European Nations League Finals

To be fair City have figured out that he’s awful and they have wasted their money and have stopped playing him.

 

He's still dizzy nearly 4 years after being on the receiving end of the Iggy chop.

 

Kneejerk much? Not long after the "lovely move" you proclaimed for Lingard's goal, which Stones kicked off.

New Dutch golden boy, De Ligt, was equally as calamitous as Stones.

 

The match was 1-1 at 90 minutes, as per the Croatia semi final.

Both teams were equally as crap as each other; as per the CL final the long break since the end of the season seemed apparent in the general lack of sharpness on display.

I don't agree with all Southgate's selections, but this England team is still heading in the right direction overall. It's just come down to very fine margins - a few milimetres difference on the Lingard offside and we're all singing a very different tune, or if Sancho's header is another few centimetres away from the gk.

Stones made a mistake, sure but the most common factor seems to be generally falling apart a bit in extra time, for whatever reason.

 

Also handy if Javi loses the first game of next season.

 

NL had 18 shots on target.

Says a lot about our defence.

 

https://imgflip.com/i/32vnfs

 

Nope it was appalling. I stand by what I said, he is a sorry excuse for a ball playing defender who occasionally picks a nice pass. There is absolutely no excuse for attempting Cruyff turns in your own box, or trying to nutmeg attackers (he got away with that in the first half).

Should not be getting a look in. I understand we try to play out from the back, but his level of complacency last tonight was shocking. Any defender at any level would get criticism for mistakes like that.

 

We're just not very good, simple as that.
Look at that teamsheet. How well would that 11 fare in the prem ?
Then add in trying to play beautiful Man City style footy from the back => recipe for disaster though of course Southgate will stick with it rather than accept it's a mistake https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48550951
I don't watch England any more because it's such a dreadful spectacle.

 

A majority of the squad play for one of City/Liverpool/Spurs who all play similar styles but with differences. Liverpool + Spurs both play out from the back, but then move the ball into the final third quickly and with pace whereas City prefer to take their time with the build-up play and camp themselves in the opposition half until they can create a chance. Southgate is as you say trying to get us to play like City, except we lack quality that the Silvas, KdB, Gundogan etc that City have in central midfield which causes the whole thing to fall apart. We have immense pace and quality on the wings with Sterling/Sancho/Rashford. Makes much more sense (and is a bit more in keeping with the "traditional" English style of play) to instead adopt the Liverpool/Tottenham playstyle and move the ball up to the final third much quicker and use our strongest skillset to our advantage. Would be much more entertaining as well!



Something like this, mobility + creativity in CM, pace and flair out wide. Kane (when fit) playing the same role he does for Spurs - dropping deeper when needed and bringing others into play. Really not a fan of us having 2 DMs like we did at the WC or last night.

 

Yes. Our strengths are playing with pace upfront and taking defenders on, being positive, while keeping possession safely at the back when possible. We seem to do the opposite. Harmlessly keep possession up top while taking players on and accepting risk at the back. Bizarre.

 

Linguards gol was disaccepted m8 due to VAR interfere

 

That bloomin Vardy always getting in the way! He's almost as dreadful as that Owen Goal bloke!

 

I particularly like the idea of 'Player 1' in goal instead of the jittery Pickford.

 

Did anyone wake up this morning thinking "I wish we were still in that competition"?

 

Oops. Definitely an upgrade though.

 

The whole Portugeuese team I expect.

 

Nice to see Tommy Yaxley Robinson Lennon supporting the England team.

https://twitter.com/Patt3n/status/1136930942734536705

 

'Can we get a photo with ya Tommy?' ask the England fans just after he's floored one of them.

Proud.

 

Netherlands weren't any better either. They only won in extra time and overall it was a game of very fine margins with both sides having clear chances to win it outright sooner.

Also, imagine if England had to play with someone as dreadful as Depay at centre forward?! Really makes me question the quality of the French league again given his scoring record there. Gray would have done a better job for them up front last night, honestly.

As for your question - that 11 probably would have finished 4th or 5th in the Prem last season (regularly training together and with a better manager than Southgate). However, I don't really know what point you're trying to make with that? Club football in general is of a better standard than international football. There aren't any international teams as good as the top club teams in each major league. The top club teams have the luxury of being able to sign players from all over the world, not just one country, and are able to sign new players to plug any positions in which they're at the present moment in time deficient. They're also able to sign players that fit the particular playing style and strategy of the club and manager. Furthermore, the club sides train together far more regularly, and tend to have better coaches than the second-tier mediocrity that usually ends up at national teams.

 

Netherlands were poor but better than us - they had more possession and 29 shots to our 13.
The point I was making was that any England team that contains Stones, Delph, Barkley, Linguard, Rice is not going to pull up too many trees.

 

The clear goalscoring chances were about even though (until the Stones howler).

Neither is a Netherlands team containing Dumfries, Babel, Depay, De Roon and Propper.

 

Just seen the result. Absolutely fantastic stuff.

 

No it isn't. But that Netherlands team battered us for large parts of the 2nd half and ET. They were poor but so much better than us, that's the worry.

 

I thought NL kept the ball well, moved it around nicely however were pretty toothless up front.

To me as a neutral, I've come to the conclusion that England have a strong starting 11, however, scratch beneath the surface and there isn't much there.

I haven't seen that level of comical defending since...well last time Watford played.

 

Holland have been desperately unlucky with the players that have come through in recent years - most recently they've had a great attack + midfield (RVP, Robben + Sneijder), but a terrible comparable defence (Heitinga etc). Now they've got a fantastic midfield + defence (De Jong, De Ligt, Van Dijk etc) but terrible options up front. Hope for their sake they've got a decent striker coming through the youth teams, if so they could do very well at international level for a good 10 years or so.

 

They really, really weren't.

It was 1-1 after 90 minutes.

Calm down and stop resorting to silly hyperbole.

 

They really really were.
They had 29 goal attempts and better possession. Did you watch the game ?
You don't like others disagreeing with your view do you ?
You need to have a word with Phil McNulty too as he clearly suffers from "hyperbole" too and doesn't understand the game either
"The Dutch were the far superior side but they were gifted their route to the showdown against Portugal on Sunday by suicidal defending in extra time by England, who were hoping to go one better than their World Cup semi-final exit against Croatia last summer.
England second best.
England's defending, or lack of, was the primary reason for this defeat, but this was a mediocre performance from a side hoping to lift their first trophy since the 1966 World Cup.
"

 

Nah, they don't even have a fantastic midfield and defence - van Dijk and De Jong are perhaps the best in the world in their positions right now, and De Ligt is close to being top drawer, but their full-backs were Blind and Dumfries. De Roon, Bergwijn and Babel are hardly great shakes in midfield either (with Propper and Promes off the bench).

The 2010 WC final team easily had more quality throughout.

 

I'm far from being a big England supporter, but yes England fans and covering journalists enjoy trading in hyperbole - the team is generally being either over-hyped or proclaimed to be in crisis - they want simple dramatic soundbites.

Lots of long-range shots straight in to Pickford's midriff means nothing. In the 90 minutes there were only two other gilt-edged goalscoring chances, one from van de Beek which he skied over the bar, the other the header from Sancho which went straight at the keeper.

Even with the Netherlands goal to go 2-1 up, Promes managed to somehow miss the target from 6 yards out - were it not for Walker desperately trying to make an interception, he would have embarrassingly missed.

Fine margins.

 

Yeah LB is a concern (although kinda surprised PVA didn't play over Blind - although guessing they went more defensive due to Sancho), but Dumfries certainly isn't terrible. Agreed about Babel and De Roon, but Wijnaldum, Van de Beek and Strootman (when fit anyway!) are solid CM options for De Jong. It's a very decent spine to the team, just lacking solid options up front.

 

Dumfries was lucky not to be sent off.

They have good CBs and CMs, but England have better options in full-back, wide, and forward areas.

On a tangent, thinking about how England were lacking in the middle of the park, I'm baffled how Maddison wasn't called up and utilised.