- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What Do You Think Could Be Done For England's Offense?
Posted on 7/1/16 at 2:02 am to John Keating
Posted on 7/1/16 at 2:02 am to John Keating
The current problem is mix of all kind of things. System and player selection being the major two.
In qualifying England went 10 for 10 yet they Roy did not have a set system in place all the back to Euro 2012. Only bringing one winger was huge mistake especially if you are banking on Sterling to be the one to make an impact. He is way to inconsistent. The talent is there but a lot of it was just neglected or left at home b/c Roy played favorites.
Now as for on a tactical level. England can not play this slow build up and playing diagonal balls over and over. They just don't have the players suited for this style. England needs to go to a more solid in the back and in the middle type of team that uses its wide players to hit you on a quick counter attack. But if you don't selected proper wide players its not going to work. Sterling far to often for being as fast as he is, often slows down play with the ball at his feet, then tries to take players on directly instead of using his speed to blow right past them. Rashford even though he isn't a winger used his pace to just say frick it and try and beat his man down the line. England has a good crop of young wide players in the youth system that also are able to do this. Hell they should have brought Antonio. A 4-4-2 back to the old school would suit this team or a 4-2-3-1.
4-3-3 was a huge mistake b/c none of the midfielder who played could make it work vs a decent team.
In qualifying England went 10 for 10 yet they Roy did not have a set system in place all the back to Euro 2012. Only bringing one winger was huge mistake especially if you are banking on Sterling to be the one to make an impact. He is way to inconsistent. The talent is there but a lot of it was just neglected or left at home b/c Roy played favorites.
Now as for on a tactical level. England can not play this slow build up and playing diagonal balls over and over. They just don't have the players suited for this style. England needs to go to a more solid in the back and in the middle type of team that uses its wide players to hit you on a quick counter attack. But if you don't selected proper wide players its not going to work. Sterling far to often for being as fast as he is, often slows down play with the ball at his feet, then tries to take players on directly instead of using his speed to blow right past them. Rashford even though he isn't a winger used his pace to just say frick it and try and beat his man down the line. England has a good crop of young wide players in the youth system that also are able to do this. Hell they should have brought Antonio. A 4-4-2 back to the old school would suit this team or a 4-2-3-1.
4-3-3 was a huge mistake b/c none of the midfielder who played could make it work vs a decent team.
3
Posted on 7/1/16 at 2:14 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
On the young players coming through into the England side, Carragher wrote: 'We think we are making them men but actually we are creating babies. Life has been too easy. They have been pampered from a young age, had money thrown at them and, when things have gone wrong, they have been told it is never their fault.'
quote:
I call them the Academy Generation because they have come through in an era when footballers have never had more time being coached.
quote:
Giggs, asked for his thoughts on England as part of his role as a pundit with ITV, believes there is something fundamentally wrong with the English system which is holding them back from reaching the latter stages at major tournaments.
Posted on 7/1/16 at 2:42 am to StraightCashHomey21
That cuts close to the bone.
Posted on 7/1/16 at 6:34 am to StraightCashHomey21
Also, England have fullbacks who are good at getting forward, and no wingers, playing 433 is stupid with that personnel.
Posted on 7/1/16 at 7:02 am to John Keating
I think it was one of the ESPN commentators, but basically he said, with Germany, you can see from watching them, their passing chart, their movement, that they have a system and a way of breaking people down that they ahve worked on. That they know where people should be going at times.
With England, there is no system, no design to anything they are doing. Its basically, you guys are pretty much our most talented group, go out there and do your thing.
I thought it was pretty spot on.
With England, there is no system, no design to anything they are doing. Its basically, you guys are pretty much our most talented group, go out there and do your thing.
I thought it was pretty spot on.
This post was edited on 7/1/16 at 7:09 am
Posted on 7/1/16 at 7:07 am to StraightCashHomey21
I've said before on here, but I'll reiterate it. I think English players should take their talents to the continent, notwithstanding. The English press and pundits love to whine about the lack of opportunities for young English players, because of the influx of foreigners. Maybe, the English could take German and Spanish players as an example. When a German or Spanish player can't find a club suitable to his talents, he doesn't just move down a division or transfer to another middling or relegation threatened club. He goes abroad. Toni Kroos didn't like his situation at Bayern, so he left to Real Madrid. Spanish players ply their trade all over the continent. Even Italian players are more likely to accept a transfer abroad than their English counterparts.
Look at what moving to Sporting Lisbon at a young age did for Eric Dier. He is probably England's brightest talent, in part because he cut his chops in a foreign country, fighting for playing time, instead of doing the normal English thing and going out on loan to a Championship or League 1 team.
English players used to go abroad semi-frequently. Gary Lineker played for Barcelona. Gacoigne played for Lazio. Hell even Joey Barton played fairly regularly for a top club like Marseille, when he easily could have transferred from QPR to another relegation-doomed club like Hull.
Look at what moving to Sporting Lisbon at a young age did for Eric Dier. He is probably England's brightest talent, in part because he cut his chops in a foreign country, fighting for playing time, instead of doing the normal English thing and going out on loan to a Championship or League 1 team.
English players used to go abroad semi-frequently. Gary Lineker played for Barcelona. Gacoigne played for Lazio. Hell even Joey Barton played fairly regularly for a top club like Marseille, when he easily could have transferred from QPR to another relegation-doomed club like Hull.
This post was edited on 7/1/16 at 7:09 am
Posted on 7/1/16 at 7:15 am to thenry712
The whole not playing abroad thing will always hurt them. A major reason players don't do it is b/c they will not get national team call up. Same with Rugby and Cricket. Its a stupid English mentality, and it will hold them back.
Posted on 7/1/16 at 7:18 am to StraightCashHomey21
Antonio (and Noble) should get a call
Posted on 7/1/16 at 7:38 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
They need to realize who they are, and become a more reactive team than a proactive team. They can't hold possession, they can't break down anyone, they can't really seem to cross all that well either. There is no shame in being a counter-attacking team.
Yep. With all the Spurs players they brought in, they really should have just emulated that style
Posted on 7/1/16 at 8:23 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Both Lampard and Gerrard lack the defensive situational discipline.
They should have dropped them both and used them situationally, and gone for a more pragmatic pairing. Carrick and Scholes were both underutilized, not to mention other borderline players who they could have called up.
Posted on 7/1/16 at 8:25 am to etm512
quote:
Yep. With all the Spurs players they brought in, they really should have just emulated that style
It's hard to emulate that style though. It takes years of drilling. Spurs are good now only because Poch has been in charge for years and the system has remained the same.
Look at Wales. They've played the same way for nearly 6 years. They are punching above their weight right now, but they make no bones about what they are good at.
Posted on 7/1/16 at 8:40 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
Both Lampard and Gerrard lack the defensive situational discipline.
They should have dropped them both and used them situationally, and gone for a more pragmatic pairing. Carrick and Scholes were both underutilized, not to mention other borderline players who they could have called up.
They should have never been in a midfield two though - a 4-4-2 with them was stupid and arrogant.
They could have excelled with a 4-3-3 or something where someone was holding behind them - but I'm not sure England had the wing play at the time to really make that work.
Regardless there is an arrogance that the talent is enough to overcome the lack of anything else - and what they keep not realizzing is that the talent isn't even enough to advance out of the group stages half of the time.
Posted on 7/1/16 at 8:46 am to Tigerstark
quote:
stupid and arrogant.
Just like this current England team.
quote:
They could have excelled with a 4-3-3 or something where someone was holding behind them - but I'm not sure England had the wing play at the time to really make that work.
Beckham wasn't going to loose his place. Joe Cole was the best wide player they had during those years.
This post was edited on 7/1/16 at 9:23 am
Posted on 7/1/16 at 8:57 am to Tigerstark
quote:
They should have never been in a midfield two though - a 4-4-2 with them was stupid and arrogant.
Well in the mid-noughties the 4-3-3 was not in fashion. The one man striker role didn't really take off in England until Mourinho's teams in 2004 and 2005. The 4-2-3-1 didn't take off until the Spanish sides of 2008 and 2010. The 4-4-2 I don't really blame them for, but they could have played Gerrard as a second striker, as he showed he was very good at that position in 2008, whereas Lampard was always more comfortable playing deeper. Carrick was certainly a good enough partner for either, and was far smarter with the ball than anyone else England had.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News