• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Group G - Belgium, Panama, Tunisia, England

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Really wished Southgate would've had a proper whinge at that now we've won and it doesn't seen like sour grapes.

I don't think theirs was a pen, but if he's given that then both had to be stonewallers with VAR.

Tunisia were fecking dog though, weren't they? Scary we took so long to break them down. Our lack of urgency was a wee bit frustrating to an old schooler like me. I'm not advocating lumping it up at any given opportunity, but it's worth noting both goals came from crosses into the box.

We're not Spain and there's no shame in playing to our strengths.
Their game plan reminded me of 90% of the teams that visited Prenton Park in the last three years of purgatory. I can think of no greater insult. Horrible and cynical, and got what they deserved in the end.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Still trying to figure out how there was only 3 minutes stoppage time in the first half, when the Tunisian 'keeper spent at least 5 minutes on the deck.
Not to mention the near minute stoppage in time added on for the player who got hit by the ball on his back and looked like he needed a HIA that lead to an extra 6 seconds...
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Sterling is a better player than Rashford but we can’t rely on him to score. That’s my basic take, I’m tired
I find it weird that Rashford for Sterling has become a thing. I absolutely love Rashford but England fans seem to think he’s something he’s not. Sterling links up better, scores far more goals, and is much more consistent.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
I find it weird that Rashford for Sterling has become a thing. I absolutely love Rashford but England fans seem to think he’s something he’s not. Sterling links up better, scores far more goals, and is much more consistent.
You'll be far more aware of Rashford's club performances than I am, which means I shouldn't be disagreeing with you. But I'll have a go anyway.
Ultimately I'm judging Sterling by what he does for England rather than what he does for City. Which iirc is 2 goals in 38 games, no goals in recent memory and not much in the way of assists. In terms of link up play, quite a lot of running up blind alleys and/or losing possession with a misplaced pass. Rashford isn't perfect and hopefully isn't the finished article, but I think his performances for the national team have been more impressive. Maybe Sterling is a football version of Hick or Ramprakash. Great at club level but weak between the ears at international level. Perhaps Rashford is the opposite, and others can decide how much that owes to more sympathetic handling by his national manager than his club one.
 
Last edited:

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
You'll be far more aware of Rashford's club performances than I am, which means I shouldn't be disagreeing with you. But I'll have a go anyway.
Ultimately I'm judging Sterling by what he does for England rather than what he does for City. Which iirc is 2 gals in 38 games, no goals in recent memory and not much in the way of assists. In terms of link up play, quite a lot of running up blind alleys and/or losing possession with a misplaced pass. Rashford isn't perfect and hopefully isn't the finished article, but I think his performances for the national team have been more impressive. Maybe Sterling is a football version of Hick or Ramprakash. Great at club level but weak between the ears at international level. Perhaps Rashford is the opposite, and others can decide how much that owes to more sympathetic handling by his national manager than his club one.
Yeah I mean this definitely could be true. He'd hardly be the first player to be better for club than country, and given the level of abuse he gets it wouldn't be too surprising.

I think it's just too early to come to that kind of conclusion. The thing people are missing is that he's properly world-class for City. His performances this season would put him in the top ten wide players in the world. He's not Neymar/Messi/Salah level, but he's outperforming guys like Hazard, Mané, and Sanchez. Hazard has been poor for Belgium too, and over a much longer period of time. But if they left him out against England you'd still be laughing, and rightly so.

Rashford is a different player, and at a much earlier stage of his career. He's very direct, quick, and skillful, which makes him great to watch, and he could go on to be an incredible player. Compared to Sterling, he needs space to operate in. Sterling's close control and quick feet mean he can play in very tight spaces, which Guardiola loves. Sterling's positional sense is miles better too. That's why Rashford has a much better shot but scores far fewer goals. When you see Sterling miss a rebound five yards out it's tempting to think Rashford would've scored it, but he almost definitely wouldn't have been there. He won't be available for the pass as often either, so the team might look less cohesive with him in it. He's still very good, and if he does come in I'd expect him to do well. But he's nowhere near Sterling's level, not yet anyway.
 

S.Kennedy

International Vice-Captain
If you added up the true play time on most of these games, and not merely the time players spend rolling on the ground in their death throe, auditioning for the role of a Hollywood redshirt, you'd probably find you are watching about sixty minutes of bona fide football (including the extra time).
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
I think Rashford's a better player than Sterling.

Sterling is benefitting from having a better coach at club level.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Having said that, at the moment I think Rashford is the perfect bench option. A fresh player who's quick and direct is a defence's worst nightmare.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Not entirely relevant, but we were chatting at work about which English player from the last 30 years would most improve the current side. Our resident Leeds Utd fan reckoned David Batty, but I don't think he was being 100% serious. Hope not, anyway. Someone else reckoned Gascoigne. I thought Scholes would be a perfect fit in this England side.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Rio Ferdinand at the back?
Yes, Rio would be an upgrade on Stones.

My preference for Scholes is that he'd be a far more reliable goal scoring option playing behind Kane than anyone from the current lineup, which would hugely add value to the side. Other players, such as Ferdinand, may well be better than current incumbents, but would they add as much value to what we already have? Anyway, those were my thoughts during a quiet moment at work.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Prime Rooney < Average Scholes
Nah. Young Rooney next to Kane would be immense. 04-08 he was as good as any English player I’ve ever seen.

Prime Owen was great too.

I’d go Gascoigne or Ferdinand though probably. Scholes was excellent but, without wishing to open past debates, Gascoigne and Gerrard both better for me.
 

flibbertyjibber

Request Your Custom Title Now!
You'll be far more aware of Rashford's club performances than I am, which means I shouldn't be disagreeing with you. But I'll have a go anyway.
Ultimately I'm judging Sterling by what he does for England rather than what he does for City. Which iirc is 2 goals in 38 games, no goals in recent memory and not much in the way of assists. In terms of link up play, quite a lot of running up blind alleys and/or losing possession with a misplaced pass. Rashford isn't perfect and hopefully isn't the finished article, but I think his performances for the national team have been more impressive. Maybe Sterling is a football version of Hick or Ramprakash. Great at club level but weak between the ears at international level. Perhaps Rashford is the opposite, and others can decide how much that owes to more sympathetic handling by his national manager than his club one.
So Sterling is a modern day John Barnes then.
 

Top