Viewing Thread:
"Englands Performence"

England...Today, i witnessed terrible play. Missing Rooney? Maybe, but it's not a one man team. The 'team' effort was abismal. We couldn't string a pass together, let alone a shot. Our one goal came from a penalty!

I don't know what is wrong and certainly cannot pin-point it, but if we hope to qualify for the world cup and get in the finals, we need to improve. And fast.

England's performance was competant just didn't have an attacking bite. I hope we get it for the big games.

Still lot to hope for in the world cup.

Our team deserved a 5. No-body played better than that. Brazils team is looking ferocious and other countries teams, such as Northern Ireland, France and Portugal have stepped their game up and are playing their best. I can't put my finger on it, i wish i could, but if Sven can't then what can i do. There is something SERIOUSLY wrong with our squad. Crouch did play better than i've seen him in other games, but he's not AT ALL England quality. His height isn't an advantage. He's too shy on the ball. Doesn't run at pace and use any strength.

What we need is another Rooney and maybe a stronger defence. As the commentators said, we have 4 men on 1 attacker at one point, and they still managed a nice swerving shot on our goal. Owen as i have said, is getting away with too little. I know he wasn't provided with anything due to our poor performence in midfield, but i didn't hear his name during the 90mins. At one point, we had all 10 men (once Beckham had been sent off) in our 6 yard box! We were outplayed and were lucky to scrape the 1-0 lead. Something needs to be done. We need to improve, and fast. The actual world cup is not so far away. I think we played better football in 2002. Micheal Owen did anyway...

Ahaha, the player ratings in the News of the World are hilarious. Everybody got a 7 out of 10 (Crouch?!) with the exceptions of Cole and Young on 6 (and I thought both of them played quite well), Beckham on 5 (harsh considering the sending off wasn't his fault), and Gerrard on 8 (played well but 8 seems a little over the top perhaps).

Stryke wrote:
> "Target man"
> "Good in the air"
>
> Stuff like that annoys me. England and Liverpool don't need an excuse
> to punt long balls into the area. They've done just fine with running
> strikers.

and lets not forget, "hes got a good touch for a big man"...poor excuse to play him!

There was also the through-ball he played to Young - had his touch have been left heavy, he would ha ve been in agood position to get a shot in.

When he played nearer the midfield he had a few effective flick-ons, particularly in Cole's direction.

I don't think Crouch had a bad game at all. Owen played worse, with his first touch letting him down on a couple of occasions, and a few bad decisions.

At least Gerrard and Lampard were massively improved over the last game, but that wouldn't have been difficult...

Foreman wrote:
> So if the Lampard shot which Crouch laid of to him went in and the
> Owen chance went in you'd still be saying the same?

Are you refering to the Owen header chance? Owen would have probably had more chance of getting that if Crouch hadn't flicked it on because it ended up at a nasty height for Owen to get to. Then again, it may have gone too high without Crouch but who knows?

> So you agree he had an average game and not a bad game?

No, he didn't do enough for it to be an average game. He never at any point really looked like scoring. That's bad news when he's a striker.

JFH wrote:
> Foreman wrote:
> He had an average game.
>
> But he didn't do anything.
>
> At all.

So if the Lampard shot which Crouch laid of to him went in and the Owen chance went in you'd still be saying the same?

So you agree he had an average game and not a bad game?

Foreman wrote:
> He had an average game.

But he didn't do anything.

At all.

JFH wrote:
> Very true, but not every player in the world is playing for their
> country when there's a better alternative, in this case it's Defoe,
> or Bent, or Vassel, or Heskey, or Shearer, or Linekar, or my gran.

I totally agree, but again it's gone off subject. What have those players got to do with his performance today?

I would of played Bent and Owen up front today as Bent is on form. But fact of the matter is, is that Crouch played and did not have a bad game. He had an average game.

And so am I. He didn't have a good game. If Bent/Defoe had been playing, they'd have got on to the end of many of Joe Cole's balls.

He flicked on maybe 2 balls. Maximum. That's all he's good for.