Euro 2012 - Knockout Stages

[Libertine]

The massive, massive plus for us was that players like Hart, Walcott, Henderson, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Welbeck and Carroll all got experience playing in a major finals and that we showed we can at least CONTAIN some of the world's best teams despite being inexperienced and patched together.

In terms of the young players, not to mention Rodwell, Wilshere, who weren't part of this squad, and maybe even Lallana (who hasn't even had a look yet). Need to find some players who can string more than 3 passes in a row together.

[Franchise FC]

as if england ever expect to win a major tournament again whilst sky rule the roost and the champions league is the arbiter of quality.

for once I don't think you can really blame SKY or any financial greed for this particular problem.

We still train kids, and encourage them to play in exactly the same way that we did in the 1960s, yet get all surprised when other teams look better than us.

I'm sure it's supposed to be exageration for effect, but that last bit is totally untrue, even if some people do still believe it.

We don't produce the depth of technical quality the Spainish or Italians do, but it's much different and better than 20, 30 years ago etc.

I'm sorry, but it's not, it's really not.

My youngest has been 'coached' to the point of giving up because the hour's training consists of 20-25 minutes 'fitness' followed by a 6/7/8 a side game.
The fitness does not involve a ball at all. When I questioned it, I was informed that this is the way that coaches are taught. When I questioned that with other coaches I got the same answer.
No wonder we don't have the technical skills with the ball.

[Franchise FC]

The Rooney apologists seem to have gone quiet tonight.

He was poor tonight, no doubting that, so no need to defend him.

Doesn't change the fact that he has been effected by a lack of match sharpness (and tonight fitness) and that he's still one of our best players of we can get him performing. He did ok at times against Sweden, but only showed his class 3 or 4 times tonight which frankly isn't good enough.

He was bloody faultless against Sweden

[Nick Shorey my Lord!]

At the end they looked like they were running in treacle.

That's fair, but I'd say the same for Italy the further they got to our 6 yard box. Plus it was past midnight, a wonky time to playing football.

Firstly people going on about Italy "deserving" to win. Absolutely f**king bullsh*t. If they deserved to win, then they should have won in 90mins, or at least 120mins. I'm sorry but if you manage double the possession and double the passes it means nothing if you can't make them count for anything.

Absolutely agree. That was some of the worst finishing I've seen in a long time. They were pony up front and couldn't hit a barn door.

So all that bullshit about Rio not coming. Bit pointless wasn't it? Lescott and Terry were immense. Johnson and Cole were really handy as well and whilst Hart flapped a bit, at least we had someone commanding the back which we haven't had for some time.

Once again, Walcott came on and did we play it down the right? No, we kept playing down the left to Young who was having a stinker. All in all we got what we deserved which is fine; world cup qualifying starts pretty soon and there's the small matter of our new season to come. It's all good.

[Mr Angry]

I can only imagine that the sole reason Ashley Young was kept on the pitch after the first 30 minutes was that he has some incriminating photographic evidence against Roy Hodgson; I'm not Milner's biggest fan, but he was head and shoulders above Young last night and looked - not surprisingly - upset at being subbed.

Also, what was the point of constantly passing it back to Hart, who then wellied it up the pitch, only to see it (until Carroll came on)gathered immediately back by the Itailans for yet another masterclass in controlling the ball, and keeping possession.

[Hoop Blah]

for once I don't think you can really blame SKY or any financial greed for this particular problem.

We still train kids, and encourage them to play in exactly the same way that we did in the 1960s, yet get all surprised when other teams look better than us.

I'm sure it's supposed to be exageration for effect, but that last bit is totally untrue, even if some people do still believe it.

We don't produce the depth of technical quality the Spainish or Italians do, but it's much different and better than 20, 30 years ago etc.

I'm sorry, but it's not, it's really not.

My youngest has been 'coached' to the point of giving up because the hour's training consists of 20-25 minutes 'fitness' followed by a 6/7/8 a side game.
The fitness does not involve a ball at all. When I questioned it, I was informed that this is the way that coaches are taught. When I questioned that with other coaches I got the same answer.
No wonder we don't have the technical skills with the ball.

I've said on here many times before that all the badges in the world won't make a bad coach good and that there are undoubtedly bad coaches still out there even though they've been through the system. I'm sure that's the case throughout Europe where pretty much everyone else has a higher ratio of 'qualified coaches'. Is the system perfect no? Are we still doing the same things with the kids as we were in the 60's, 70's or 80's? Absolutely not, at least they shouldn't be.

In terms of the fitness element, coaches should still include fitness work in sessions because it's still a fundemental part of the game, but coaching now is much more technique based and really is aiming to bring about more rounded players. I'm amzed that you get the opposite feeling from speaking to coaches as that really isn't whats being taught on the coaching courses.

As we saw last night, when you get fatigued and are reaching into the reserves of your stamina you're technique, and more specifically your decision making, gets less reliable. England, and specifically the midfield and Rooney, struggled more and more as the game went on, but for the first half we more than matched Italy and for a good 20-30 minuted kept the ball better than them and created the better chances. Once the effect of chasing the ball for 3 and a half games kicked in our weaker technique and reliance on a more rushed type of football came to the fore as we reverted more to type. I'm sure part of that is down to fatigue and it's why fitness is still important as part of any coaching routine.

If you think all the improvements in coaching leave coaches just doing what you've alluded too I suggest you search our the course content for even the basic courses and take a look for yourself.

[Hoop Blah]

The Rooney apologists seem to have gone quiet tonight.

He was poor tonight, no doubting that, so no need to defend him.

Doesn't change the fact that he has been effected by a lack of match sharpness (and tonight fitness) and that he's still one of our best players of we can get him performing. He did ok at times against Sweden, but only showed his class 3 or 4 times tonight which frankly isn't good enough.

He was bloody faultless against Sweden

It was late and I was tired and emotional!

[SpaceCruiser]

Thinking about it, the positive I can draw from this tournament is that we performed better than the French.

England: W2 D2 L0 F5 A3
France: W1 D1 L2 F3 A5

[Alan Partridge]

It's all about perspective, the only chance England had not just in this game but against any of these good sides was to play the way they did and hope for something either on the break or from a set piece win 1-0, or by winning a shootout. They did the very best they could and that's all that can be asked.

3/4's of England's would be starting XI were sat at home watching this the same as the rest of us and lets face it we're not that good with them all available nevermind without them. Had to LOL on Twitter Hodgson and Henderson getting flak as if he had any choice? Got 4/5 would be CM's injured, 2 that don't want to play anymore so who else could he pick? and who else could he bring on when it was clear Parker was shot to bits. Morons. As if that was the point that changed the game, he did nothing wrong when he came on.

The right team won in terms of Italy's intent was there but they reminded me of Reading under Rodgers. They created nothing that Hart shouldn't have saved. It was comfortable, I thought Terry and Lescott were superb and other than 5minutes against Sweden were excellent throughout. The biggest letdowns were the wingers really as it should have been England's strength, it was the one area of the field where we actually had our best players available and none of them really delivered unfortunately.

Rooney had to come back in but it was clear he wasn't really up to the challenge but again there wasn't really much else to pick from. Carroll is ok as an impact sub or against weaker opposition, I think Welbeck had a reasonable tournament but is a 2nd or 3rd striker at best and Defoe I've never been convinced about at International level and without Darren Bent available Rooney had to play at the 1st opportunity.

I've seen criticisms about the style and the ball retention well that's what happens when you are forced into playing 4-4-2 with 2 central midfielders who are more hustle and bustle than genuine craft and guile. No ones fault it's just the way it is. If everybody was available then I think Wilshere would have been in there and possibly even Tom Huddlestone playing defensively with Gerrard alongside wilshere would have given a nice balance of workshorses but with lads with technical ability. Didn't have 2 of those 3 available so we had to do what we knew we could do. Have a defensive setup and try and do what Chelsea did, and it nearly worked.

Overall a good tournament from England's C team, I felt they'd struggle to get through the group they had with the squad England had available and the y won it. There are obviously loads of things to work on but I feel England are in a better place than they were 2 years ago. If we can get our younger lads fit and maybe adapt our system a little bit I think we could be a threat for if not the next World Cup definitely the next Euros.

[ZacNaloen]

Christ, I'm seeing people arguing on another site that it's Hodgsons fault England played so poorly.

These people are oxf*rd thick if they can't recognise that the team that played this tournament is actually a massively depleted England team. All our attacking minded midfielders were either injured (or in Gerrards case just too old to get box to box like he used to). The lack of depth in midfield was exposed by the fact Henderson was only player who could come onto replace Parker.

Cahill, Walker, Wilshere, Lampard, Smalling and Huddlestone if all fit would have added depth and a bit more quality to that team.

This isn't the managers fault, or the tactics fault.

If your players just aren't good enough, sometimes that's all it is.

[soggy biscuit]

Glad this preliminary tournament is out of the way so we can now all loom forward to thd main event - John Terry's trial

[LUX]

3/4's of England's would be starting XI were sat at home watching this

out of interest, who are these?

ps our most effective players yesterday were Carroll and Johnson imo.


pps have to say I disagree vehemently with RR's earlier comments about embarrassment. I do accept we were second best of course. But I would have LOVED to have gone through, however flukily.

[Hoop Blah]

3/4's of England's would be starting XI were sat at home watching this

out of interest, who are these?

ps our most effective players yesterday were Carroll and Johnson imo.


pps have to say I disagree vehemently with RR's earlier comments about embarrassment. I do accept we were second best of course. But I would have LOVED to have gone through, however flukily.

Totally agree with most of AP's post*, and it's arguable that the following were all first choice players or at least preferred options over those playing.

Walker
Cahill
Wilshire
Lampard
Barry
Bent

3/4's might be over playing it a touch, depending on who you'd have selected, but there are plenty of others who would've been in the squad if available.

* only bit I disagree with is that Gerrard's ability to keep the ball is as bad as everyone's made out. He was immense in this tournament, much better than I was expecting and I (as a massive Gerrard supporter) wouldn't have argued against him being left out a month ago when Lampard was playing much better at club level.

Johnson proved a lot of people wrong in this tournament. Yeah he got caught out a couple of times in the 4 games, as all defenders have done, but he more than made up with it with his excellent covering of the centre backs and his usually good attacking play.

Funny that, for all the abuse about taking so many Liverpool players, it was Gerrard, Johnson and Carroll that have probably come out of the tournament with the most credit (plus Terry and, for me at least, more so Lescott).

[Uke]

This thread should now be retitled "Euro 2012 - Knocked Out Stages"

[Barry the bird boggler]

Thoroughly embarrassing and lucky is the way to sum up the performances but Hodgson is not to blame as a) he did have a somewhat depleted squad due to injury (and other decisions) and b) England just aren't technically very good due to the crap set up in this country that after every tournament for the last n years the FA have said they'd do something about and promptly done bugger all. Of course this latter part isn't helped the thye ludicrous amounts of foreigners playing in the English game but when the roots of the game are so very wrong - and have been for decades - you reap what you earn.

At the end of the day though England are still (just about) a top 10 country in the world of football but just aren't capable of progressing aywhere beyond about 8th.

[watfordroyal]

It's all about perspective, the only chance England had not just in this game but against any of these good sides was to play the way they did and hope for something either on the break or from a set piece win 1-0, or by winning a shootout. They did the very best they could and that's all that can be asked.

3/4's of England's would be starting XI were sat at home watching this the same as the rest of us and lets face it we're not that good with them all available nevermind without them. Had to LOL on Twitter Hodgson and Henderson getting flak as if he had any choice? Got 4/5 would be CM's injured, 2 that don't want to play anymore so who else could he pick? and who else could he bring on when it was clear Parker was shot to bits. Morons. As if that was the point that changed the game, he did nothing wrong when he came on.

The right team won in terms of Italy's intent was there but they reminded me of Reading under Rodgers. They created nothing that Hart shouldn't have saved. It was comfortable, I thought Terry and Lescott were superb and other than 5minutes against Sweden were excellent throughout. The biggest letdowns were the wingers really as it should have been England's strength, it was the one area of the field where we actually had our best players available and none of them really delivered unfortunately.

Rooney had to come back in but it was clear he wasn't really up to the challenge but again there wasn't really much else to pick from. Carroll is ok as an impact sub or against weaker opposition, I think Welbeck had a reasonable tournament but is a 2nd or 3rd striker at best and Defoe I've never been convinced about at International level and without Darren Bent available Rooney had to play at the 1st opportunity.

I've seen criticisms about the style and the ball retention well that's what happens when you are forced into playing 4-4-2 with 2 central midfielders who are more hustle and bustle than genuine craft and guile. No ones fault it's just the way it is. If everybody was available then I think Wilshere would have been in there and possibly even Tom Huddlestone playing defensively with Gerrard alongside wilshere would have given a nice balance of workshorses but with lads with technical ability. Didn't have 2 of those 3 available so we had to do what we knew we could do. Have a defensive setup and try and do what Chelsea did, and it nearly worked.

Overall a good tournament from England's C team, I felt they'd struggle to get through the group they had with the squad England had available and the y won it. There are obviously loads of things to work on but I feel England are in a better place than they were 2 years ago. If we can get our younger lads fit and maybe adapt our system a little bit I think we could be a threat for if not the next World Cup definitely the next Euros.

Agree with this,
plus just the luck of the draw, to either play Sain or Italy, was always gonna be a struggle,
wouldn't we have loved a QF against Czech Rep or Greece!

[Alan Partridge]

3/4's of England's would be starting XI were sat at home watching this

out of interest, who are these?

ps our most effective players yesterday were Carroll and Johnson imo.


pps have to say I disagree vehemently with RR's earlier comments about embarrassment. I do accept we were second best of course. But I would have LOVED to have gone through, however flukily.

Kyle Walker
Gary Cahill
Gareth Barry
Frank Lampard
Jack Wilshere
Jack Rodwell
Tom Huddlestone
Darren Bent

Could all have a case for starting or being involved. I'd start Walker, Cahill, Wilshere, Huddlestone and Bent if I was picking a starting XI from scratch. Only my opinion natch.

I would also seriously consider changing Glen Johnson to a winger or right hand side midfielder. He looks so dangerous in the opponents half and much more suited there than at right back where his positioning is generally awful.

[winchester_royal]

Yep, and then you have players like Tom Cleverley who would have been pushing had he not been injured for 3/4 of the season

[LUX]

OK fair enough, AP.

[Alan Partridge]

Yep, and then you have players like Tom Cleverley who would have been pushing had he not been injured for 3/4 of the season

Forgot about him yep he'd have been in my squad as well (if i'd remembered him, probably would have picked Lambert and Butler)