England vs Costa Rica

[Colinjb]

I don't read the Sun but point taken. He went on to do rather well 2 years later but it's not particularly instructive to make glib comparisons across time. Drawing a friendly with Saudi Arabia is hardly comparable with a WC.

 

Indeed, the quality of the opposition was lower.

 

Had Sir Bobby not had that wonderful 1990 tournament (when we only actually played well for about a game and a half, we laboured into the semi final) he would not have been remembered as fondly.

 

Is consistency in management going to ensure we succeed again? Of course not. But history has shown England managers to be vilified, criticised and entirely humiliated yet just a couple of good games can make them into Heroes.... oddly enough with no regard for the actual team performances that took them as far as they could.

 

I'm not going to call for dismissals, or call Roy an idiot, mainly because better and worse men then him have been in the roll before and created wildly differing results. All I know for a fact is that this England team did play better then Capello's side in 2010 and Roy's first defensive and pragmatic tournament eleven in 2012. Better finishing would have seen us looking forward to last 16 game v Greece.

Edited 25 June, 2014 by Colinjb

[Graffito]

Indeed, the quality of the opposition was lower.

 

Had Sir Bobby not had that wonderful 1990 tournament (when we only actually played well for about a game and a half, we laboured into the semi final) he would not have been remembered as fondly.

 

Is consistency in management going to ensure we succeed again? Of course not. But history has shown England managers to be vilified, criticised and entirely humiliated yet just a couple of good games can make them into Heroes.... oddly enough with no regard for the actual team performances that took them as far as they could.

 

I'm not going to call for dismissals, or call Roy an idiot, mainly because better and worse men then him have been in the roll before and created wildly differing results. All I know for a fact is that this England team did play better then Capello's side in 2010 and Roy's first defensive and pragmatic tournament eleven in 2012.

 

The quality of opposition was lower as were the stakes.

 

Playing poorly and winning (Robson 90) is infinitely preferable to playing poorly and losing (Hodgson against CR and U).

 

Normally I would tend towards consistency with Managers as it's obvious how fortunes can change in a few matches but soon I'll be running out of World Cups. Roy clearly isn't an idiot and only a fool would suggest that he is. He has two years on his contract. Let's hope he turns it around.

[Colinjb]

The quality of opposition was lower as were the stakes.

 

Playing poorly and winning (Robson 90) is infinitely preferable to playing poorly and losing (Hodgson against CR and U).

 

Normally I would tend towards consistency with Managers as it's obvious how fortunes can change in a few matches but soon I'll be running out of World Cups. Roy clearly isn't an idiot and only a fool would suggest that he is. He has two years on his contract. Let's hope he turns it around.

 

Quite.

 

And as for playing poorly and losing in this tournament. At least we played better then the last two. That was my only expectation, we were clearly never going to win it.

Edited 25 June, 2014 by Colinjb

[simo]

Anyone else think unless Lambert was injured it's a disgrace he hasn't played more!?

[svetigpung]

He's a nice intelligent man and a good ambassador for England but at the end of the day he's a loser. There's one compelling reason for keeping him. There's no obvious alternative.

 

that about sums it up.

[redder freak]

Anyone else think unless Lambert was injured it's a disgrace he hasn't played more!?

Yes. Sadly I fear that Bwanamakubwa is right. Lambert's days as a regular striker have ended. He'll just be an occasional substitute in the Prem and hopefully get a few games in the cups. Liverpool won't plan their team formations to suit Lambert's best position, any more than England have done. I hope I'm wrong, but that's the way I see it.

[sadoldgit]

I'll answer each of your points in turn.

 

Do we sack a Manager every time he loses? Of course not. The team showed promise against Italy but it was the manner of the next two performances which bothered me. No discernible pattern or tactics that I could see. Granted, individual performances were below par but I saw a lot of tension in the players who appeared inhibited, at a WC where for the first time that I can remember there were realistic expectations from media and fans.

 

Hodgson is presiding over a period of change. He's been in post for 2 years. Change is a constant.

 

Tough Group? Agreed. It was tough for all the teams. Two went through, including the unfancied CR and two didn't go through including England. There are other tough groups.

 

Better teams than England are going home. So what?

 

Who should we have instead, Redknapp etc? As I said, there's no obvious alternative to Roy. If there were, I believe the FA would have been much less inclined to keep him.

 

That squad was good enough to get out of the group. It didn't and I think that was down in large part to team selection, tactics, and lack of motivation. Think Suarez. How much did he want to beat England?

 

Then there are Roy's comments after last nights match...I'll stop there.

 

If Sturridge and Rooney had finished better we could have won all three games. I am not saying we were brilliant but we were hardly played off the park and certainly better than 2010. Realistic expectations? Many people were saying we woul struggle to get out of that group and it proved to be so. Lets face it, we were never going to win it and even semi or quarter finals looked highly unlikely.

 

 

He has been in post for 2 years in which time he has lost for one reason or another quality centre backs and we dont have anyone else coming through. The likes of Barkley, Sterling and Lallana are relatively recent additions. Shaw is new. He could have kept the old guard but is bringing in youth - the pundits seemed to accept that the WC would be a time of gaining experience and that we would see more in 2016.

 

There are other tough groups and I am not saying we would have done any better in another group - but Uruguay and Italy were favourites in our group and that was before CR showed they were no mugs.

 

So what that there are better teams than England going home? Just goes to show that it isnt a cake walk and if the likes of Spain, Italy and Portugal struggle what do you expect of us when we are in a transitional process? There is no shame in going out early although there is clearly a huge amount of disappointment.

 

Suarez was well up for beating Engalnd because he feels hard done by by the media. Perhaps we should get the redtops to wind up our players more? The squard were good enough o get out of the group? No they werent as it transpired. Forget tactics etc. We had the chances to win all three matcheds which were missed and the B list defence (as pointed out by most pundits before the WC) made some basic errors. If you are good enough you take your chances and you dont make schoolboy errors. The squad needs more work.

 

As for Roy's comments - we all see things through our own filters. He has worked with these players on the training ground and he knows what was exxpeted of them. I dont know why he didnt use Lallana more for example but he is more knowlegeable about football than I am and has seen the players close up day in day out. He made some decisions and for all we know they were the right decisions and we did the best we could with what we had. With a Lineker and a Terry or a Ferdinand it could well have been very different but we dont have a world class finisher or centre half so we are where we are.