The World Cup Thread

[Scully]

Southgate fury at conceding 2 goals was very weird considering 1 was a fairly random sympathy penalty. No joy at scoring 6 now we get this performance. Bizarre 

[whelk]

I knew I’d start hating Southgate at this World Cup. Haven’t even heard what he had to say about that pile of shit but I will hate it.

worst game of WC by a mile. 

 

[Sheaf Saint]

6 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

You win World Cups by gambling and having balls. 

In the knockout stages, yes absolutely. But play at high intensity in all 3 group games and we'll be burnt out by the time we get there.

Everyone (almost) is miffed because we should be beating USA, on paper at least. But playing more cautiously and avoiding defeat in the last two group games, having already done the biz in the first, will guarantee progression and seems sensible to me.

As another poster has already pointed out, Southgate's remit is results, not entertainment. We're not Brazil. We don't have that kind of flair to play fluid attacking football and breeze past opponents. If we want to win the WC we need to be more like Germany when they have won it, and grind out results instead. It might not be the prettiest way to achieve silverware, but would anyone on here give a shit about that if the end result is seeing Harry Kane lift the trophy?

[egg]

1 hour ago, Sheaf Saint said:

In the knockout stages, yes absolutely. But play at high intensity in all 3 group games and we'll be burnt out by the time we get there.

Everyone (almost) is miffed because we should be beating USA, on paper at least. But playing more cautiously and avoiding defeat in the last two group games, having already done the biz in the first, will guarantee progression and seems sensible to me.

As another poster has already pointed out, Southgate's remit is results, not entertainment. We're not Brazil. We don't have that kind of flair to play fluid attacking football and breeze past opponents. If we want to win the WC we need to be more like Germany when they have won it, and grind out results instead. It might not be the prettiest way to achieve silverware, but would anyone on here give a shit about that if the end result is seeing Harry Kane lift the trophy?

We'll get picked off playing that way. The USA could have had a couple. France would have smashed us. The Iran game showed that we can attack and score, but Southgate has the mentality of preferring a 0-0 draw to a 3-2 win. I'm with Whitey, we need gamble a bit and take the leash off if we're to have a chance. 

[Chewy]

1 hour ago, Sheaf Saint said:

In the knockout stages, yes absolutely. But play at high intensity in all 3 group games and we'll be burnt out by the time we get there.

Everyone (almost) is miffed because we should be beating USA, on paper at least. But playing more cautiously and avoiding defeat in the last two group games, having already done the biz in the first, will guarantee progression and seems sensible to me.

As another poster has already pointed out, Southgate's remit is results, not entertainment. We're not Brazil. We don't have that kind of flair to play fluid attacking football and breeze past opponents. If we want to win the WC we need to be more like Germany when they have won it, and grind out results instead. It might not be the prettiest way to achieve silverware, but would anyone on here give a shit about that if the end result is seeing Harry Kane lift the trophy?

Sorry but that’s a cliche. We watch Grealish, Foden, Mount, Sterling, Rashford, Kane, Saka, Maddison versus Richarlison, Fred, Rodrygo every week in the premier league - we have as much if not more flair than Brazil this year.

Play to your strengths - we have no defence but attacking options every team is envious (and scared) of. 
I don’t expect flair players to turn it on every game (remember Le Tissier 😉) so I’m not fussed a few of them had an off day, but swap them early enough to make a difference.

If Southgate made his changes 10 minutes earlier, and had added Foden for Mount, we’d have won that last night. And everyone could have been given a rest for Wales.

And quite frankly so what if the risk cost us defeat. Avoid defeat against Wales and we’re through anyway. Get beat by Wales (as well as USA) and we deserve to go home.

Sorry, bit ranty but we had a chance last night to positively impact a game we’d been poor in and we were too chicken. What will last night do to Fodens confidence? We’ve got great attacking players so trust them and use them.

 

Edited 26 November, 2022 by Chewy
Typo

[egg]

12 minutes ago, Chewy said:

Sorry but that’s a cliche. We watch Grealish, Foden, Mount, Sterling, Rashford, Kane, Saka, Maddison versus Richarlison, Fred, Rodrygo every week in the premier league - we have as much if not more flair than Brazil this year.

Play to your strengths - we have no defence but attacking options every team is envious (and scared) of. 
I don’t expect flair players to turn it on every game (remember Le Tissier 😉) so I’m not fussed a few of them had an off day, but swap them early enough to make a difference.

If Southgate made his changes 10 minutes earlier, and had added Foden for Mount, we’d have won that last night. And everyone could have been given a rest for Wales.

And quite frankly so what if the risk cost us defeat. Avoid defeat against Wales and we’re through anyway. Get beat by Wales (as well as USA) and we deserve to go home.

Sorry, bit ranty but we had a chance last night to positively impact a game we’d been poor in and we were too chicken. What will last night do to Fodens confidence? We’ve got great attacking players so trust them and use them.

 

Yep. Brazil aren't a better team of players than us imo. Fred offers less than Rice. Richarlison less than several of our forwards. They have a more positive mentality though, and I put that as the difference between us. Match the attitude, have the belief, play to our strengths, and we won't be drawing 0-0 with the likes of the USA. We should not have been going into the Wales game with any vague possibility of elimination, we should have had 2 wins and the chance to rotate. 

[Plastic]

I work with a lot of Americans. I was hoping that this game would highlight the beautiful elements of the game in their eyes. In reality, it demonstrated the worst; crabby defensive play. No movement, no options, just knocking it about at the back. 

Yeah, we didn’t lose but the lack of ambition was frustrating. 

[Window Cleaner]

Probably need to give Kane a rest, not doing very much at all. Start Rashford and leave midfield to the midfielders. Oh and don't start Sterling, utter waste of space yesterday.  We must have better available.

 

[Ex Lion Tamer]

9 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

 You win World Cups by gambling and having balls.

Simply not true. Most winners these days are pretty cautious

[egg]

1 minute ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

Simply not true. Most winners these days are pretty cautious

Do you think we'd have done better last night by being less cautious?

[The Kraken]

13 minutes ago, Window Cleaner said:

Probably need to give Kane a rest, not doing very much at all. Start Rashford and leave midfield to the midfielders. Oh and don't start Sterling, utter waste of space yesterday.  We must have better available.

 

I dunno, in some ways I felt for Kane a bit. His touch has been brilliant and he receives the ball up front so well and can turn defence into attack. The game against Iran totally played into his hands as he had willing runners off of him each time, Sterling and Saka supported him well, Mount wasn’t good but made lots of space, and Bellingham got up the field in support. Last night there were times when Kane had nobody running beyond him or in support.

Kane did look a bit laboured at times but I thought that was exaggerated by the lack of options around him. I thought Sterling was awful,both in possession and out of it, he should’ve gone for foden at half time. Saka did alright first half but was far too quiet second half. Add in that Trippier had a nightmare and did nothing going forward while looking shaky at the back, Shaw had a couple of good runs but couldn’t find his players a lot of the time. Also, USA did a good job of pressing us high and breaking in numbers quickly which then scared the life out of our defenders and coach, and we shut up shop.

Its a return to Garethball - keep it tight and hope to nick a goal.

[saintant]

5 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

Simply not true. Most winners these days are pretty cautious

Yeah right...since 1994 Brazil twice, France twice and Spain once. The other two were Germany and Italy.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

Do you think we'd have done better last night by being less cautious?

I thought we looked ropey at the back and outfought in midfield. A more "defensive" formation, at least in the first half, would have given us a more solid base to get comfortable in the game and start playing a bit more.

I fully expect Southgate to go back to five at the back against tougher opposition

[saintant]

Midfield was our major problem. I felt sorry for Rice because he seemed to be the only one in midfield. I couldn't work out what Mount and Bellingham were trying to do but they left it wide open for USA to dictate the play. 

[Window Cleaner]

I thought our ball control in general was pretty poor all round; Thought Shaw played pretty well.  The Americans were particularily motivated, probably because a defeat would leave them in a dodgy position because Iran didn't look all that bad against Wales....who were pretty dire. Iran-USA is going to be a pretty tough match with the winner getting to the knockout stage. WE need however to run at the Welsh, they're a poor side just about everywhere and will have no answer to pace at the sharp end. So Rashford and no Kane.

[Plastic]

8 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

I dunno, in some ways I felt for Kane a bit. His touch has been brilliant and he receives the ball up front so well and can turn defence into attack

Thought he was one of the better players last night. Not supported and constantly needed to get involved in MF / defence due to lack of energy behind him. Needs a strong MF supporting him. Had nothing. 

[Ex Lion Tamer]

10 minutes ago, saintant said:

Yeah right...since 1994 Brazil twice, France twice and Spain once. The other two were Germany and Italy.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/jun/09/attacking-rarely-wins-international-prizes-now-so-what-will-southgate-do

[AlexLaw76]

Gareth Southenhuttle strike again.

The point made further up. On paper, we have players that can match any other team (bar maybe France)

yet for a while now, Gareth’s teams bore the snot out of everyone, and his continued inability to change the momentum displays his extreme limitations

[egg]

15 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

I thought we looked ropey at the back and outfought in midfield. A more "defensive" formation, at least in the first half, would have given us a more solid base to get comfortable in the game and start playing a bit more.

I fully expect Southgate to go back to five at the back against tougher opposition

Fair points. The weird thing was that we were conservative, but set up in a way that allowed us to be overrun in midfield. An extra man in there was needed, but wouldn't have meant that we needed to be more cautious in our approach. For me our issue was part tactical and part mentality. 

[The Kraken]

7 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/jun/09/attacking-rarely-wins-international-prizes-now-so-what-will-southgate-do

That article is doing some pretty good straw-manning:

“Those who look at Gareth Southgate’s slightly cautious approach and demand he shoehorn in half a dozen of England’s array of gifted young forwards are living in a dreamworld.”

Who has ever said that we should play six forwards? Anyone who has suggested it doesn’t know what they’re talking about, but I’ve certainly never heard it. England played the ‘right’ formation last night. A central striker, two wide players who can get behind the striker but also create a good press and keep play high up the pitch. Then, behind them, a three who can offer defensive rigidity while also finding space in the attacking third when we are on the front foot.

There was no difference in formation to last night and the Iran game, just a massive difference in how it was executed. USA showed exactly how to press high up the pitch. The only times we got through were through combinations of good, slick, quick passing play with players supporting each other closely.  We’ve got the players to do that too, and we’ve got the players on the bench to replace them when they get tired (we’re allowed 5 subs which should more than cover it).

[saintant]

13 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/jun/09/attacking-rarely-wins-international-prizes-now-so-what-will-southgate-do

Totally ignores the fact that teams park the bus against the likes of Brazil, France and Spain yet they still manage to get the job done thanks to their overall attacking intent and individual brilliance of key players. You don't win tournaments unless you attack. Anyway, who believes an article written in the Guardian 🙂

[saintant]

4 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

That article is doing some pretty good straw-manning:

“Those who look at Gareth Southgate’s slightly cautious approach and demand he shoehorn in half a dozen of England’s array of gifted young forwards are living in a dreamworld.”

Who has ever said that we should play six forwards? Anyone who has suggested it doesn’t know what they’re talking about, but I’ve certainly never heard it. England played the ‘right’ formation last night. A central striker, two wide players who can get behind the striker but also create a good press and keep play high up the pitch. Then, behind them, a three who can offer defensive rigidity while also finding space in the attacking third when we are on the front foot.

There was no difference in formation to last night and the Iran game, just a massive difference in how it was executed. USA showed exactly how to press high up the pitch. The only times we got through were through combinations of good, slick, quick passing play with players supporting each other closely.  We’ve got the players to do that too, and we’ve got the players on the bench to replace them when they get tired (we’re allowed 5 subs which should more than cover it).

If our midfield had functioned correctly then the defenders would have had options to slide shorter balls forward. Time and again they looked up, saw nothing and nobody moving to receive the ball short and were forced to hoof it. It was a totally disjointed, shapeless display and Southgate should have done something to put it right in the first twenty minutes by getting instruction onto the pitch.

[Saint Billy]

The minute I saw Maguire and Stones endlessly passing to eachother I gave up being interested.

I've seen enough of this type of shit with saints to know that it rarely results in a win and the only person happy with that performance is Southgate. 

So bloody frustrating when there is an abundance of talent in our squad that could prove to the world we now have what it takes to win the world Cup with flair and yet Southgate decides to revert to setting up his side with the priority of not losing, and nearly was unstuck doing that. 

 

[saintant]

1 minute ago, Saint Billy said:

The minute I saw Maguire and Stones endlessly passing to eachother I gave up being interested.

I've seen enough of this type of shit with saints to know that it rarely results in a win and the only person happy with that performance is Southgate. 

So bloody frustrating when there is an abundance of talent in our squad that could prove to the world we now have what it takes to win the world Cup with flair and yet Southgate decides to revert to setting up his side with the priority of not losing, and nearly was unstuck doing that. 

 

Exactly and it started in the first minute. As soon as you see that you pretty well know what sort of performance is coming and they did not disappoint.

[AlexLaw76]

I’d happily see pochettino as our manager

[egg]

14 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

I’d happily see pochettino as our manager

He'd be superb I reckon. The frustration is that we've got such a talented squad of players, and can all see the potential. 

[Ex Lion Tamer]

42 minutes ago, egg said:

Fair points. The weird thing was that we were conservative, but set up in a way that allowed us to be overrun in midfield. An extra man in there was needed, but wouldn't have meant that we needed to be more cautious in our approach. For me our issue was part tactical and part mentality. 

That's fair. Mount at least had a good shot in this game but generally I don't know what he adds.

[egg]

2 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

That's fair. Mount at least had a good shot in this game but generally I don't know what he adds.

He's playing as neither a 10 nor an 8, just kind of floating around as an old school inside left. He was decent first half against Iran I thought, but anonymous last night. 

[adrian lord]

38 minutes ago, saintant said:

Exactly and it started in the first minute. As soon as you see that you pretty well know what sort of performance is coming and they did not disappoint.

Indeed. It set the tempo and tone of the entire match. 

[skintsaint]

You knew it was going to be shite when we spent the first 60 secs of the game just passing between Stones and Maguire.

[CB Fry]

1 hour ago, saintant said:

Yeah right...since 1994 Brazil twice, France twice and Spain once. The other two were Germany and Italy.

Those world famous throw-caution-to-the-wind Italians and Germans.

And the Brazil that won in 1994 were not Pele and co, they slogged and bored their way to that trophy.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

10 hours ago, Scully said:

Southgate fury at conceding 2 goals was very weird considering 1 was a fairly random sympathy penalty. No joy at scoring 6 now we get this performance. Bizarre 

This is how he manages the players. Don't let them get too high when they win, don't let them get too down when they lose

[Sheaf Saint]

10 hours ago, whelk said:

worst game of WC by a mile. 

Australia and Tunisia look to be taking that crown today, although it's fair to say the referee is playing a significant role in making it such a poor spectacle.

[Turkish]

4 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Australia and Tunisia look to be taking that crown today, although it's fair to say the referee is playing a significant role in making it such a poor spectacle.

Sounds like the piped crowd noise in this one, the high pitched noise of screaming  kids Everytime the ball goes In the penalty area is an identical sound to other matches.

[tpbury]

23 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Sounds like the piped crowd noise in this one, the high pitched noise of screaming  kids Everytime the ball goes In the penalty area is an identical sound to other matches.

Glad something else noticed this 😀

 

[saintant]

56 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

This is how he manages the players. Don't let them get too high when they win, don't let them get too down when they lose

This is such a cop out. In reality they should be taking the plaudits when playing well and winning so that they get the taste and incentive for victories. When they play badly they should be taken to task so that they appreciate they have let people down and need to strive to do better. No place for the wishy washy 'don't let them get too high when they win or too low when they lose. Tell it how it is and feed off it.

[whelk]

Sainst should buy some of that Aussie spirit and effort

[Turkish]

23 minutes ago, tpbury said:

Glad something else noticed this 😀

 

It’s very annoying 

[iansums]

On ITV, a female presenter and two female pundits, now a little piece on Poland with a female voice-over. Is this the men’s or women’s World Cup?

[Killers Knee]

Judging by the urgency Shaw was getting to the free-kick in the closing seconds, I can only deduce the England team agreed a 

'gimme' with the USA, to allow them a chance against Iran.  At least we now know Southgate is a tactical genius, resting the first XI on the pitch was a masterstroke.

[cloggy saint]

16 minutes ago, iansums said:

On ITV, a female presenter and two female pundits, now a little piece on Poland with a female voice-over. Is this the men’s or women’s World Cup?

It's the men's World Cup, the clue is all the men running around and falling over on the pitch.

[whelk]

17 minutes ago, iansums said:

On ITV, a female presenter and two female pundits, now a little piece on Poland with a female voice-over. Is this the men’s or women’s World Cup?

Carney is a decent pundit. Not so fond of Aluko though

[East Kent Saint]

Talking of falling over FIFA officially condone diving , by the right players of course !

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/63766703

Edited 26 November, 2022 by East Kent Saint

[iansums]

2 minutes ago, whelk said:

Carney is a decent pundit. Not so fond of Aluko though

Agreed, Carney is very good. I don’t mind the odd female presenter and pundit for the men’s games but honestly, all three?

[whelk]

1 minute ago, iansums said:

Agreed, Carney is very good. I don’t mind the odd female presenter and pundit for the men’s games but honestly, all three?

The pick is from this lot but probably putting lesser known pundits on less interesting game. I think the presenters are fine. Just still sometimes weird hearing female main commentator but just think that is getting used to it as what they say doesn’t differ too much from the blokes. 
 

 

 

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, whelk said:

The pick is from this lot but probably putting lesser known pundits on less interesting game. I think the presenters are fine. Just still sometimes weird hearing female main commentator but just think that is getting used to it as what they say doesn’t differ too much from the blokes. 
 

 

 

Where is the disabled one?

[iansums]

8 minutes ago, whelk said:

The pick is from this lot but probably putting lesser known pundits on less interesting game. I think the presenters are fine. Just still sometimes weird hearing female main commentator but just think that is getting used to it as what they say doesn’t differ too much from the blokes. 
 

 

 

Just one of that lot without a hint of a smile

[CB Fry]

I must have missed the memo about Matty Cash being Polish now.

[CB Fry]

16 minutes ago, whelk said:

The pick is from this lot but probably putting lesser known pundits on less interesting game. I think the presenters are fine. Just still sometimes weird hearing female main commentator but just think that is getting used to it as what they say doesn’t differ too much from the blokes. 
 

 

 

I think you can't have too much Laura Woods and Seema Jaswal on the TV. Difficult to decide which is my favourite but I'd probably come down on the side of Jaswal.

[Totton Saint]

I feel for the English fans who paid to watch the game, not forgetting travel and living  costs.  

I felt sorry for myself wasting 2 hours watching it on TV.  

Will watch France this pm as an antidote