Speaking of left-midfielders, how’s Matty Etherington coming along these days, LC?
:eek: I think Trevor Francis is past his best now - Trevor Sinclair is your man (and indeed perhaps he is the answer)
Yes well, having termed Ashley Cole ‘Andy Cole’ in another emotional, post-match thread, I’m not commenting on ‘Trevor Francis’ - looked good on the left though, didn’t he 
Yep, I don’t doubt he handles the players very well.
Every midfield player in England’s starting line-up had a Champions League winners medal, three of the back five have just won the domestic Double, two others have been to World Cups before.
That leaves only Mills and Heskey (Premiership debut 1995, Euro 2000, Champions League, etc) without shed loads of directly comparable experience Yep, it’s a relatively young team but I don’t believe that has any greater bearing on ability to play than does inexperience.
Nor can many teams rely on that level of experience.
I think my point is that I have long gave up on hearing/reading anything from professional sportsmen/women that might reveal something interesting. They are all so well trained by experts to handle the media that I dismiss everything said in ‘press conference mode’ as bland dumbing down, don’t-feed-the-tabloids dead-bat comments – unless, of course, they’re made on purpose as per Beckham’s pre-match “They’re very wily” comment (which was, as far as I’m concerned, aimed at the referee).
On Beckham - I don’t have a problem with the way he played, or rather was played. Having seen the game twice now, my view is that I’ve never seen him play deeper or with greater discipline. His role was, defensively and as circumstances demanded, to work around Mills: wide when Mills got dragged in, in front (screening him), covering him when Mills went forward – I don’t think that means the manager was particularly concerned with Mills but it was part of a general defensive strategy. If Beckham has any sort of injury now, I’d imagine its neck-ache from looking over his shoulder in order to adjust his position.
On the game in general - IMHO, the manager was, again, very lucky in the Argentinean game. He started off with Scholes on the left and Hargreaves inside. Obviously, we have no way of knowing how that may have worked out but early signs were not encouraging – in the first 10 minutes I saw the same lack of balance and shape as previously.
The injury to Hargreaves was the making of the performance, not least in that being the introduction of the player sent home as surplus to requirements a week before the tournament started.
And as for taking Owen off so as to release a further two defenders to push up…I just don’t know what to say.
ruadh – I’d like to offer an observation but three league games this season, several substitute appearances and a couple of Cup matches isn’t enough for this, now, non-attendee to comment save to say the deal that brought both him and Davies for just over the million looks like excellent business.
Francis, Sinclair, whatever. 
I just wish he’d stop using that fake tan, even if it is a lot better than Dale Winton’s. Don’t get me started on that Brummie accent…
I agree completely.
It’s a bit of a change from say the George Best era. If only Best had had the media protection Beckham’s got…
You should be a manager yourself!
I’d like to be the first to echo glee’s fine sentiment. BTW, your real life name wouldn’t be Adam Crozier per chance ? 
Oh, you said ‘a’ manager…pah!
well I’m not LC but I am Spurs season ticket holder.
Matty has failed to come on as hoped and we have farmed him out on loan to Bradford, and were about to let him go permanently when we had one of our periodic injury crises.
According to David Pleat the general feeling at the club is that he isn’t quite good enough to figure in future plans, and we would certainly listen to ofer (analagous to Luke Young). It was this feeling that was behind the signing of Jamie Blueknapp.
Bizzarely, Glenn thinks Stephen Clemence is the better player.
You learn something new every day. (No. 4) My apologies.
Your knowledge of soccer is no doubt more nuanced than mine. But I note that both Sweden and Argentina looked significantly better offensively in their other games than they did against England.
And yet I see a lot of criticism (well, lack of enthusiasm, anyway) of England’s defensive performance. Moreso at other sites than here.
What gives? Is this a Boston Red Sox kind of thing, where you are just always worried (for those of you knowledgeable about American baseball)?
FWIW, we ignorant 'Merkins had a nice feature on Michael Owen in our major weekly sports publication, Sports Illustrated, this week.
I think you may be right there, Milo. England have a traditional reputation – not entirely fair – for being a fairly unglamourous, workmanlike side. As such, the stereotyped England side cannot rely on attacking flair to win or turn a game, so when the defence comes under pressure we fans panic that a single slip of concentration will put the game beyond us.
Of course it’s not an accurate image these days, but given that England always seem to make hard work of games (only two exceptions spring to mind from recent years) and endeavour to lose guaranteed wins it’s not surprising. Our defenders are mostly very average international quality, so nobody really trusts them to not mess up. As such, when we defend it’s a bad thing since we don’t trust ourselves to do a good job of it.
No indeed.
If I was, I would have done better over Wembley. Appointing Sven does not compensate for the joke that is our rusting National Football Stadium.
I notice that the Japanese have managed to build several delightful stadiums, including some indoor ones, while we pathetically squabble over where the cash is coming from.
I’ve lost track of the number of Ministers / Chairman of committees that have come and gone over Wembley.
P.S. Why didn’t we put it in the Millenium Dome?
Sorry to hear it. I wonder if this might be at least partially down to Glennda’s preference for 3-5-2 - it was as a conventional winger in a 4-4-2 that he excelled at Peterborough (I used to have a good mate there and saw him play at London Road a few times, always thought he had a bright future). He’s still quite young, anyway, wouldn’t write him off yet as a potential solution to England’s left midfield problem.
I’d like to see Ashley Cole groomed as a left-sided midfielder. I’ve watched him play once for Arsenal, and the season-ticket holders around me confirmed that he is prone to horrendous lapses of concentration in defence. I think he could take up where Graeme Le Saux left off (if you see what I mean) with Wayne Bridge or <Oldham bias> future England international and current U-21 star Chris Armstrong</Oldham bias> at left back.
I have to say the name ‘Chris Armstrong’ sends shivers down my spine…
So I suspect there’s not too much debate about England’s starting line up against Nigeria:
Defence: Arsenal and Leeds
Midfield: Man U and Sinclair
Forwards: Liverpool
Any other ideas ?
No, I think the team’s fairly obvious now. Despite my Cole worries he hasn’t played at all badly by any standards, and I suppose he’s no more gaffe-prone than Mills.
I would like to see Vassell at some point, if only to keep his morale up. Maybe, just maybe, if we can build a two-goal cushion we could rest Owen and bring on Sheringham and Vassell for Owen and Heskey.
PS Aye, Chris Armstrong’s name is not one to breed confidence, but this one’s a gem. Has his older namesake found a new club yet?
Aye. Stringfellow’s.
Either as Twisty’s says or the Darby and Joan.
Just going to list a few of the more contentious issues and players
[ul][li]Heskey: Poor old Emile, he really doesn’t get very much credit. FWIW, I don’t think the way he is played (as opposed to the way he would chose, or a conventional striker is played) does him any favours at all. Hardly ever is the ball passed to him on the ground and when it is it’s when his back’s to goal in that ‘sitting’ position – what he’d love is to run onto the ball and into the box.[/li]
I guess his value in that position is in sucking back at least one opposing midfielder (as was the case with Simeone in the Argentine game) and also, together with Owen, stretching the defence so others can run into space. He also does the holding and laying-off thing well and that’s very useful. For a big man, he also turns defenders occasionally, which is surprising.
I think I probably still like the way that works from an initial tactical perspective and it affords the opportunity to completely change tactics with the introduction of Sherringham or Vasell.
- What, for me, might be interesting is, at some point (and I guess it’s only feasible, now, if England are behind in the knockout stage) is changing to a back three after 65-70 minutes and having Owen plus two of three from Vassell, Sherringham and Heskey (3-4-1-2 : “If you will” as Big Ron says).
[li]Beckham: I hope he’s still not fit because if it’s not that then something else could be wrong. Having said that, the way he’s been played so far by the manager isn’t flattering to his abilities (getting less forward than Scholes, working tightly with Mills – Mills, incidentally, has crossed far more balls into the box than has Beckham).[/li]
I also worry about the limited time he’s had getting used to this new ball because of injury. Seems to be an absolute nightmare keeping the damn ball down and while I’m sure he’s up to taking free kicks, I do think he needs as much practice as possible – it’s partly a confidence thing, IMHO, tied in with the sports psychology visualisation thing.
[li]Campbell: Slow to read the game and with the turning circle of an oil tanker. But, whenever the manager could put him and Rio together, he always has – in his mind, they’re the number one partnership.[/li]
I’ve never been a fan of Southgate but since his move from Villa, I do think he’s blossomed in ability and confidence. The problem is, Rio now understands Campbell and what he may, or may not, cover and do. I imagine the manager is open-minded enough to think about changing the partnership but it has to be unlikely.
I’m reminded of Bobby Robson at Italia '90 when the team only really came together after injuries forced the changes that actually made sense anyway. Southgate may only get his chance if injury or suspensions allow,
[li]Sinclair: Love his athleticism and willingness to cover opposing runs into dangerous areas. But the poor bloke is stronger on his right foot. Lost count of the number of times he’s got close to the line and then checked back rather than crossing (because he’s not great with that left boot) - that always costs us in terms of defenders being able to organise and cover. Who’s better ? the born-in-England Ryan Giggs ? It’s still the problem position and I like A. Cole at full back so I’m not keen on pushing him up and bringing in Bridge. How fit is Dyer and is he too attack-minded to cover those oppposing runs ?[/ul][/li]
Overall, I think the balance is much better now than it’s ever been under this manager. IMHO, one problem we still have is getting fast, quality service to Owen, in fact, any kind of service – the final ball isn’t happening enough whether from wide or in the channels. However, perhaps that’s the price we are paying for a ‘swamping’ style defence. If Beckham gets fitter then at least that’s one more between-the-box- runners (or double as only Scholes is doing that), or at least one more capable of delivering that quality final ball.
I agree wholeheartedly with your comments on Mills and Beckham. I was gobsmacked today to see Beckham taking a throw-in to Mills, who the wasted a long pass. Why the hell wasn’t it the other way round? Mills is a good, solid full-back; Beckham should not be covering for him and should be pushing forward to put in crosses - that’s almost his sole value to the team.
I’ve never been sure what Heskey’s strength actually is, and I think he gets lumbered with the muscular target man role because he looks the part rather than plays it. I don’t know that Sheringham could do better, but Sheringham’s passing and creativity are more obvious than Heskey’s.