28 Mar 2021 18:42:52
What does everyone think of Gareth Southgate's England masterclass against Albania.

Ranked 66th in the world and plays Rice and Phillips as his midfield for over 70 minutes.

Does he have what it takes to replace Ole? 😂.

1.) 28 Mar 2021
28 Mar 2021 19:36:51
France beat Kazakhstan 2-0 and there the world champions.

2.) 28 Mar 2021
28 Mar 2021 19:50:21
Shappy you took the words out of my mouth.

I’ve just watched an England team play against Albania, ranked 63rd in the World with two defensive midfielders in a double pivot. Interestingly both players Rice and Phillips have been linked with Utd.

Albania predictably sat deep, were well organised and made it very difficult for England to create chances.

To be brutally honest I didn’t see much from either Rice or Phillips to suggest either would be a major upgrade on McFred. There was a lot of backwards and sideways passes but very little penetration or quality forward passing. Getting either player out of West Ham and Leeds would be difficult, extremely costly and to get them both would surely cost North of £100m. Whilst I accept Fred’s passing can be atrocious on occasions, neither Rice or Phillips are significantly more progressive with their passes considering what they would cost to bring them to the Club. Rice probably reads the game better and tracks runners but with the cost of any potential transfer prohibitive would he really improve our side that much?! I’m yet to be convinced.

I have no idea why experienced, elite coaches choose to play with two defensive midfielders against significantly weaker opposition. Surely two more creative No’s 8 playing ahead of one holding midfielder would be much more adventurous, progressive and create more passing options!

I don’t see Ole changing formation so where does that leave us?

I’m convinced improving our front four and getting a quality RW will improve us more than a CB, CDM or CF. Ole loves Lindelof/ Maguire and McFred so any player for those positions would have to be a significant upgrade. 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th options won’t start.

In my opinion get a top quality RW, complete our attacking quartet and see where that takes us.

Ps - Southgate only made two subs (he’s allowed 5) and didn’t make his first until after the 70 minute mark.

3.) 28 Mar 2021
28 Mar 2021 22:45:27
England won at a canter guys.

4.) 29 Mar 2021
29 Mar 2021 00:58:27
Two very good holding midfielders who would improve us a lot and allowed the forward players and the full backs to get forward.

5.) 29 Mar 2021
29 Mar 2021 10:25:47
Hatter, its not about the result its about how Southgate set up a clearly far superior side versus a team that they should be comfortably beating. England could have played with one holding midfielder and played someone like Ward-Prowse or even Bellingham instead of one of Rice or Phillips. In doing so would England have been any worse defensively? Probably not, but by playing an extra player in midfield who can move the ball forward quickly and accurately then maybe England would have 2 or even 3 nil up before the hour mark and the game would have been far more comfortable. Could have even taken a couple of key players off and give them a rest.

DLIB, You might be right that someone like Sancho might make a bigger impact over a season. At least I think he would make a more obvious impact. I don't necessarily have a problem with playing a double pivot, or even that both players in that pivot are more defensively orientated. Liverpool played fantastic football last season with Henderson and Fabinho starting most weeks in the heart of their midfield.
For me the issue is that the players we play there just aren't up to scratch. I don't think the balance is right and as such we give away simple chances and create problems for our defence that just shouldn't happen when playing two defensive players in the double pivot.

For example the league average for goals conceded in the second phase of play by a midfielder breaking in to the box is 2.8 goals so far this season. We have conceded 9 such goals in the league and a further 2 in cup games. When you have two defensive midfielders playing and not one of them picks up the midfield runner there is a clear problem.

I think it stems from the fact that neither are "thinking" CDMs, they are reactive and not proactive. The rush toward the ball without thinking about the same that opens up behind them, often leaving huge gaps if they don't win the ball.

While someone like Sancho would clearly have won us a further 5-8 points this season, equally someone like Rice or Ndidi would have saved us a further 5-8 points.

I just think its much easier, especially to the casual fan to notice a goal being scored rather than a player holding their position meaning we don't concede.

It's the same thing in England, we have often been more impressed with the defender who throws themselves into a last second tackle than the player who never has to because they are always in the right place at the right time because they read the game well. John Terry at Chelsea was always lauded as a great CB, yet from my memory more often than not his defensive partner was the better defender. Terry was just the more active one due to his poorer reading of the game making him a reactive defender rather than a proactive one.

6.) 29 Mar 2021
29 Mar 2021 22:52:17
I don't come on the sites often anymore, long time no see!

Shappy, so you honestly think Terry didn't have good reading of the play? I know you're a United fan and I'm a Chelsea fan so bias is a factor, both for and against. But Terry is rightly lauded as one of the greatest CBs of his generation. He didn't have great speed, but his game intelligence and reading were superb. If not he would never have been able to reach the heights he did.

7.) 30 Mar 2021
30 Mar 2021 10:13:56
Jackson, I think Terry was a very good player. But he was overhyped because he was English.

Whenever I watched Chelsea I also thought that Desailly, Gallas, and Carvalho were much better defenders than Terry. I'd even argue that Cahill read the game better than Terry.

That's not to say Terry was a bad player, and he certainly improved his reading of the game as he got older.

But if you're having to throw yourself into last ditched tackles 3 or 4 times a game then you have got yourself into the wrong position at least 3 or 4 times in that game. Simple as that really.

Just listen to what Paolo Maldini has to say on the art of defending.

British fans love a trier, someone who works hard, and its much easier to appreciate defending when we see someone do something as clear and obvious as throw their body in front of the ball.

However, great defending means you never have to make a last ditch manoeuvre like that. Great proactive defending means you cut that out before there is even a shot.

8.) 30 Mar 2021
30 Mar 2021 14:17:03
Desailly, Gallas, and especially Carvalho were all very good, definitely agreed. Carvalho probably one of the more underrated defenders from those years.

But I just can't agree on Terry. He read the play wonderfully well, otherwise he would've been lost a lot due to his lack of pace/ mobility. Talk about last ditch tackling, that's pretty much Cahill's bread and butter. Cahill is the embodiment - or perhaps I should say 'was' - of reactive defending, not Terry.

Another aspect that made him special was his organization of the defense, something we've sorely lacked over the past few seasons. Terry was brilliant at it, which is probably again due to him being excellent at reading the game.

Perhaps he was never at Maldini's level, but then who is? Terry's one of the top CBs to have played in the PL, and that's not because of last ditch tackles.