute sitter.  Certainly not World Class.

Had that been Sterling then everyone would have been all over it, . . . forever forever ever!!