Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Manchester United' started by Ashur, May 17, 2021.
Are the kickers and order of kickers set and given to the ref before it starts?
Great recap from Gary Neville.
I think most people are saying the likes of Shaw, Sterling, etc were not up for it. I mean some people will call them cowards but i cant.
I think you got it spot on. It was a negative move from Southgate. Saka offers a bit in attack, but not more than any other England attacker. Not a goal scorer like Rashford, not a creator like Sancho.
International football brings the worst out of managers.
Can you please post more?
I always wondered. People praise his ability on the ball, but other than being composed in possession not once has his alleged ball playing ability been an obvious point of strength. Apart from the one time he scored from open play against Rochdale.
This man will carry the ball 30 yard into op half, just to either turn back and carry it back or pass it back or dribble is a slow circle.
He commits defenders and doesnt find the open attacker or the guy who could find em.
1. You keep listing anecdotal examples. Just because you list an outlier doesnt make it the norm. And yes, Ole and Southgate should know better. Thats why they both got/are getting so much shit for their coaching in those respective games.
2. I thought Maguire was a bad call as well, but he has experience as a player and will be less shook by the moment. Also, taking a 2nd penalty is much different than a 5th.
Like I said, the manager should have a list of best to worst penalty takers. But that list cant be set in stone. I believe their needs to be alterations based on the occasion and the current form of the player.
I don't think it's so much that it brings out the worst in managers as it goes back to the point that international mangers, with a few exceptions, are bad. If they were good, they'd be managing at a club.
I don't agree - Rice / Phillips was not the main issue against Italy.
I think the main problem area for this game was Mount. Italy play with a 3, so when I saw Mount was selected I assumed he would be on Jorginho to match up the Italy midfield 3 (ie in a 3-5-2).
However for some reason he was stuck out at LWF in a bit of a nothing position in a 3-4-3 (given we really needed some pace there to push Italy defence back) and he had no real impact on the game.
Considering the workload Rice / Phillips consequently had to get through and the fact they were often out-numbered there, they did a good job.
We couldn't progress the ball because (2nd half on especially) we allowed Italy to press so high, we were in a really, really low block that we just couldn't get out of because of their press. Just look at the Chiellini (a CB) heat-map above.
The over-riding image of the game for me is Bonucci on the centre-spot having no issue dealing with Kane (who had no pace). With Cheillini so comfortable he spent a lot of time deep in our half (again as the heat map someone posted above shows). For Southgate to allow that when we have players such as Rash and Sancho on the bench, who would force Italy to defend deep rather than press high was the main eff up from Southgate this game.
This was the biggest difference in the match. England started out very well with their wing-backs attacking at will, completely bypassing Italy's midfield duo. Eventually, Italy got to grips with that and once they did all the play went through the middle with Veratti and Jorginho dictating the tempo of the match. Rice and Phillips are decent as a duo, but are fairly one-dimensional as you mention. Once they get hold of the ball they don't tend to do too much with it. I would have been interested to see what Bellingham could have offered in this match.
Alternatively, in absence of a ball-playing midfielder I think that Grealish could have accomplished the task of holding and distributing from a more advanced midfield position. He would have done better than Mason Mount, who ended up being a total passenger in the match.
Mancini is probably the biggest outlier at the moment. Was a pretty good coach/manager before but I feel he's done his stock a world of good in this tournament (first to. Not going to leave Italy anytime soon (not before after Qatar at minimum) but clubs in need of a manager could do worse than going after him. If it wasn't for the City thing, he'd be on my list of candidates for possible alternatives to Ole, if it comes to that this coming season.
Think that Luis Enrique is still a viable option also at club level: the circumstances with his daughter are probably why a national team gig, best for him at this time but could still be decent at club level for the right team.
By and large though, the best coaches and managers are in club football right now and it's not even close.
Yep. We gotta remember, this is the same manager that started 3 defensive mids against Croatia (I think).
Agreed RE Mount. He was awful all tournament and definitely didnt justify being in the 11 for the final. Southgate leaving Grealish and Sancho out made no sense this tournament.
I disagree that rythym or momentum.
Even at the lowest levels, you need to warm that leg up. You dont just come on and everything works like an on switch.
My best set piece taker i ever coached, literally needed at least two corners or free kicks to get a feel.
Then you add the pressure.
Thats crazy. Unfortunately England made it really easy for him by being a pussy cat. He should've feared being sent off with all the space he left behind him.
But hey, that's what happens when someone employs 2 central mids who's job is to win it and give it to creative players. You cannot get the ball yo allow your attackers to influence the game.
Andersons pen was shit. He just blasted the ball and got lucky. Thats not an example...
Yes and you cant changed them. You cant even sub in takers after the FT whistle.
That is not the point. The point is that the greatest coach of all time used the same tactic as Gareth Southgate, that time it worked. It is up in the air as long as you have a plan.
Yes he did. I told jeff this before the tournament and he didn't believe me.
Don't remember who it was but someone made the point during the game that Chiellini, as Italy were chasing the equalizer, was playing in a very advanced position. And it was mind bogging, especially for a 36yr old player who is not known for his pace.
But as noted, that is where Southgate bottled it (one of his many mistakes after the half). Even if he did not want to change his shape with the 2 holding mids, I still believe the right call would have been to throw Grealish earlier in Mount's place (as he was ineffective).
Not only he would have provided the creativity that was needed in an ACM capability, but he's the type of player that could have given Chiellini and Bonucci something to think about in terms of roaming freely upfield the way they did.
Shame in the end, as it was just one of a few moves Southgate could and should have made in the 2nd period, that could have been England ultimately close the game out.
Anderson wasn't SAF's plan A, though, he went 6th.
I honestly dont have a problem with the Mount selection. He is a perfect balance if you had Sterling on one wing and Sancho on the other. But yes, the tactics were shit. But I dont think Mounts ineffectiveness would be a big problem if your 6 and 8 could actually try and find him. Imagine mostly passing safe and still not completing 80% of your passes.
Rice and Phillips had to work so hard because they cannot help their team keep the ball. Especially against Italy's press. They each had below a 77% pass completion. Outside of the defenders, they attempted the most passes. Between them, they had 10 total tackles. 6 and 4. No other England player made that many recoveries. So if thats the case, its not like they did not have an opportunity to transition.
You say "we allowed" Italy to press so high. I dont think you allowed anything. I think Italy kept the ball and circulatated the ball so well, you had no choice but to drop off. Every time Italy had to go back, England tried to step up, Italy just played around the press.
I agree with you here. I think that at the very least with those guys on, you could just play more direct and hope more. But there's no way Kane, Phillips or Rice are getting them the ball.
He was subbed on minute 125. He was in the plan. Your plan is never just 5 takers.
If that was not sarcasm, I will try. Did not see much football last year, my daughter was born. Ole had us playing so boringly for a long time that it was not worth the effort.
Also, it's a mindset thing when you set up defensively, every minute the opponent doesn't breach your goal, you are winning and getting confident whilst the opposition is getting frustrated. The moment they score it's very difficult to turn that mindset around and change players to do the opposite.
Secondly, chasing the ball for 90 mins is very hard, boring, frustrating especially for attackers, they get physically tired and mentally checked out. Thus you see smaller teams that bunk against bigger clubs eventually concedes. Also, it's hard for these attackers to suddenly find an attacking rhythm after defending for 90 mins. Defending a lead is good but giving up initiatives and starving attacking players are bad, a lot of attackers need a rhythm to timing their runs, get their touches right as attackers are outnumbered to defenders.
If you think about it, England with all the attacking threats they have could not outrun, out stretch an older Italian defense is where the manager failed.
1414653375073894400 is not a valid tweet id
So many great moments and don't think there can be much argument about how good and exciting this edition of the Euros were. The final might have been a bit 'meh' overall but as far as finals go, definitely seen worse (just as we've seen better). Still was a pretty intense affair with plenty of drama.
This was the tournament we needed following the year we had gone thru. Amazing seeing the fans back in the stadiums (something that will never be taken for granted again, I imagine). Plenty of quality matches both in the group stage and in the knockout rounds (something that is pretty rare: most of the time, one is clearly superior to the other).
Shame it's already over though: was lots of fun while it lasted. Still over a year away but I'm curious to see how the WC in Qatar will stack up compared to this.
Coming to midfield, the midfield is your engine, attackers need midfield to give the ball to do their thing, defense needs it to relieve the onslaught or shield. If your midfielders are unable to retain the ball, find a player, get themselves out of a tight spot, they will turn it over constantly which starves your attack and puts pressure on your defense. Yes Rice and Philips worked hard but I rather they did not and kept the ball, then it would be less running around and more opportunity for your attackers.
@benni... agree to disagree
Only thing I would add because I probably didnt make it clear is that Mount was totally disconnected from the midfield. He was very left and very high (actually higher than Kane & Sterling). Previous games he was central as a #10.
It was just not a functional midfield from England at all against a fully functional Italian one. Passing stats reflect the (broken) system as much if not more so than the individuals. Especially when outnumbered.