Game 17: Denmark vs England live from the Frankfurt Arena. BBC1 5pm

[RTHerringbone]

You absolutely have to take the plunge with Wharton or Mainoo if the "best" other option over the full-back in midfield, is Connor Gallagher. Come on.

That pair have demonstrated ably over the season that they have huge potential. We can't shield them until they hit an arbitrary age or number of appearances.

[Rob1981]

16 minutes ago, Haguey said:

I agreed with your point about having an experienced head in defence the other day Rob rather than 3 players with barely any caps, but not sure that applies to Henderson

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think Henderson is some world beater   But there is a good chance Wharton goes through the entire tournament and doesn’t kick a ball. Henderson is a player we could have used in loads of different scenarios as the games play out and the injuries and suspensions kick in. Does the boring stuff against a good team more reliably than TAA, has the experience to deputise for Rice or Gallagher if we don’t want to be over reliant on the youngsters. 

Guess I would have taken Mainoo or Wharton but not both, then swapped in some more experience. And if that’s Henderson, it’s only because Phillips and Mount are out of the picture and nobody else has made a convincing case.

Edited June 20 by Rob1981

[Tummyowl]

3 minutes ago, Rebs said:

I'd rather have Wharton in than Gallagher.

I’d rather have an actual midfielder alongside Rice in midfield. Mainoo or Wharton please. I don’t rate Gallagher much, think he’s there for ‘energy’.

Still just cannot get my head around England playing 5 defenders, a holding midfielder against Denmark. Plus, Kane who spent most of the game trying to play in midfield. Foden and Bellingham both trying to play in the central role.

[outlander]

39 minutes ago, The_jagster said:

But Henderson today is worse than Henderson of previous tournaments. Rashford has been playing worse for a considerable period now. You also have to adapt for now and not what somebody could do 2 or 4 years ago

The point there, I think, is that it's not some best player voting/contest. It's not about who playED better or worse but who will play better at the tournament. 

[Bigwig]

I’m not buying the rhetoric that this is what happens when you pick players based on form.  This is what happens when you ignore players in form for the majority of the build-up then throw them in last minute for some reason.

Take someone like Gordon as an example. He’s been excellent all season but was constantly ignored while the likes of Rashford gets picked despite struggling, then just before the tournament in March Gordon gets his first cap. The guy could have been integrated into the side well before now but for whatever reason Southgate decided to do a massive u-turn right before the tournament.

Could also use other examples like Guehi, Palmer or others who probably should have been getting more game time long before now. 

[Rob1981]

11 minutes ago, eenie said:

How many times has TAA played CM for England before this Euros?

Are we including the two games at this tournament?   If so, I think maybe four. Possibly five.

[Smallen]

2 minutes ago, Bigwig said:

I’m not buying the rhetoric that this is what happens when you pick players based on form.  This is what happens when you ignore players in form for the majority of the build-up then throw them in last minute for some reason.

Take someone like Gordon as an example. He’s been excellent all season but was constantly ignored while the likes of Rashford gets picked despite struggling, then just before the tournament in March Gordon gets his first cap. The guy could have been integrated into the side well before now but for whatever reason Southgate decided to do a massive u-turn right before the tournament.

Could also use other examples like Guehi, Palmer or others who probably should have been getting more game time long before now. 

Palmer and Gordon only really arrived this season though. You’d have never put either in the England squad last summer.

Edited June 20 by Smallen

[Barry Cartman]

What a mess, Foden doesn't want to be left, Bellingham doesn't want to sit behind Kane, Kane doesn't want to stay up to, Trent isn't any sort of midfielder, Rice was ****ing woeful 

Complete shambles 

[Rob1981]

7 minutes ago, Bigwig said:

I’m not buying the rhetoric that this is what happens when you pick players based on form.  This is what happens when you ignore players in form for the majority of the build-up then throw them in last minute for some reason.

I take the point here, but the international breaks are ridiculously squeezed. We’ve lost friendly dates in August and February and April because the clubs didn’t want them. So there is now only one England meet up in seventh months between November and June.

If someone new smashes it in the second half of a PL season, you’ve basically only got two friendlies in March and on the back of that you have to make a call whether you take them to a tournament.

Take Mainoo for instance… wasn’t even on the scene in November, played the England friendlies in March, now he’s in the squad for the Euros. And people are saying he should be starting. And maybe he should, but there wasn’t a scenario where he could have accumulated more than two caps. Same as Palmer and Gordon really.

Edited June 20 by Rob1981

[skybluedave]

Guehi's had plenty of caps tbf. Maybe should have gotten more but he was earmarked as the Maguire replacement for over a year now

[RTHerringbone]

1 minute ago, Rob1981 said:

but there wasn’t a scenario where he could have accumulated more than two caps.

But why does the number of caps matter? Two caps. Ten caps. Twenty caps. When is someone "in"?

If you have players available whose profile appears to match the sort of role that your preferred system is missing, why wouldn't you give them a chance? We risk wasting opportunities by shoehorning more experienced players into slots that would be better served by developing "green" players.

[Wiggins Top Boys]

1 hour ago, Tikka Mezzala said:

Surely Millwall have someone?  

George Saville took a Northern Ireland cap rather than wait it out for a chance he would have got this summer. Muppet

[Rob1981]

Just now, RTHerringbone said:

But why does the number of caps matter?

Because someone is saying Southgate should have used these players more in advance of the tournament. There simply aren’t enough games to give everyone loads of caps.

But you’re right, that doesn’t mean one of them can’t slot into the starting eleven. We just have to brave enough to do it.

[Tummyowl]

Just now, RTHerringbone said:

But why does the number of caps matter? Two caps. Ten caps. Twenty caps. When is someone "in"?

If you have players available whose profile appears to match the sort of role that your preferred system is missing, why wouldn't you give them a chance? We risk wasting opportunities by shoehorning more experienced players into slots that would be better served by developing "green" players.

Why play a midfielder in midfield when you have an ‘experienced’ right back in Trent?

Why play a left back? You have another ‘experienced’ right back for that position too.

Why play a striker? You can play the uber ‘experienced’ Kane as a deep lying playmaker.

Why play a left winger? Shoehorn an in form central attacking midfielder there, because the other central attacking midfielder has to play central, so they can both occupy that space and leave a huge void on the left.

For what it’s worth, I thought Saka did ok tonight, and though the central defensive pair did ok.

[RTHerringbone]

Just now, Rob1981 said:

But you’re right, that doesn’t mean one of them can’t slot into the starting eleven. We just have to brave enough to do it.

This is it for me and then we need to be mature enough collectively as a nation and as a press not to be tossers when it goes wrong, because it will on occasions.

I'd much prefer if we became a proactive nation who risked taking a chance with youngsters, rather than one who passively stuck with the familiar old guard.

[eenie]

16 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

Are we including the two games at this tournament?   If so, I think maybe four. Possibly five.

Everyone criticises Southgate for not being bold, but deciding to shift TAA into central midfield as an experiment for the opening of a tournament finals is, well... bold.

 

[RTHerringbone]

2 minutes ago, Tummyowl said:

Why play a midfielder in midfield when you have an ‘experienced’ right back in Trent?

Why play a left back? You have another ‘experienced’ right back for that position too.

Why play a striker? You can play the uber ‘experienced’ Kane as a deep lying playmaker.

Why play a left winger? Shoehorn an in form central attacking midfielder there, because the other central attacking midfielder has to play central, so they can both occupy that space and leave a huge void on the left.

For what it’s worth, I thought Saka did ok tonight, and though the central defensive pair did ok.

It's like a massive amplification of the Eriksson midfield conundrum. We have to remember that the whole is often greater than the sum of its parts.

[GunmaN1905]

Southgate saying he's missing Phillips is up there to take the award as the worst NT manager take ever, after Martinez saying he doesn't need Nainggolan because he has Mertens.

[EdBed]

Southgate took a risk in backing TAA in midfield and it hasn't worked.

I think that picking Gordon on the left, Foden as the 10, Bellingham as the 8, is the selection we need. It brings balance and plays players in roles that they perform for their clubs, and means that Kane has players on both sides running beyond him.

However, whoever he picks in midfield is going to struggle if Stones and the defensive unit sits to deep and stretches us out. We can't be stretched out like this both vertically and horizontally.

[Vynal Seven]

1 minute ago, EdBed said:

Southgate took a risk in backing TAA in midfield and it hasn't worked.

I’m not having this risk nonsense, it isn’t a risk, it’s a stupid decision, he’s in no way, shape or form a midfielder. It’s like playing Kane in goal because he likes to come deep and calling it a risk. 

[aggressive minor]

24 minutes ago, eenie said:

Everyone criticises Southgate for not being bold, but deciding to shift TAA into central midfield as an experiment for the opening of a tournament finals is, well... bold.

 

Bold but stupid 

[eenie]

6 minutes ago, Vynal Seven said:

I’m not having this risk nonsense, it isn’t a risk, it’s a stupid decision, he’s in no way, shape or form a midfielder. It’s like playing Kane in goal because he likes to come deep and calling it a risk. 

Yeah he is just not a midfielder, no matter what people may want to believe. Amazingly it's much, much harder to find enough space to play those fantastic long passes when you're starting in central midfield rather than at full-back, and TAA doesn't offer anything else as a midfielder.

[EdBed]

8 minutes ago, Vynal Seven said:

I’m not having this risk nonsense, it isn’t a risk, it’s a stupid decision, he’s in no way, shape or form a midfielder. It’s like playing Kane in goal because he likes to come deep and calling it a risk. 

I'd say playing him in midfield in the hope that he adapts to the position was risky. Whether it was stupid or not is dependant on the degree of risk versus reward.

[Vynal Seven]

Just now, EdBed said:

I'd say playing him in midfield in the hope that he adapts to the position was risky. Whether it was stupid or not is dependant on the degree of risk versus reward.

Well yeah okay, but if I decided to play Russian roulette with a fully loaded gun would you describe me as risky or stupid?

[EdBed]

21 minutes ago, Vynal Seven said:

Well yeah okay, but if I decided to play Russian roulette with a fully loaded gun would you describe me as risky or stupid?

Well yeah, exactly. Total risk for zero reward, stupid.

 

We're basically discussing semantics (or whatever the right term is ). Risk isn't something you are.

Edited June 20 by EdBed

[themadsheep2001]

7 minutes ago, aggressive minor said:

Bold but stupid 

If you're bold enough to play TAA in midfield, you're bold enough to play Bellingham, Wharton or Mainoo in midfield 

[Wiggins Top Boys]

If Southgates alternative to Trent is Conor Gallagher, who I have no problem with, but clearly is only brought on to try and run around a bit rather than take control of the midfield, then it's completely pointless. The fundamentals of his plan and the system are all wrong as soon as the opposition step it up slightly (usually once we have opened up the game by scoring). The team don't press properly they do half arsed chasing shadows, they get outnumbered and lose the midfield battle. It feels like that arguing who should play in position X is futile while we play so deep and passively. 

If we are stuck like this because of the limitations of the manager, the squad he picked and his system the only thing we can really do to improve in spite of it is make a couple of personnel changes. If we are stuck with Trippier left back then whoever plays on the left needs to be far more direct to get up alongside Kane (being realistic, advanced of Kane as he drops back to his own 6 yard box) and we also need a midfielder in there to take control of the game whether that be driving the ball forward or passing it and retaining the ball. These things are obvious because even Southgate has seen and made the changes in game albeit with the wrong players because he's an absolute donut. 

Tl;Dr - play Mainoo or Wharton alongside rice OR bring Jude back and put Foden in as the #10. With either put Gordon/Eze/Bowen out wide. These are the only realistic changes other than Southgate admitting his system is pants

 

[aggressive minor]

I wonder if 5-3-2 would just work better. 
Saka and Trent wing backs, more freedom for Bellingham and Foden 🤷‍♂️ 

[Bootador]

Rice was so bad today, I'm actually all in on the "we have to play Wharton" now

Because Rice cannot play the 6. Not in this team - he's ****ing **** on the ball, great ball carrier, cannot pass. You are absolutely kidding yourselves if you think this guy is remotely up to the job. Can't pass for buggery. He can be the new Conor Gallagher. We need to some rhythm in midfield.

Pickford

Trent Stones Guehli ?

Bellingham Wharton Rice

Sake Kane ?

If Shaw plays Foden, if it's Trippier then I guess... I don't ****ing know Gordon maybe?

The subs performance (Watkins did fine tbf) today were worrying, I think I'd be happier with Foden as a "Finisher" than stuck on the left with Trippier. 

 

[Bootador]

I don't even know why this is surprising news, we already know this from Arsenal - it's why Arsenal started playing Jorginho (and the other guy)

[iamjerome]

i have always been a southgate apologist and think he deserves huge credit for 18/20/22

but this has been a shambles so far.

euro 2020 started slow too to be fair but england still made for chances.

we don't know what we're doing at all here.

a right footed left back who doesn't offer width while playing foden who wants to come inside.

a right back in centre midfield.

inconsistent pressing.

just so bad.

[Bootador]

We need a left footed left back so badly I'm leaning into the "if Shaw isn't fit then **** it play Saka there"

Yeah, he's not played left back in years but might be worth a punt in the last group game.

[Rob1981]

If we aren’t bold enough to play Mainoo from the start then I’m coming round to the idea of Bellingham playing deeper. Especially with Gallagher now on a yellow card. I don’t like moving Bellingham away from the opposition box, but he was poor today. And after the weird Southgate comments about Bellingham’s performance against Serbia.. it looks like they have already tried to get Foden into the game more by asking Bellingham to do less.

Might as well go the whole hog and drop Bellingham into a CDM role.

Gordon in for TAA with Foden/Bellingham moved around is surely better than Gallagher in for TAA and then Gallagher getting sent off or suspended for the R16.

Would still prefer Mainoo but I don’t know if Southgate will do it.

[kopsy101]

5 minutes ago, Bootador said:

Rice was so bad today, I'm actually all in on the "we have to play Wharton" now

Because Rice cannot play the 6. Not in this team - he's ****ing **** on the ball, great ball carrier, cannot pass. You are absolutely kidding yourselves if you think this guy is remotely up to the job. Can't pass for buggery. He can be the new Conor Gallagher. We need to some rhythm in midfield.

Pickford

Trent Stones Guehli ?

Bellingham Wharton Rice

Sake Kane ?

If Shaw plays Foden, if it's Trippier then I guess... I don't ****ing know Gordon maybe?

The subs performance (Watkins did fine tbf) today were worrying, I think I'd be happier with Foden as a "Finisher" than stuck on the left with Trippier. 

 

Can't help but think that Trippier has been pretty solid, and if Shaw isn't fit he deserves his place?

Trent has been alright, created chances at least. I do think that all the chat previous has made him a scapegoat, like he was alright but I've never seen anybody so heavily criticised for losing the ball in a slightly dangerous position considering everybody else did it. He was certainly better than Rice today, probably Bellingham too. Gallagher coming on just invited this wave of pressure from Denmark. The problem is probably a mixture of the system being completely ineffective and players confidence waning as the game goes on. 

Really liked Watkins coming on, however we probably need to find a way of playing Kane and stretching opposition back lines. Gordon and Saka seems like a good wing combination. 

[Bootador]

2 minutes ago, kopsy101 said:

Can't help but think that Trippier has been pretty solid, and if Shaw isn't fit he deserves his place?

Trent has been alright, created chances at least. I do think that all the chat previous has made him a scapegoat, like he was alright but I've never seen anybody so heavily criticised for losing the ball in a slightly dangerous position considering everybody else did it. He was certainly better than Rice today, probably Bellingham too. Gallagher coming on just invited this wave of pressure from Denmark. The problem is probably a mixture of the system being completely ineffective and players confidence waning as the game goes on. 

Really liked Watkins coming on, however we probably need to find a way of playing Kane and stretching opposition back lines. Gordon and Saka seems like a good wing combination. 

Trent has created chances yeah, that's why I'd keep him in the team. Just not in midfield. Walker can come on when we need to tighten up.

[Vynal Seven]

2 minutes ago, Bootador said:

Walker can come on when we need to tighten up.

So after 15 minutes when we’re 1-0 up?

[Bootador]

Just now, Vynal Seven said:

So after 15 minutes when we’re 1-0 up?

Pretty much... but Southgate doesn't make subs until 70 minutes

[Haguey]

Bellingham mostly played as a B2B/run from deep kind of midfielder before Madrid didn't he? Surely up to it, he can kind of do everything really well but needs to be told to lay the ball off sometimes. Saying that Boots is right, him there would leave Rice exposed so we'd need a third player in there to steady things. 4-3-3 would work, surely better than whatever we're doing now

[Smallen]

He has played really well there for England. 

[Bootador]

2 minutes ago, Smallen said:

He has played really well there for England. 

It's his best position, because he isn't that creative as a player. Technically brilliant, is he a 10 though?

[Weezer]

[Smallen]

2 minutes ago, Bootador said:

It's his best position, because he isn't that creative as a player. Technically brilliant, is he a 10 though?

I think he’s best as an all-action ball carrying, box crashing 8 tbh. Definitely for England anyway. 

With Foden off the wing, Kane up top and Bellingham as a 10 we have too many of our best players all trying to occupy the same spaces and perform the same functions.

[themadsheep2001]

23 minutes ago, Haguey said:

Bellingham mostly played as a B2B/run from deep kind of midfielder before Madrid didn't he? Surely up to it, he can kind of do everything really well but needs to be told to lay the ball off sometimes. Saying that Boots is right, him there would leave Rice exposed so we'd need a third player in there to steady things. 4-3-3 would work, surely better than whatever we're doing now

Yep. He was box to box for England too before this season at Madrid. No idea why Southgate has made this so difficult for himself. TAA out, Bellingham drops back, and Foden to 10. Gordon to left wing. There's his ****ing Phillips replacement

[aggressive minor]

35 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

If we aren’t bold enough to play Mainoo from the start then I’m coming round to the idea of Bellingham playing deeper. Especially with Gallagher now on a yellow card. I don’t like moving Bellingham away from the opposition box, but he was poor today. And after the weird Southgate comments about Bellingham’s performance against Serbia.. it looks like they have already tried to get Foden into the game more by asking Bellingham to do less.

Might as well go the whole hog and drop Bellingham into a CDM role.

Gordon in for TAA with Foden/Bellingham moved around is surely better than Gallagher in for TAA and then Gallagher getting sent off or suspended for the R16.

Would still prefer Mainoo but I don’t know if Southgate will do it.

Gallagher suspension would be perfect tbh 

[WillHoward42]

34 minutes ago, kopsy101 said:

Can't help but think that Trippier has been pretty solid, and if Shaw isn't fit he deserves his place?

Trent has been alright, created chances at least. I do think that all the chat previous has made him a scapegoat, like he was alright but I've never seen anybody so heavily criticised for losing the ball in a slightly dangerous position considering everybody else did it. He was certainly better than Rice today, probably Bellingham too. Gallagher coming on just invited this wave of pressure from Denmark. The problem is probably a mixture of the system being completely ineffective and players confidence waning as the game goes on. 

Really liked Watkins coming on, however we probably need to find a way of playing Kane and stretching opposition back lines. Gordon and Saka seems like a good wing combination. 

Trippier hasn’t done anything wrong, but not really done anything good either?

Rice had an absolute stinker. But because of the way Southgate has set us up to play, to accommodate the Trent experiment, which is absolutely baffling.

Trent might work if we have wingers hugging the line for him to ping balls to, or a striker sitting on the mast defender. But we have neither of those things, so what exactly is Southgate trying to accomplish here?

Trent hasn’t exactly been ‘bad’ but him trying to play midfield is not the answer and is hampering the team.

[Rob1981]

Yes, we were poor. But drawing with a decent team and almost certainly qualifying is hardly “a new low”  

Looks like gunman got that job at the Guardian.

 

[Bootador]

Don't worry, none of us in here have ruled out "a lower low" incoming.

[Lucas]

1 hour ago, Bootador said:

We need a left footed left back so badly I'm leaning into the "if Shaw isn't fit then **** it play Saka there"

Yeah, he's not played left back in years but might be worth a punt in the last group game.

I'm on board with this personally. Probably what I would do to get one of Cole Palmer / Wharton / Mainoo in the squad as well possibly, depending on how you want to set up the midfield. Trippier isn't bad in this team but isn't good either, it's not really doing anything for us right now. 

As I asked earlier, I don't really know or understand where this 'Trent in midfield' idea materialised from, whose brainchild it is. 

[arenaross]

9 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

Yes, we were poor. But drawing with a decent team and almost certainly qualifying is hardly “a new low”  

Looks like gunman got that job at the Guardian.

 

Quote

 

And what was most immediately arresting about this performance was that it tasted a little different to the usual tournament gruel. Normally when England draw against a smaller nation in the group stage – think the United States in 2022, Scotland in 2021, Russia in 2016 – they are more guilty of being boring than bad, lacking in inspiration and invention rather than possessed of any particular malignance.

But this was a performance that was actually too bad to be boring, a performance that actively courted our disapproval, a thin gruel laced with rat poison and carpet tacks. 

 

Hard to disagree with the actual article once you get beyond the headline. 

[titchuk]

12 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

Yes, we were poor. But drawing with a decent team and almost certainly qualifying is hardly “a new low”  

Looks like gunman got that job at the Guardian.

 

There's a lot of overreacting going on. Feels like the bad old days where the players are going to hate playing for England.