The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
The group stages are about to wind down, and so far, it's not gone catastrophic for England. A tight draw against France and a goal-filled victory against Sweden, a side we always have trouble against, sees us second in Group D. With our last game being against Ukraine, a team who also managed to beat Sweden, but lost out to the French, most smart money would go on an England victory for the last game. It would be foolish to underestimate the advantage of being a host nation though, as the underdogs Poland have proven in Group A. Of course, the group is that close, we may only need a draw against Ukraine to see us through to the next round. Most England fans will probably be content with this, but if we're in it to win it, competition against the likes of Spain, Italy, Croatia, Germany and Portugal seems a daunting prospect. So what do England need to do to better their chances?
Well, from what I've seen so far, defence against set pieces has been catastrophic. As was pointed out on MOTD the other night, the likes of Joleon Lescott should be in the heart of the defence right in front of Joe Hart when defending set pieces, not smaller and weaker players like Ashley Cole. The fullbacks have been a mixed bag in this tournament for us. Ashley Cole thus far hasn't impressed, particularly against Sweden where he was so far up the pitch, we might as well have had 3 men at the back. Glen Johnson on the other hand has been the pole opposite. At club level, he's often been criticised for being unable to defend, but against Sweden particularly, he was a first class full back. So defensively, set pieces seem to be the biggest threat. Lescott and even Carroll (for corner and free kicks) should be at the heart of the defence ready to outjump the smaller spaniards and the likes. Goalkeeping wise, Joe Hart is always favourite to start. He's a good keeper, and if anyone wants to complain about him, my one question is who would you have in goal instead?
Midfield wise, we haven't had too much trouble, but there are a few problems. The most notable disruption seems to be James Milner on the right wing. For every decent cross he puts in, he over works the ball on numerous occassions instead of playing a ball in. I'd be ordering Milner to keep the passes simple, to stop cutting inside so often and to get a good cross in. Walcott made a show of Milner yesterday, with Jimmy not making any impact all game, only for Theo to show him how it's done in a quarter of the time with a goal and an assist. In my opinion, Walcott deserves the start for the final group game because he looks more than an impact substitute which many are labelling him. On the other wing, Ashley Young has been dangerous at times. against France, he was a great winger, but last night he didn't put up to much of a good show. Thankfully for him, there aren't many claims for the left wing, so he can consider his position in the team safe for now. I've not got too many complaints in central midfield. I think Steven Gerrard has been a great central man and captain, his long ball to Carroll yesterday showing exactly what he's about. If he could connect passes like that more often, we'd be in a more comfortable position as a team for sure. Scott Parker has been one of England's best players in my opinion. I love to watch him play because he's full of passion for his country, and you see it every game. No worries there. Who's Frank Lampard?
Up the top is a very mixed bag. We've got Welbeck who hasn't been brilliant, but scored a promising goal yesterday against the Swedes thanks to his link up play with Walcott. I'd love to see Rooney, Welbeck and Walcott mixing it up at the top of the field against Ukraine. Carroll hasn't had too much of a chance thus far. What we've seen from him so far is his brute strength which drew a few whistles from the referee, and a stunning header near the edge of the box. Carroll does seem to be getting better, and between him and Welbeck, it would be Carroll had Rooney not been returning next game. As it is, I think some Man Utd magic would do England a world of good.
And finally the man who brings them all together Roy Hodgson. Wasn't too sure what to make of the appointment at first. It wasn't too long ago since he was managing my team, Liverpool, and that didn't go well at all. But watching England's friendly games, you could see instantly how the squad had adjusted to Roy's style of defense. England are certainly playing a different style than we've seen in the past. Lets hope we keep him for more than one or two tournaments, and give him a chance to engrave his philosophy on the national team, because different managers resulting in different styles of play certainly isn't helping England's cause.
The most important factor for England is fan support. This is the first time that I've heard football pundits admit that there's no high expectation for England. There's usually a ridiculous build-up of 'this is our year'. I'm sure you remember the 3 Lions song being released with the line '30 years of hurt' in 1996. It's soon to be 46 years of hurt, and they're lyrics that anybody would have difficulty squeezing into a song. I think most fans would be happy to go out to somebody like Spain respectfully in the quarter finals. It's quite a while now since England have won anything or looked like winning anything. Several generations of great players have come through the squad and left with nothing to show for it. Sure we've had some close calls and bad decisions, but 46 years of them? It's not an excuse.
So, no. England don't have a realistic shot at the Euros. We should be through the group stages (touch wood) and depending on who we meet in the quarter finals, the best we could honestly hope for is a spirited semi-final defeat. You get a feeling that one of these years when we least expect it that England are going to make a run for the European Cup or World Cup and catch us all off guard.
Anyway, that's my little analysis of England so far. How do you think England will do? Will they top the group? Will they beat Ukraine? How far will they get? Who have been the key players? Is Roy the right man for the job?
Some, if not all will disagree with me, so leave your opinions below!
Well, from what I've seen so far, defence against set pieces has been catastrophic. As was pointed out on MOTD the other night, the likes of Joleon Lescott should be in the heart of the defence right in front of Joe Hart when defending set pieces, not smaller and weaker players like Ashley Cole. The fullbacks have been a mixed bag in this tournament for us. Ashley Cole thus far hasn't impressed, particularly against Sweden where he was so far up the pitch, we might as well have had 3 men at the back. Glen Johnson on the other hand has been the pole opposite. At club level, he's often been criticised for being unable to defend, but against Sweden particularly, he was a first class full back. So defensively, set pieces seem to be the biggest threat. Lescott and even Carroll (for corner and free kicks) should be at the heart of the defence ready to outjump the smaller spaniards and the likes. Goalkeeping wise, Joe Hart is always favourite to start. He's a good keeper, and if anyone wants to complain about him, my one question is who would you have in goal instead?
Midfield wise, we haven't had too much trouble, but there are a few problems. The most notable disruption seems to be James Milner on the right wing. For every decent cross he puts in, he over works the ball on numerous occassions instead of playing a ball in. I'd be ordering Milner to keep the passes simple, to stop cutting inside so often and to get a good cross in. Walcott made a show of Milner yesterday, with Jimmy not making any impact all game, only for Theo to show him how it's done in a quarter of the time with a goal and an assist. In my opinion, Walcott deserves the start for the final group game because he looks more than an impact substitute which many are labelling him. On the other wing, Ashley Young has been dangerous at times. against France, he was a great winger, but last night he didn't put up to much of a good show. Thankfully for him, there aren't many claims for the left wing, so he can consider his position in the team safe for now. I've not got too many complaints in central midfield. I think Steven Gerrard has been a great central man and captain, his long ball to Carroll yesterday showing exactly what he's about. If he could connect passes like that more often, we'd be in a more comfortable position as a team for sure. Scott Parker has been one of England's best players in my opinion. I love to watch him play because he's full of passion for his country, and you see it every game. No worries there. Who's Frank Lampard?
Up the top is a very mixed bag. We've got Welbeck who hasn't been brilliant, but scored a promising goal yesterday against the Swedes thanks to his link up play with Walcott. I'd love to see Rooney, Welbeck and Walcott mixing it up at the top of the field against Ukraine. Carroll hasn't had too much of a chance thus far. What we've seen from him so far is his brute strength which drew a few whistles from the referee, and a stunning header near the edge of the box. Carroll does seem to be getting better, and between him and Welbeck, it would be Carroll had Rooney not been returning next game. As it is, I think some Man Utd magic would do England a world of good.
And finally the man who brings them all together Roy Hodgson. Wasn't too sure what to make of the appointment at first. It wasn't too long ago since he was managing my team, Liverpool, and that didn't go well at all. But watching England's friendly games, you could see instantly how the squad had adjusted to Roy's style of defense. England are certainly playing a different style than we've seen in the past. Lets hope we keep him for more than one or two tournaments, and give him a chance to engrave his philosophy on the national team, because different managers resulting in different styles of play certainly isn't helping England's cause.
The most important factor for England is fan support. This is the first time that I've heard football pundits admit that there's no high expectation for England. There's usually a ridiculous build-up of 'this is our year'. I'm sure you remember the 3 Lions song being released with the line '30 years of hurt' in 1996. It's soon to be 46 years of hurt, and they're lyrics that anybody would have difficulty squeezing into a song. I think most fans would be happy to go out to somebody like Spain respectfully in the quarter finals. It's quite a while now since England have won anything or looked like winning anything. Several generations of great players have come through the squad and left with nothing to show for it. Sure we've had some close calls and bad decisions, but 46 years of them? It's not an excuse.
So, no. England don't have a realistic shot at the Euros. We should be through the group stages (touch wood) and depending on who we meet in the quarter finals, the best we could honestly hope for is a spirited semi-final defeat. You get a feeling that one of these years when we least expect it that England are going to make a run for the European Cup or World Cup and catch us all off guard.
Anyway, that's my little analysis of England so far. How do you think England will do? Will they top the group? Will they beat Ukraine? How far will they get? Who have been the key players? Is Roy the right man for the job?
Some, if not all will disagree with me, so leave your opinions below!
Page:
HighflyerVII wrote:
Now here's a question: Where do we go from here?
Whose 'we' ... I'm Irish and 'we' went first haha :ŹD
But, being serious, where do they go ... look at these stats:
Pirlo was by far the game's leading passer with 131 passes. England's highest passer was Ashley Cole with 44
13 of Italy's 14 players used had a pass completion rate of 80% or above, while England had only five players in that category
Italy had 39 shots to England's 13, with 12 shots on target to four
According to Uefa, Pirlo ran 11.58 kilometres, more than any England player. Gerrard covered 11.26 km
England managed only 2.75 shots on target per game in Euro 2012; only Ukraine, Greece & Republic of Ireland produced fewer
England have only won one of eight penalty shoot-outs in all competitions
And maybe, I'll add this from Michael Owen:
"We played to our strengths but are just not quite good enough. The answer has to be to start coaching our youngsters a different brand of football."
About time!!!!!!
Now here's a question: Where do we go from here?
Whose 'we' ... I'm Irish and 'we' went first haha :ŹD
But, being serious, where do they go ... look at these stats:
Pirlo was by far the game's leading passer with 131 passes. England's highest passer was Ashley Cole with 44
13 of Italy's 14 players used had a pass completion rate of 80% or above, while England had only five players in that category
Italy had 39 shots to England's 13, with 12 shots on target to four
According to Uefa, Pirlo ran 11.58 kilometres, more than any England player. Gerrard covered 11.26 km
England managed only 2.75 shots on target per game in Euro 2012; only Ukraine, Greece & Republic of Ireland produced fewer
England have only won one of eight penalty shoot-outs in all competitions
And maybe, I'll add this from Michael Owen:
"We played to our strengths but are just not quite good enough. The answer has to be to start coaching our youngsters a different brand of football."
About time!!!!!!
Now here's a question: Where do we go from here?
The only reasoning seems to be a natural upbringing in a particular country. It's strange how the best Spanish players always play fast free-flowing football, Italians like to play it slow but with purpose. English players like to be the underdog and to underachieve, yet they show a tremendous amount of spirit. Strange how where you're raised depicts how your style develops.
Isn't it now about time that 'England' accepted that their national football team have never had the capabilities to be a 'recognized and revered' force in World Football?
The World Cup win in 1966 was by more luck than skill and what else of any note since then can be used to indicate a national team capable of taking on the world and winning tournaments on a regular basis?
In the present situation, England won their qualifying group for Euro 2012 - only because they were collectively slightly better than average and not because they were potential world beaters, which England have never been!
It's a shame that so many 'misguided souls' put so much effort into supporting a national team but who wouldn't do the same if the team were 15th in League One ... (which is about where they are now!)
I know this is harsh and I do know that the players are:
a. very highly paid
b. very skilled
c. they've all had a very hard and long season
d. they've not had a holiday yet
but doesn't the same apply to other national teams?
The World Cup win in 1966 was by more luck than skill and what else of any note since then can be used to indicate a national team capable of taking on the world and winning tournaments on a regular basis?
In the present situation, England won their qualifying group for Euro 2012 - only because they were collectively slightly better than average and not because they were potential world beaters, which England have never been!
It's a shame that so many 'misguided souls' put so much effort into supporting a national team but who wouldn't do the same if the team were 15th in League One ... (which is about where they are now!)
I know this is harsh and I do know that the players are:
a. very highly paid
b. very skilled
c. they've all had a very hard and long season
d. they've not had a holiday yet
but doesn't the same apply to other national teams?
Well at least we got the answer to the original question. England knocked out in a penalty shootout by Italy. We wouldn't have made it passed Germany anyway.
Don't think anybody can say that we deserved to get through. Italy were so much more dominant, and it's unbelievable that they didn't score in 2 hours of football.
Impressed with some England players, notably Gerrard, who is the player of the tournament for us. Johnson has played very well, as have both Lescott and Terry. Milner, Young and Welbeck, well, I've no idea what they did all tournament.
Roy has enforced a philosophy on England in such little time, looks like the right man for the job. Come the World Cup, it's the last roll of the dice for a few key England players potentially. Will be an interesting tournament
Roll on the new premier league season!
Don't think anybody can say that we deserved to get through. Italy were so much more dominant, and it's unbelievable that they didn't score in 2 hours of football.
Impressed with some England players, notably Gerrard, who is the player of the tournament for us. Johnson has played very well, as have both Lescott and Terry. Milner, Young and Welbeck, well, I've no idea what they did all tournament.
Roy has enforced a philosophy on England in such little time, looks like the right man for the job. Come the World Cup, it's the last roll of the dice for a few key England players potentially. Will be an interesting tournament
Roll on the new premier league season!
dav2612 wrote:
At what point was it offside? Only going by the footage on the BBC website and all looking onside to me.
But after the Lampard goal that wasn't in world cup I guess England were due one back... might want to have saved that for the knock out stages though.
Yeh as Nin said, the initial pass, he's a mile off. Linesman didn't see it. Essentially, he got 2 decisions wrong in the space of 5 seconds. Sian Massey would've seen it...
*EDIT* Clicky Linky
At what point was it offside? Only going by the footage on the BBC website and all looking onside to me.
But after the Lampard goal that wasn't in world cup I guess England were due one back... might want to have saved that for the knock out stages though.
Yeh as Nin said, the initial pass, he's a mile off. Linesman didn't see it. Essentially, he got 2 decisions wrong in the space of 5 seconds. Sian Massey would've seen it...
*EDIT* Clicky Linky
dav2612 wrote:
At what point was it offside? Only going by the footage on the BBC website and all looking onside to me.
The pass from the back, the guy was clearly offside.
I think England would have had a better chance of getting to the final if they've finished 2nd in the group. Easier to get past Spain and Portugal than Italy and Germany I think.
At what point was it offside? Only going by the footage on the BBC website and all looking onside to me.
The pass from the back, the guy was clearly offside.
I think England would have had a better chance of getting to the final if they've finished 2nd in the group. Easier to get past Spain and Portugal than Italy and Germany I think.
At what point was it offside? Only going by the footage on the BBC website and all looking onside to me.
But after the Lampard goal that wasn't in world cup I guess England were due one back... might want to have saved that for the knock out stages though.
But after the Lampard goal that wasn't in world cup I guess England were due one back... might want to have saved that for the knock out stages though.
dav2612 wrote:
I see having an official at the goal line doesn't make much difference.
It did go in, but seeing as it was miles offside, it was probably the right decision overall. You're right though, it doesn't matter how many officials there are. I have difficulty telling if it's a goal in slow motion. Lord knows how the officials can make the correct call at full speed!
I see having an official at the goal line doesn't make much difference.
It did go in, but seeing as it was miles offside, it was probably the right decision overall. You're right though, it doesn't matter how many officials there are. I have difficulty telling if it's a goal in slow motion. Lord knows how the officials can make the correct call at full speed!
I see having an official at the goal line doesn't make much difference.
Page: