Round 16 and Beyond

[FaaipDeOiad]

England have a good set of players, but a mediocre team. Great players /= great team.

That's fairly true, but they've only played three matches. It may be that the strength of the team will become apparent later in the tournament. Up until now, England look a long way short of world cup winners. In fact, I'd have expected them to lose to Germany comfortably if they played the same way against them. They should get past Ecuador though.

 

[BoyBrumby]

That's fairly true, but they've only played three matches. It may be that the strength of the team will become apparent later in the tournament. Up until now, England look a long way short of world cup winners. In fact, I'd have expected them to lose to Germany comfortably if they played the same way against them. They should get past Ecuador though.

Bloody should do. Their keeper looks incredibly dodgy & our record against South American teams not called Brazil or Argentina is good.

It's a truism, but I think stands repeating here: the best 11 players don't necessarily make the best team. No-one would claim Hargreaves to be superior to Stevie G or Fat Frank, but he does give us better depth. Sweden hardly created anything except via dead balls (& the blame there goes to messers Beckham, Campbell & Robinson).

In 1966 Sir Alfred left out cultured players of the ilk of Ian Callaghan & George Eastham to play the limited but, er, robust Nobby Stiles. &, more famously, Jimmy Greaves (44 goals in 57 caps) gave way to the apparently inferior Geoff Hurst.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Agreed about Hargreaves. After watching him last night, all the merciless criticism seems pretty ridiculous. He played an excellent game, certainly far better than Lampard has in any of the matches.

The question is, if Hargreaves comes in, who goes out? Lampard has been terribly wasteful with his chances, but at least he's getting chances, and Gerrard has scored twice but hasn't had a huge impact aside from that. Beckham has been poor most of the time, but is the captain and won't be dropped, while Cole has been probably England's best player over the three games.

Is there any chance of leaving Crouch out and playing five midfielders? Might leave too much for Rooney to do, but England have plenty of midfielders who like to get forward and help out, so it shouldn't be too bad.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Lampard for mine. Hasn't found his range all tournament. Generally Stevie G has been sitting deepest of the two, but has still shown a better eye for goal when he has got forward.

If we played five in midfield I don't think we could do it with Rooney; his best postion is "in the hole", just behind the main striker. &, obv, there's zero chance of leaving him out, fitness permitting.

 

[aussie]

Lampard for mine. Hasn't found his range all tournament. Generally Stevie G has been sitting deepest of the two, but has still shown a better eye for goal when he has got forward.

thats the thing Lampard even though he hasn't found his range can easy get it right in the coming matches, so i'd keep faith in him

If we played five in midfield I don't think we could do it with Rooney; his best postion is "in the hole", just behind the main striker. &, obv, there's zero chance of leaving him out, fitness permitting.

Rooney's best position may be in the whole, but if we weigh in all the options that we have now (no offence to Crouch who has been fairly good) i think England should risk playing role as the main striker & Gerrard in the hole, so that Gerrard, Lampard & Hargreaves can play.

 

[aussie]

at the moment 6 more sides will qualify for the round of 16, i'll make a guess of who i think it will be:

1.Ghana
2.Italy
3.Australia
4.Korea Republic
5.France
6.Ukraine

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I think France and Switzerland is probably more likely, from that group. Otherwise I agree.

 

[Blaze]

Where is this area of unbridled optimism then, since there's a fair number of English people on here, most of whom have never said that?

I am talking about people outside of the internet..

 

[Craig]

Lampard for mine. Hasn't found his range all tournament. Generally Stevie G has been sitting deepest of the two, but has still shown a better eye for goal when he has got forward.

If we played five in midfield I don't think we could do it with Rooney; his best postion is "in the hole", just behind the main striker. &, obv, there's zero chance of leaving him out, fitness permitting.

Well how about the "Christmas tree" formation with Crouch as the lone striker and the one of the men behind him is Rooney and Joe Cole also playing behind Crouch, but Rooney could also push forward and Cole could drop back and give you the standard 4-4-2 formation as well.

That could work?

Although now he may be forced to use Walcott more often, see Sven there might be a reason why you should use him more, or have taken a moire 'established' striker/forward instead.

I was thinking:

---------- Beckham (c) ---------- Gerrard ----------- Lampard -----------------------

--------------------------- Rooney ------------------- J. Cole --------------------------------

------------------------------------------- Crouch -------------------------------------

Lampard probably should be on the bench, but I will be surprised if he is not starting against Ecuador.

 

[GIMH]

Rooney playing as lone striker would be a bit daft IMO, but Sven tied his hands behind his back by picking just one out and out striker, Crouch is a target man while Rooney and Walcott are more the second striker sort of player. So really, we need to play Crouch and Rooney, but we could also do with Haregreaves, Gerrard and Lampard all playing. The most important thing for Sven to realise is that Steven Gerrard is better than Frank Lampard in every way, and if he isn't going to play both, Gerrard must play. We will not get anywhere without gerrard.

 

[marc71178]

I think Sven has made that clear, hence his resting Gerrard against Sweden.

It's a difficult choice between 442 and 451 - I'm not sure which camp I fall into to be honest, how about 352?!

 

[GIMH]

In an ideal world 3-5-2 would suit us well, but it's a bit late ot be playing with new formations.

Plus it would probably mean Beckham playing at wing-back, which I'm not sure I would like.

 

[luckyeddie]

I am talking about people outside of the internet..

Expats are likely to give you a glowingly false impression, I should imagine.

Here at Ground Zero much of the optimism to which you refer dissipated with a loud 'Pop' the day Rooney got injured. The rest went with a feeble balloon-emptying squeak the day the squad was announced.

I should imagine that Owen's departure has caused people to actually choke on the shredded bits of balloon now.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Playing any formation bar 4-4-2 against Ecuador just gives Ecuador a much greater chance of pulling off a 1-0 type victory. England have to impose their style of play on teams and play to their own strengths, it's no good playing to their weaknesses - you won't win the World Cup consistently playing rubbish unless you're Germany.

Owen had been fairly rubbish anyway, whilst Crouch had been better and Rooney is Rooney - I don't see why all of a sudden England should switch to 1 up front. Hargreaves had one decent game, but gives away too many needless free kicks which would cost England sooner or later.

 

[luckyeddie]

In an ideal world 3-5-2 would suit us well, but it's a bit late ot be playing with new formations.

Plus it would probably mean Beckham playing at wing-back, which I'm not sure I would like.

It'd mean bringing Mark Wright coming out of retirement

(last decent English 'libero' when we played 3 at the back)

 

[GIMH]

**** Mark Wright, the man's a scumbag

 

[Pedro Delgado]

**** Mark Wright, the man's a scumbag

You're as bad as me with LFC.

 

[luckyeddie]

You're as bad as me with LFC.

Or me with Dirtyleeds

 

[GIMH]

LOL I do go on about it everytime his name comes up

I'd advise you not to get me going on Bolton Wanderers. Or Allan Gunn. or Mark Bosnich.

 

[aussie]

I think France and Switzerland is probably more likely, from that group. Otherwise I agree.

looking at the Koreans i'm pretty sure they will win that group, dont think the swiss even though are group leaders currently will beat them & even though France have been relatively poor i'd back them to beat Togo.