Group G Matchday 1 - 18th June - Belgium 3-0 Panama, Tunisia 1-2 England

[The Palace Fan]

[Danny]

I thought Pickford played well, didn't have to do a lot but decent passing.

Trippier for me was MOTM outside of Kane, consistently a threat all game and played well defensively. Walker could do better, did look lost. Stones was good and didn't make many mistakes, he's got a good positioning and angles his defensive runs well to cut out crosses/passes. Maguire was decent going forward but a liability at the back, his passing to Pickford could have given away two goals at least, doesn't look comfortable passing under pressure. Ashley Young was solid, but needs to use his left foot more.

Thought Henderson was alright, but definitely needs to learn to take one touch more often, got closed down too many times trying to take 2-3 touches before passing. Thought Alli was error prone and pretty average, didn't offer a lot but had a couple of smart moments (the header in front of the keeper), thought Lingard was just average.

Sterling's link up play was good I thought, dribbling and passing but finishing was bad and should have been more of a goal threat. Kane's obviously got an eye for goal but he could have created more for himself. Rashford was very good coming on and I hope he gets more game time, gave us some control in the final third and is very difficult to win the ball from. Loftus-Cheek also changed the game, added a dimension we don't have and forced the ball into the final third when we were struggling to keep it there. I'd like to see him and Rashford get a chance together.

Overall the first 25 minutes was very good, had we of kept that intensity we'd of put a few past them but we didn't. That has to be the biggest issue as you can't just play well for 25 minutes.

Good to see us win the game, in years gone by that'd be a draw for us and heads down but they kept going and didn't shy off from the ball. Hopefully we can build on that against Panama.

[Lucas]

5 hours ago, Smiley Culture said:

I can’t get on board with the wholly positive comments about England based upon nothing other than “on another day it could have been three or four”.

It wasn’t three or four, it was nearly 1-1 with a country that based their tactics on a team in the bottom four of League One playing away at a better team. Also, if that’s how quickly England fall apart after conceding a goal, it doesn’t bode well for a game against somebody who’ll actually bother to attack.

There’s definitely a fair few questions from that game and as a first game it was a good test but I don’t think it gets easier. Panama look awful and will look to be aggressive and tough and I’m not sure how England would cope with that. 

Think you need to lighten up a little. We haven't won an opening game in an International tournament for ages. Let's at least embrace the fact we didn't give up and kept going. We showed great mentality to convert that draw to a win given our results in recent years. We've drawn with the likes of Russia, Slovakia, Costa Rica, Algeria, USA and lost to Iceland. History suggests we wouldn't normally find a way to win.

Yes we made a meal of it. Yes we took longer to finish them off than we should but we kept going and found a way. Even when VAR wouldn't go for us we didn't let it beat us. We had spells where we played good football and created decent opportunities which is far more than France, Germany and Brazil can say they have done. We looked dangerous and capable of goals but we just missed the clinical aspect where you put teams to bed when you are on top.

And I have to say the most pleasing aspect is we kept looking to play football and get in behind them to the end than just launching it in the box everytime. Teams will have watched us tonight and thought we look handy. We have something we can work with and get better.

[Smiley Culture]

2 hours ago, Lucas said:

Think you need to lighten up a little. We haven't won an opening game in an International tournament for ages. Let's at least embrace the fact we didn't give up and kept going. We showed great mentality to convert that draw to a win given our results in recent years. We've drawn with the likes of Russia, Slovakia, Costa Rica, Algeria, USA and lost to Iceland. History suggests we wouldn't normally find a way to win.

Yes we made a meal of it. Yes we took longer to finish them off than we should but we kept going and found a way. Even when VAR wouldn't go for us we didn't let it beat us. We had spells where we played good football and created decent opportunities which is far more than France, Germany and Brazil can say they have done. We looked dangerous and capable of goals but we just missed the clinical aspect where you put teams to bed when you are on top.

And I have to say the most pleasing aspect is we kept looking to play football and get in behind them to the end than just launching it in the box everytime. Teams will have watched us tonight and thought we look handy. We have something we can work with and get better.

Why should we compare England to what happened as long as eighteen years ago? That’s utterly daft. Will you be comparing opening days of the season when the Championship starts? 

Again, if you’re happy with falling apart when conceding a penalty, one of the only chances the opposition had, then that’s fine but I wouldn’t get carried away. There’s plenty of questions that have come from that game. 

A decent first game but nowhere near as good as people seem to believe. 

[Smiley Culture]

8 hours ago, Danny said:

Didn't fall apart, other than the penalty they didn't threaten us. Did however make life difficult for ourselves.

No? England wobbled once Tunisia scored and started playing and looking like an England side that we have come to know over the years. Nerves come in to play and there were some poor play for England for a while after the goal. 

They didn’t have to threaten. They’d got a goal and were prepared to sit on it. It’s the classic away team performance that is seen up and down the country at every level on a Saturday afternoon. 

[Honey Honey]

They played like England of previous tournaments 2nd half but it wasn't wobbling or falling apart. That language is for very different performance types.

[Danny]

34 minutes ago, Smiley Culture said:

No? England wobbled once Tunisia scored and started playing and looking like an England side that we have come to know over the years. Nerves come in to play and there were some poor play for England for a while after the goal. 

They didn’t have to threaten. They’d got a goal and were prepared to sit on it. It’s the classic away team performance that is seen up and down the country at every level on a Saturday afternoon. 

So they won a penalty through a poor refereeing decision, where the ball itself was dealt with comfortably and didn't threaten our goal before or after it, or even during the play that lead to the penalty. And that's a collapse?

You love being overly negative about everything.

[Stan]

Maguire's game by numbers

 

I'll admit club bias got the better of me with some comments early in the thread! 2nd half he was much improved though which probably bumped a lot of those stats. Many on social media saying he played the worst out of everyone but it's definitely not club bias when I say that's bollocks. Lingard and Sterling were less than impressive and I think were more wasteful than him. 

I think he'll start Maguire again against Panama but then play Cahill vs Belgium. 

[Marc]

I thought Maguire was good. Monster in the air, comfortable bringing the ball out of defence. 

[Honey Honey]

He was a massive liability first half. Under no pressure whatsoever second half.

Maybe with time he will take to the big game with big pressure. The question is whether we have that time.

The in form English centre halves this season didn't even get called up.

[Danny]

27 minutes ago, Harvsky said:

He was a massive liability first half. Under no pressure whatsoever second half.

Maybe with time he will take to the big game with big pressure. The question is whether we have that time.

The in form English centre halves this season didn't even get called up.

This.

His game as whole was decent, but his passing under pressure meant that we were giving the ball away. Do that against Belgium and they'll score, I just don't think we can trust him personally. I'd go Cahill or Dier.

[Happy Blue]

9 hours ago, Gunnersauraus said:

And that is why I called you delusional 

You just don't get it 

[Stan]

3 hours ago, Harvsky said:

He was a massive liability first half. Under no pressure whatsoever second half.

Maybe with time he will take to the big game with big pressure. The question is whether we have that time.

The in form English centre halves this season didn't even get called up.

Maguire has been in form though hence the call up. 

Smalling and Lascelles should have been called up I think but would the latter take to the big games with big pressure too? 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Happy Blue said:

You just don't get it 

I was just trying to wind you up mate. Was to pissed to notice who was playing well. Sterling was shit there was a massive cheer when he got taken of but not sure who else played bad or good

[Carnivore Chris]

It was a good performance and quite refreshing. The first game is all about winning and that's what occurred, so there are positives to take for England. It could be a decent tournament, after not much was expected at the start.

I've actually got England on my sweepstake(I have them and Senegal, 2 teams for a fiver) so that's one reason to start being more patriotic this summer

[Dan+]

Maguire's a funny one because I do think his ability to run with the ball does cloud some visions, at both club and international level in my experience. I like him and think in a side that can compensate for the odd error (like Man City have with Stones) he could be quality. There are some question marks over him though, don't forget he's just been an ever present in a side that shipped 60 goals this season. While others took the bulk of the stick he wasn't entirely innocent.

He does offer something that no others do though. I'd go as far as saying he's better on the ball than Stones.

[Rick]

Stones is better on the ball than Maguire. I want Maguire replaced by Cahill for the next game. There were just far too many errors from him all game.

[Danny]

Watching a very shit 6 minute highlight back, (if anyone knows any longer/better highlights that show passing and movement and not just a cut to a shit that'd be great) our biggest problem in the game was making a good connection with the ball when striking. It's probably fair to say that whilst we could have won it bu 2-3 goals, we didn't necessarily deserve to because whenever we had a chance it was personal errors that fluffed them.

Lingard continually mishit the ball and had about 2-3 chances, his first chance he hit with his hill in the 6 yard box, fluffed the volley and could have done better when he hit the post, obviously Sterling was offside but that open goal should have been finished even if it was difficult to take on, John Stones had a chance near the 6 yard box at a corner and completely fluffed it, Loftus-Cheek played a good ball after a good run to Rashford who instead of hitting it let it go for Lingard...should have just opened up, especially as he's a striker and Lingard isn't...wouldn't see Harry Kane doing the same in that situation I don't think.

Maybe they were nervous, I don't know, but they need to get that together because that's far too many mistakes in front of goal and is the reason why it was so tense.

[Danny]

Stones is our best ball playing defender, easy.

[Stan]

42 minutes ago, Danny said:

Stones is our best ball playing defender, easy.

if Maguire's not on the pitch then yeah. (go on, fall for it)

[Marc]

Thought this was vaguely interesing:

The academies of the England starting eleven:

Sunderland Sheffield Utd Barnsley Sheffield Utd Man City Watford Sunderland Man Utd QPR MK Dons Tottenham

Lack of 'big' clubs in there and even the ones at the 'big' clubs gained their experience out on loan in the football league first: Kane, Lingaard, Trippier.

[Stan]

a credit to the development of players in the Football League.

Trippier is an interesting one as he was developed at a Premier League club, took a step down to move permanently away from that big club (Man City) and plied his trade for a few seasons in the lower leagues before getting the deserved step back up. Clearly paid dividends. Wonder if he ever thought he'd be starting World Cup games when playing in shite conditions outside of the Premier League. 

That latter point goes for a lot of the squad too.

[Danny]

46 minutes ago, Stan said:

if Maguire's not on the pitch then yeah. (go on, fall for it)

Banter

[Dan+]

2 hours ago, Cannabis said:

How will I ever counter such an argument.

[Dan+]

46 minutes ago, Marc said:

Thought this was vaguely interesing:

The academies of the England starting eleven:

Sunderland Sheffield Utd Barnsley Sheffield Utd Man City Watford Sunderland Man Utd QPR MK Dons Tottenham

Lack of 'big' clubs in there and even the ones at the 'big' clubs gained their experience out on loan in the football league first: Kane, Lingaard, Trippier.

Did that EPPP idea ever hold up, that initiative that effectively gave the bigger clubs the ability to cherry-pick youngsters for a nominal fee. Absolutely disgraceful idea.