World Cup 2010

[Cardboard Box City]

He finds a player with his crosses far more than SWP ever does. He finds a player with his crosses far more than Lennon ever does.

Simple fact is, if the players who have received the balls from Walcott had made the most of the more than decent ball they've so often been played, then there wouldn't be these criticisms of Walcott. It's perhaps the case that those attackers who have messed up the very decent balls that Walcott has played them have messed them up simply because they never expected to get the ball to their feet. Whatever, Walcott can only send the ball in, what happens next isn't in his control.

The one thing that Walcott perhaps does 'wrong' (not really wrong, just different to what other players do) is run for the line on more occasions. If he took the easier options of coming inside or playing it back or playing a cross in early as much as Lennon or SWP do then I reckon he'd get none of the criticism that he does, and would be universally recognised as better than those. While those easier options might see us keep the ball, they rarely lead to the sort of goal threat that Theo creates when he gets to the line and gets a cross in.

[Tugger2k]

id much rather have a side capable of winning when playing badly than a side that looks great and doesnt deliver.

the biggest thing for me was the test, and they passed that against very decent opposition

even playing badly we scored 3 goals, add that into the fact that we finished the qualifiers as top scorers and that gives a chance, in any game, against any opposition. the sides got goals in it.

and lets put this into perspective. it could have been much, much worse last night.

we could have been Portuguese

Portugal 0-0 Cape Verde Islands

[TheGayTent]

He finds a player with his crosses far more than SWP ever does. He finds a player with his crosses far more than Lennon ever does.

Simple fact is, if the players who have received the balls from Walcott had made the most of the more than decent ball they've so often been played, then there wouldn't be these criticisms of Walcott. It's perhaps the case that those attackers who have messed up the very decent balls that Walcott has played them have messed them up simply because they never expected to get the ball to their feet. Whatever, Walcott can only send the ball in, what happens next isn't in his control.

The one thing that Walcott perhaps does 'wrong' (not really wrong, just different to what other players do) is run for the line on more occasions. If he took the easier options of coming inside or playing it back or playing a cross in early as much as Lennon or SWP do then I reckon he'd get none of the criticism that he does, and would be universally recognised as better than those. While those easier options might see us keep the ball, they rarely lead to the sort of goal threat that Theo creates when he gets to the line and gets a cross in.

[ampersand]

Why? True isn't it?

[eFestivals]

Theo?

I was finger saving, by typing fewer letters.

Now wasted by this post of course.

[Langdale Wolf]

True.

But there was no third gear if we'd have needed it - and given the chances they created in the first half, it was very lucky that we didn't need it.

[Tugger2k]

He finds a player with his crosses far more than SWP ever does. He finds a player with his crosses far more than Lennon ever does.

[Cardboard Box City]

Would you not agree Walcott is no better now than he was in 2006? He shows no sign whatsoever of improving. He clearly hasn't a football brain.

Edited May 25, 2010 by Cardboard Box City

[oafc0000]

I think there is third and fourth gear to hit yet... There where some good key players missing last night.

If it was a full on world cup game last night we would of played better I am sure of that much.

[ampersand]

I think there is third and fourth gear to hit yet... There where some good key players missing last night.

If it was a full on world cup game last night we would of played better I am sure of that much.

[TheGayTent]

no, he doesnt!

[Langdale Wolf]

i couldn't say for sure. not an expert on the other 3 teams, as i'm sure you aren't either.

[oafc0000]

yup. as would mexico. friendlies are meaningless. especially ones like this where they are only there for the manager to cut names.

[oafc0000]

USA - the toughest opponent on paper

[ralph250]

Regards the Spain game, twas in Seville aswell. Spain seem to either go 442 or 451 depending on Torres' fitness, but I really don't think you stand much chance playing 442 like we did in that game against the Spanish. Think it's pretty much a requisite for 3 in the mid to try and limit the space Xavi & co has to work in the centre.

England do have a chance this summer, but I worry about our flexibility to adapt to the opponent and that we haven't really practiced much in other formations to 442.

[eFestivals]

Yeah I agree. It's all Rooney's fault that Walcott's crosses end up 20 yards away from him. Rooney really should do better.

You must watch England games in a parallel universe to me.

Was the best cross of the game last night 20 yards away from Rooney. And Defoe. Or just a yard?

The only other real opportunity Walcott had to put a ball into Rooney he chose Gerrard instead - and in my mind, that was the much better ball. He could have delivered a ball perfectly for Rooney's head but I doubt Rooney would have got it, given that Mexico had remembered what defending was by that point of the game.

Anyway, Rooney (in the past at least) has rarely been in the box - he's generally run wide left, as a result of Cole believing that he's been told he's centre forward and has to score all of England's goals.

Would you not agree Walcott is no better now than he was in 2006? He shows no sign whatsoever of improving. He clearly hasn't a football brain.

It depends what you're calling 'improved'.

I agree that he's having no greater impact on games than he was a couple of years back (I wouldn't take that back as far as 2006 tho).

His game has defo changed tho - he's far less forward focused, and is much more prepared to play a simple ball inside than used to be the case, and that's the sort of thing that managers beat into players in England - don't show your skill, play it safe and boring instead. As is so often the case with the tactics of the English game, it doesn't improve players, it just has them playing to formula.

[eFestivals]

no, he doesnt!

On the basis of crosses that trouble the opposition, he defo does.

Lennon plays more of the safe balls that don't lead to any threat, that I'll agree with.

[Cardboard Box City]

I hope Onyewu plays at centre half as he's like Bambi on ice. I watched him closely because Wolves were after him last year.

[Langdale Wolf]

That is why I choose that as my game to attend. Should be a decent battle

[Tugger2k]

On the basis of crosses that trouble the opposition, he defo does.

Lennon plays more of the safe balls that don't lead to any threat, that I'll agree with.

[eFestivals]

Not an expert, no - not by any means. But I've certainly looked into the other sides and the threats we'll face, and also looked at what England have done when faced with similar opposition.

Algeria - no mugs really but we comfortably beat Egypt - who many pundits believe are a similar sort of side to Algeria - 3-1 very recently. And Algeria don't have anyone as good as Mohammed Zidan. We should win this one.

Slovenia - did really well to qualify, but they have absolutely nothing to offer that we can't nullify. Tore them to shreds when we played them last year (I think it was last year?). We should CERTAINLY win this one.

USA - the toughest opponent on paper, they really impressed me in the confeds cup last year. They almost reminded me of the way Wolves play - constantly closing down the opposition, working extremely hard with a couple of decent players and can be a danger on the break. I really like Landon Donovan, but him aside, don't have too many players that should cause us too many troubles. One of their better players in the Confeds was Altidore, yet he's not impressed me at Hull this season. I hope Onyewu plays at centre half as he's like Bambi on ice. I watched him closely because Wolves were after him last year. With a professional approach, we should win this one too, though I admit they have it in them to take points off us should we not perform.

Would you say this is a fair assesment?

Yep, a fair assessment.

Which pans out as a win, a draw, and a loss for England. If we get out the groups, we'll scrape thru.

[Langdale Wolf]

Yep, a fair assessment.

Which pans out as a win, a draw, and a loss for England. If we get out the groups, we'll scrape thru.

[ampersand]

Would you say this is a fair assesment?

[TheGayTent]

Was the best cross of the game last night 20 yards away from Rooney. And Defoe. Or just a yard?

The only other real opportunity Walcott had to put a ball into Rooney he chose Gerrard instead - and in my mind, that was the much better ball. He could have delivered a ball perfectly for Rooney's head but I doubt Rooney would have got it, given that Mexico had remembered what defending was by that point of the game.

Anyway, Rooney (in the past at least) has rarely been in the box - he's generally run wide left, as a result of Cole believing that he's been told he's centre forward and has to score all of England's goals.

It depends what you're calling 'improved'.

I agree that he's having no greater impact on games than he was a couple of years back (I wouldn't take that back as far as 2006 tho).

His game has defo changed tho - he's far less forward focused, and is much more prepared to play a simple ball inside than used to be the case, and that's the sort of thing that managers beat into players in England - don't show your skill, play it safe and boring instead. As is so often the case with the tactics of the English game, it doesn't improve players, it just has them playing to formula.

[eFestivals]

How do you work that out then?

The USA have a habit of beating us, and Algeria ain't gonna roll over in a WC game where England will have their own big nerves after having already lost to the USA, and an Algeria win would see them qualify.

OK, it might not go like that, but I'll be far from surprised if it does.