FIFA World Cup 2014 - GROUP D [Uruguay, Costa Rica, England, Italy - 14/19/20/24 June] **spoilers**
- Thread starter Cosimo
- Start date
no need to say any more
lol, nah I think they have had a chance, watching them try and fail repeatedly using the same strategy for 70 minutes before any real attempt to try something different was depressingly like watching some primitive lifeform. Making changes earlier would have seen a different result I think.
Wonder if Gerrard will do another assist to Costa Rica
Got it the first time. Better is one vs France. Or more similar is the back headed OG vs Chelsea in the League Cup final.
Still, he does more good than harm.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
All the best teams play with 3 nominal defenders, then you go straight on to say 2 cb's, 2 fullbacks and a DM< who by definition is in midfield. So that is... 4 at the back.
Mascherano doesn't play as part of a back three, he plays as part of a back 4, with two fullbacks with license to roam and a DM who very rarely drops in to form a back 3. Playing someone you consider DM in the CB position doesn't make him a DM, it's just his favoured position. When he lines up, starts and plays the entire game as a CB... he's a CB.
Holland for YEARS have played 4-3-3, people were pretty shocked they played a 3-5-2 because they haven't played anything other than 4-3-3 in years and apparently( I exceptionally rarely watch the dutch division so taking it on word) the entire league plays 4-3-3.
Last time a team played 4-4-2 great, Real Madrid thrashing the pants off Bayern, who played a 4-3-3 btw. If we want to get technical, Real Madrid played a 4-4-2 with Alonso and Modric, and Modric was absolutely playing as a holding midfielder, with very little license to get forward and spent almost the entire game protecting the defence.... this being the team that beat the previous years champions and then went on to become the... oh yeah, new champions.
where did I even suggest Hodgson was on par with LVG tactically? Anywhere, or are you stating something daft as a way to reinforce your point by claiming I said something insane. I didn't make any claims at all about Hodgson or the quality of his tactics in my post, you may have noticed this by not mentioning Hodgson even once in the post you quoted.
I still stand by, people who insist that 4-3-3 is the only formation or that any particular formation is "from the 70's" is deluded. It's exceptionally narrow minded, it's that kind of thinking that prevented Holland adapting in the past to suit the opposition. It's the kind of thinking that wouldn't have allowed Real Madrid to not only implement EXACTLY the formation you're complaining about, it let them use that formation to perform utterly brilliantly, to utterly destroy the reigning champions.
Tactics are just that, many many many 4-3-3 teams have lost, many many 3-5-2 teams have failed, many many 4-4-2 teams have failed. The tactics aren't at fault, the incorrect application of the wrong tactics at the wrong time fails.
As shown by two great teams with two of the best performances of the past year using alternative and considered out dated tactics to demolish the opposition.
3-5-2 as Holland lined up is VERY rare, it didn't have a DM in central defence, they played a full on 3 defenders throughout the game. LIkewise in the second game when they went behind against Chile, they changed formation because that is what was going to work.
There is no right formation, or wrong formation, just using it with the wrong set of players at the wrong time. There are many ways to win a game and no tactic is out dated.
Chelsea have won 2 european titles in recent history playing a 60 year old league 2 tactic, everyone behind the ball and frustrate the opposition... it is an incredibly basic tactic that managed to work used at the right time. Mourinho applied such tactics on multiple occasions this year to great success.
The league is not the national team. I agree we have one of the best leagues in the world but our national team is very average. Massive delusions in this country on that particular issue.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,367
Best Strikers - Suarez, Aguero and RVP (when fit)
Best Midfielders - Yaya, Hazard, Oscar, Silva and Gerrard
Best Centre Backs- Cahill and Kompany
Best Full backs - Azplicueta, Ivanovic and Zabaleta
Best Keeper - Cech
I would say the majority are foreigners tbh
Any one of the above players can single handedly win you a game with a good performance.
Anyone trying to blame that goal on Gerrard is retarded. The CB Jagielka is at fault. His job first and foremost is to mark the striker. He leaves the striker to go into no mans land when he knows Cahill is playing him onside and he has zero chance of getting the ball. When the flick on happens had he been marking the striker (which is a centre backs job) he could have slowed suarez down and waited for backup to arrive. Instead he's clean through to score.
Same ol' story every time. 
People need to stop blaming individuals and the manager. Although Roy and certain players were poor, the bigger picture needs addressing for once.
The coaching of youngsters isn't good enough. The national psyche isn't conducive to creating hungry, dedicated sportsmen. Our linguistic and cultural isolation (relative to other top leagues) means players/coaches refuse to go abroad - limiting the opportunity for competition and learning. The national game lacks clear direction and the right men in place to make the necessary changes.
When we have a squad of stars but still crash out, then we can point fingers and play the blame game.
The coaching of youngsters isn't good enough. The national psyche isn't conducive to creating hungry, dedicated sportsmen. Our linguistic and cultural isolation (relative to other top leagues) means players/coaches refuse to go abroad - limiting the opportunity for competition and learning. The national game lacks clear direction and the right men in place to make the necessary changes.
When we have a squad of stars but still crash out, then we can point fingers and play the blame game.
While you may have a point, the first 70 minutes of that match was a complete an utter management failure never mind the quality of play from individuals.
On a semi related note I found it funny they were joking on mock the week about how each team should be allowed a comedy substitution and named England's as Ian Botham when infact he was also a very talented footballer and in his prime if he'd stuck with football instead of cricket would have wiped the floor with most of the current crop.
Absolutely impossible to say, he had what almost a dozen games for Scunthorpe and a few for Yeovil. Hardly a base to say he could wipe the floor with anyone at Newcastle let alone Internationally.
Whole team has been poor, and while England were a little unfortunate to get at least one more (that hit the underside of the crossbar/post from rooney's header, and the free kick was very close too) too many attacking chances just given away by terrible passing or just running into blind alleys and giving possession away
Definitely looked like Gerrard's head that gave away the 2nd goal (although CB's were very poor for both goals), but they could easily have had one or two more so all round defensively England were ****
Johnson was also pretty terrible (very good up to the last third, but consistantly when getting there in both games ran right at opponants and gave the ball away or just dawdled too long), good assist last night but was that more fluke than judgement (more the former imo given how many other times he got in similar positions and did sweet F.A. wilth it).
Stirling and Sturridge should be much better for the Euro's in 2 years time and Barkley will hopefully be a starter by then also maybe as well as Shaw (Baines did a few good things last night , but a lot of possession was cut back by him and passed two or three yards which does very little indeed)
Definitely looked like Gerrard's head that gave away the 2nd goal (although CB's were very poor for both goals), but they could easily have had one or two more so all round defensively England were ****
Johnson was also pretty terrible (very good up to the last third, but consistantly when getting there in both games ran right at opponants and gave the ball away or just dawdled too long), good assist last night but was that more fluke than judgement (more the former imo given how many other times he got in similar positions and did sweet F.A. wilth it).
Stirling and Sturridge should be much better for the Euro's in 2 years time and Barkley will hopefully be a starter by then also maybe as well as Shaw (Baines did a few good things last night , but a lot of possession was cut back by him and passed two or three yards which does very little indeed)
That's certainly what he thought last year but turned out not to be true. Arsenal met the release clause in the contract, Suarez tried to engineer the move and Liverpool decided they weren't selling anyway. I think later the owner said that release clauses hadn't been tested in court and their legal advice was that they weren't enforceable. Suarez also took legal advice and involved the PFA but he is still at Liverpool so there is probably some merit to their view. Even if they are wrong it would take a long court case to find out, by which time the transfer window is long closed and he has to keep playing for them anyway.
If RM came in with a more sensible offer (£80m+) then it will likely start the whole charade again. The only way I can see them accepting the offer is if they think they will get enough to improve the team.
You were doing well, right up until you said squad of stars.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2005
- Posts
- 6,243
- Location
- North of Watford Gap
Still in a really bad mood this morning. I've seldom been annoyed by England, despite their many failing over the last decade (we at least used to show spirit), but that was crap.
We all know Uruguay have a very good team at the moment, but there was no spark at all yesterday. Same old England, back with our old plodding style, lack of ability to keep possession anywhere other than the back four, no penetration.
But it was Hodgson's decisions which really ground my gears. It was plain to see Barkley was never going to get any change out of that Uruguay team, and true enough, he barely touched the ball. Lallana for Welbeck wasn't too bad, as Welbeck had been anonymous in the second half, and I could see the logic in bringing on Lambert, but even with us chasing the game he was far too isolated up front to be of any use. "We're chasing the game - what to do? I know, we'll bring on 2 attacking central midfielders to go with the one we're already playing there, go extremely narrow and make sure we get no space at all to attack against an organised defence!". ****ing hell.
I still can't comprehend moving the most damaging playing against Italy, Sterling, from his role in the centre. Rooney was better yesterday, but as usual he was dropping too far back and leaving Sturridge isolated, and with only Welbeck pushed forward (Sterling was much deeper on the right), it meant the boring old slow build up we've had for the last decade or so. Sterling might not have been brilliant out wide, but don't move the one player who will scare the **** out of the opposition into a defensive wide midfielder role FFS. It was like a lopsided 442, but with Welbeck much further forward and Rooney dropping back into the centre.
Gerrard was poor on and off the ball, Henderson ineffective, Sturridge wasteful, Baines was poor (stop crossing every single time from deep - get to the byline once in a while and actually stretch teams and mix it up a bit), Jagielka looked nervous and sorely lacked in pace. I thought Cahill and, somewhat worryingly, Johnson were our best players... and in the latter's case, that says it all.
We all know Uruguay have a very good team at the moment, but there was no spark at all yesterday. Same old England, back with our old plodding style, lack of ability to keep possession anywhere other than the back four, no penetration.
But it was Hodgson's decisions which really ground my gears. It was plain to see Barkley was never going to get any change out of that Uruguay team, and true enough, he barely touched the ball. Lallana for Welbeck wasn't too bad, as Welbeck had been anonymous in the second half, and I could see the logic in bringing on Lambert, but even with us chasing the game he was far too isolated up front to be of any use. "We're chasing the game - what to do? I know, we'll bring on 2 attacking central midfielders to go with the one we're already playing there, go extremely narrow and make sure we get no space at all to attack against an organised defence!". ****ing hell.
I still can't comprehend moving the most damaging playing against Italy, Sterling, from his role in the centre. Rooney was better yesterday, but as usual he was dropping too far back and leaving Sturridge isolated, and with only Welbeck pushed forward (Sterling was much deeper on the right), it meant the boring old slow build up we've had for the last decade or so. Sterling might not have been brilliant out wide, but don't move the one player who will scare the **** out of the opposition into a defensive wide midfielder role FFS. It was like a lopsided 442, but with Welbeck much further forward and Rooney dropping back into the centre.
Gerrard was poor on and off the ball, Henderson ineffective, Sturridge wasteful, Baines was poor (stop crossing every single time from deep - get to the byline once in a while and actually stretch teams and mix it up a bit), Jagielka looked nervous and sorely lacked in pace. I thought Cahill and, somewhat worryingly, Johnson were our best players... and in the latter's case, that says it all.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
How many Italians play abroad? That's just making bs excuses. Overhyped players propped up at club level by foreigners who are technically more capable and useful than their lunking uk counterparts.