Definitely. England looked good in the last couple of years with the two wingers coming narrow and running beyond Kane, with two defensive mids and one attacking as the link. For some reason Southgate lives changing a system that works.
Sancho has been shite.
Would say that's ridiculous but right at the end there I saw two examples of a player facing ward Prowse who was in acres of space and turning their back on him to pass into traffic. Hope we're not returning to the England cliques.
He's had 3 or 4 good little touches and got into some good positions on the edge of the box but been ignored.
More annoyingly seems like they aren't giving him set piece duty but, bizarrely, have trippier taking corners.
Still can't help feeling we might be better off getting in an experienced player from a top club on loan for the season and buy a permanent midfield fixture next summer when we have more funds available, rather than buying a mediocre midfielder now and being lumbered with them when they inevitably don't become part of our long term plans.
Well, we absolutely need another midfielder now then. Not sure who we can get that's better than Reed with the £10million raised here unless we have hidden funds to top it up.
Well that's given me a reason to cheer for Fulham.
Question - let's say the scenario occurs where they are obligated to buy him. Is he then obligated to agree terms or can he refuse? Surely they wouldn't have agreed terms now, as he could have a storming season that would be of benefit in negotiations next summer?
Been suggested only season ticket holders will have access to their teams games if they're televised, other than the ones picked normally that is. If so I'll still be looking for streams as I ain't paying £700 for it.
It's been proven time and again that net transfer spend rarely translates to table position, but ranking wage bills almost exactly matches league position. I'd be more interested in seeing that comparison.