The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
"You've got to really take your hat off to the tactical approach of Northern Ireland coming in this game" says Graham Le Saux. Yeah, what a genius move it was to lob everybody behind the ball for the first half and hope in the second. Note: I'm not knocking the NI performance, but the tactics really were exactly what you would have predicted.
But Sven, one of that game's well-respected managers, can do worse, oh yes. Not only did we have to continue with the nonsensical 4-5-1 rubbish (we're playing Northern Ireland ffs, a team we should be attacking for 90% of the match, on an extremely narrow pitch. whywhywhwyhwy?) but then, at the end of the first half when bloody Shrek-fase decides to act like a retarded monkey why on earth didn't Sven pull him off straight away? Rooney may be almost completely devoid of common sense, but A) he was playing greedily, and poorly, and B) he's never going to learn that he can't act like an idiot when he wants to unless you show him a lesson.
And then, after NI score and you start to think things couldn't get any worse, that complete buffoon of a manger takes off the player with the best long range shot on the pitch and replaces him with a holding midfielder. There's 15 minutes on the clock, you're 1 - 0 down to a team you shouldn't be, and you bring on bloody Owen Hargreaves. An out and out midfield scrapper. Absolutely illogical.
Nice one, you passion-less Swedish hove.
But Sven, one of that game's well-respected managers, can do worse, oh yes. Not only did we have to continue with the nonsensical 4-5-1 rubbish (we're playing Northern Ireland ffs, a team we should be attacking for 90% of the match, on an extremely narrow pitch. whywhywhwyhwy?) but then, at the end of the first half when bloody Shrek-fase decides to act like a retarded monkey why on earth didn't Sven pull him off straight away? Rooney may be almost completely devoid of common sense, but A) he was playing greedily, and poorly, and B) he's never going to learn that he can't act like an idiot when he wants to unless you show him a lesson.
And then, after NI score and you start to think things couldn't get any worse, that complete buffoon of a manger takes off the player with the best long range shot on the pitch and replaces him with a holding midfielder. There's 15 minutes on the clock, you're 1 - 0 down to a team you shouldn't be, and you bring on bloody Owen Hargreaves. An out and out midfield scrapper. Absolutely illogical.
Nice one, you passion-less Swedish hove.
Page:
Meka Dragon wrote:
> Seriously though, does no one agree that we missed Gary Neville
> yesterday? If he was in the positions Luke Young got into, he would
> have delivered balls into the box that would have troubled the
> defence.
Yeh I agree to a certain extent Meka but to be honest it still doesn't excuse Englands defeat. There were enough quality players out on that pitch to get the job done.
The main problem lies with the tactics, what on earth did Hargreaves bring to the team when he was brought on? Gerrard and Rooney strung out as wingers? Becks played well, however with him playing 40 yard balls over the top to bring the wingbacks into play meant Lampard and Gerrard were rarely used to their strengths. It's a joke really.
When we come up against British opposition we should play the traditional English way - 4-4-2 - up and at them with two out and out wingers/fullbacks putting in quality crosses (this where I agree with you about Gaz Nev)
Sven tried to play like a 'european team' against an NI and they were all over us and rushed England into making errors with their slow passing and long balls.
> Seriously though, does no one agree that we missed Gary Neville
> yesterday? If he was in the positions Luke Young got into, he would
> have delivered balls into the box that would have troubled the
> defence.
Yeh I agree to a certain extent Meka but to be honest it still doesn't excuse Englands defeat. There were enough quality players out on that pitch to get the job done.
The main problem lies with the tactics, what on earth did Hargreaves bring to the team when he was brought on? Gerrard and Rooney strung out as wingers? Becks played well, however with him playing 40 yard balls over the top to bring the wingbacks into play meant Lampard and Gerrard were rarely used to their strengths. It's a joke really.
When we come up against British opposition we should play the traditional English way - 4-4-2 - up and at them with two out and out wingers/fullbacks putting in quality crosses (this where I agree with you about Gaz Nev)
Sven tried to play like a 'european team' against an NI and they were all over us and rushed England into making errors with their slow passing and long balls.
Hargreves = fresh legs
EDIT: It's Neo I was agreeing with.
Totally agree, wasn't trying to make excuses, I just think Gary deserves more credit than he gets.
We need to be able to break down teams that play defensively - especially if we're top seeds in a qualifying group, as every team will see how they can be successful, and play defensively against us.
Sven spends an awful lot of time at matches matching OUR players, but do you think he studies the opposition enough? I don't recall a time when England have changed focus agaisnt a particular team, we play the same way every game, until the recent pointelss formation change. It's not like Sven has thought that a team's full backs are slow, so use pacey wingers - or their defenders are good in the air, so play it along the ground. For 4 million a year you'd think he'd know everything about every player we play against. Christ, I'd watch video's of Azerbaijan for half that. Just because they're ranked lowly, doesn't mean we can play without a strategy.
Totally agree, wasn't trying to make excuses, I just think Gary deserves more credit than he gets.
We need to be able to break down teams that play defensively - especially if we're top seeds in a qualifying group, as every team will see how they can be successful, and play defensively against us.
Sven spends an awful lot of time at matches matching OUR players, but do you think he studies the opposition enough? I don't recall a time when England have changed focus agaisnt a particular team, we play the same way every game, until the recent pointelss formation change. It's not like Sven has thought that a team's full backs are slow, so use pacey wingers - or their defenders are good in the air, so play it along the ground. For 4 million a year you'd think he'd know everything about every player we play against. Christ, I'd watch video's of Azerbaijan for half that. Just because they're ranked lowly, doesn't mean we can play without a strategy.
Dringo wrote:
> Hargreves = fresh legs
Yeah, but not particularly attacking ones.
> Hargreves = fresh legs
Yeah, but not particularly attacking ones.
No but Sven put him on because he is was fresh and rareing to go no doubt.
Indeed. And he suceeded in gift-wrapping and hand-delivering NIR with two opportunities to kill the game off. Excellent. Well done that man. Thank god we got those tired and no doubt mistake ridden legs off the pitch, it could've been embarrassing otherwise!
So Sven put him on because he was fresh and raring to go? He could have plucked anyone out of the crowd wearing an England shirt then if that's all the criteria needed, probably would do a better job than Hargreaves actually.
Yup i agree on the Neville thing as well, that's what made Beckham so dangerous when he decided to stay on the right wing in games, Neville would provide the option on the overlap allowing Beckham time to deliver a cross himself or let the Gorgeous one cross it in. While i like Young and think he's got a great future he didn't do that nearly enough in support of SWP, granted he didn't get much chance though what with the long balls
Yup i agree on the Neville thing as well, that's what made Beckham so dangerous when he decided to stay on the right wing in games, Neville would provide the option on the overlap allowing Beckham time to deliver a cross himself or let the Gorgeous one cross it in. While i like Young and think he's got a great future he didn't do that nearly enough in support of SWP, granted he didn't get much chance though what with the long balls
I'd rather have Defoe upfront with Owen, I hate shrek-boy so much. If we make it to the WC not only will I be suprised, i'll expect shrek-boy to loose his temper and hit the ref.
RastaBillySkank wrote:
> Mav wrote:
> Dringo wrote:
> SWP should have stayed on.
>
> He wasn't using the ball intelligently.
>
> Who was? Beckham just about. That's more or less it.
Not the point.
He can run around at the speed of light for all I care, but if he's just going to run into people and not look up then his efforts are irrelevant.
Joe Cole attempted a more creative approach in-between clumsy stepovers, but didn't seem to have a real game plan.
At the end of the day though, Sven's at fault, not the players.
> Mav wrote:
> Dringo wrote:
> SWP should have stayed on.
>
> He wasn't using the ball intelligently.
>
> Who was? Beckham just about. That's more or less it.
Not the point.
He can run around at the speed of light for all I care, but if he's just going to run into people and not look up then his efforts are irrelevant.
Joe Cole attempted a more creative approach in-between clumsy stepovers, but didn't seem to have a real game plan.
At the end of the day though, Sven's at fault, not the players.
Mozzy wrote:
> I'd rather have Defoe upfront with Owen, I hate shrek-boy so much. If
> we make it to the WC not only will I be suprised, i'll expect
> shrek-boy to loose his temper and hit the ref.
"Shrek-boy" is the best forward in the world. Why do you hate him?
> I'd rather have Defoe upfront with Owen, I hate shrek-boy so much. If
> we make it to the WC not only will I be suprised, i'll expect
> shrek-boy to loose his temper and hit the ref.
"Shrek-boy" is the best forward in the world. Why do you hate him?
Page: