Mails call for Rose, Vardy, Rashford and a sh*thouse…

Sarah Winterburn

If you have anything to say on any subject, you know what to do: Mail theeditor@football365.com

 

Most importantly…
I think we’re missing the most important aspect of England last night. Gareth Southgate wears the shit out of a three-piece suit.
SC, Belfast

 

Dropping Kane and other ideas
Long-time reader, but this is the first time I have felt the need to write in. I would like to my two pence to the many initial reactions from last night, with a few things Southgate should be looking at:

Young: well done mate, but please take your seat back on the bench. He has all the problems of a right-footed player playing at LWB, get Rose in and gives us balance. Please.

Trippier: Played very well, but surely the world class RWB that is Kyle Walker would have done the same if not better and given us a more robust defence, by adding someone who knows how to play CB (Cahill).

Alli: I fear many people are saying RLC was excellent just because Alli came up short. This isn’t anything to do with his talent but carrying a knock is not a good idea in a World Cup. For me when he took his knock we knew how Tunisia were playing, so why not put Rashford on right away? I would be more looking to start Rashford in the next game rather than RLC. Even if we were to say RLC was excellent, was his 10 min cameo better than Rashford (and his goal) against Costa Rica?

Kane: here is the controversial one. Brilliant finish for his two goals, however would anyone else (apart from Stones) have been less deadly from that distance? His build-up play was none existent, and he doesn’t have the pace to scare defences as much as Rashford, Sterling, Vardy et al. Vardy, who has been pointed out in this mailbox many times, has the better conversion rate this season. We are told that Kane is the only world class player (see point 1 for a rebuttal of this), but keeping him in rather than people who would suit the team’s ethos of speed smacks of the same flawed thinking that kept Lampard and Gerrard together in the same team.

Against Panama none of this should matter as we SHOULD overcome them, but against Belgium when we will look to play on the counter it could make a massive difference. Imagine the likes of Vardy, Rashford, Sterling, Lingard, Rose, and Walker hitting teams on the break with Henderson continuing his role in sweeping up behind the midfield. To make this even better, this plays to the strength of another player, Pickford. His distribution is immense, and seems to get better the further he must kick it and the less time he has, a prime example is his assist to Redmond.
Lloyd Thompson

 

How about Kane’s anticipation?
I haven’t seen too much made of this, but Kane’s anticipation for both goals is bloody brilliant. The first in particular, where he starts moving before Stones even makes contact with the ball, makes me very happy.

I don’t really have much more to say about it, other than it’s great to watch the replay and see just how early he realises what is going to unfold. No lightning quick reactions required, just the thought process of a clinical, predatory, world class goalscorer.

I’ll get back to hating him once the World Cup is over though.
Ross, AFC London

 

Rashford should start
I’ve said it before and I’ll say again – it’s not in the interests of this England team to have Raheem Sterling starting in a front two. He has two goals for England in 39 games, none in his last 21. He’s a wonderfully gifted footballer and had a fantastic season, but playing alongside Silva, De Bruyne, Sane and Aguero in a finely tuned team may as well be a different sport to playing for England at a World Cup (compare the types of goals the two teams score).

Football’s a funny old game, England completely dominated that game and yet after all the sharp passing, slick movement and attractive dribbling (not just Raheem) actually all of our output i.e. actual goals, came from two big centre-backs winning headers from corners.

Football’s a game of small margins. Goals win games. I look at this team and ask how are we going to score? Set pieces look good. Harry Kane always looks good. But in Alli, Lingard and Sterling I see a heavy focus on tippy tappy aesthetically pleasing football that typically leads to very low output. Bringing Rashford in means you don’t lose a lot in terms of creativity, pace and ability to keep the ball but you add a natural finisher and someone who can shoot from range. Another dimension if you will. I suspect and hope it will happen naturally as the tournament progresses.
Dan, Herts

 

Not won over by Henderson
Let me start by saying I’m a big Jordan Henderson fan. I’ve loved watching him develop for Liverpool and I’ve always backed him, but his performance last night wasn’t a good one so I don’t understand everyone falling over themselves to praise him?

Maybe I have higher standards or maybe everyone else watched something different to me, but I watched him closely last night and just wasn’t amazed.

My friend and I were on a stag do last weekend and got into a drunken argument about Jordan with neither of us remaining composed. It resulted in a £10 bet about whether he would make more forward or backwards passes over the course of the World Cup. As such, we watched Jordan very closely.

A lot of the time he “kept the ball moving”. This was fine. What wasn’t fine was the lack of taking a bit of time to turn and look for a pass forward. It was as if he’d receive the ball and immediately know he was passing within his current vision. What I’d have given for him to take a second to just look up and maybe take a player on or pass the ball and run forward with a cheeky one-two. I’ve seen him play much better in other games, so why was everyone so happy with his performance last night?

Granted, there were about five or six really good passes forward, but surely we should expect more? From around the 30th minute till the 70th minute he seemed to play within himself and he really could’ve grabbed the game by the scruff of the neck instead of just passing back to the player he’d received from without even taking the time to assess his options. It was only Tunisia for God’s sake…
Nick P. Burnley FC. (Anyone know where to find stats about passing direction?)

 

Looking at the positives
Adding to the ‘over analysis’ that dominates every England performance, I am feeling really positive after watching that, for the following reasons:

1. We won in spite of the fact key decisions (i.e 3 penalty calls) went against us. If luck evens itself out in the tournament I would rather save that for the knockout phase

2. We won in spite of the fact we contrived to miss at least three really excellent chances. That we can afford to be profligate is a good sign, even if the lack of composure is a little worrying

3. We had 15 shots on goal, 9 on target. That is a decent effort at international level against a side ranked 21st in the world

4. Winning a game in the last minute is far more uplifting than cruising to a 2 or 3 nil. It should give us a real buzz going into the next game (I’m choosing to ignore the precedent of our similar last minute winner against Wales in the Euros and what followed from that).

5. Although Tunisia weren’t exactly pouring forward, that we restricted them to one shot on target from a dubious penalty is further vindication that we are strong defensively. Yes, we will be tested more by better teams, but I think we raise our defensive game against those sides anyway (examples in our recent friendlies against Brazil, Germany and Italy)

6. If we are to go deep in this tournament, I imagine we will need Kane to score at least five or six given the lack of goals elsewhere. Getting two in the first game should give him huge confidence and if he has a sniff of the golden boot he won’t be shy in pulling out all the stops to get it.
Rob (looking forward to enjoying England ‘B’ v Belgium ‘B’ next Thursday…)

 

Looking on the bright (and dark) side
Positives:

1. We have only one World Cup game since 2010, against Slovenia. In that time we have drawn with Algeria, Costa Rica & USA and lost to Germany, Uruguay and Italy. As a fan watching only their third World Cup as an adult, this game could have descended into the dour draws of old when teams try to shithouse their way through a game.

2. The defence. Yes Maguire, Walker and Stones all have a costly mistake in them. However, so do Jones, Smalling and Keane with Gary Cahill known to drop off his marker for set plays. Unlike those bumbling knuckleheads, the starting trio can step out in drive with the ball. The amount of times Maguire and Walker drove from their own half to the final third was something to behold and they must have gained more ground than any of our midfielders/attackers. Yes they can cock up but at least it is worth the risk.

3. The opening spell – that was England built in Southgate’s image – if we can have more of that we will do well. I think this style will work better against bigger teams. Especially ones with no specialist wing-backs like Belgium – who Tripper will find a lot of space against.

4. Set-piece delivery. Trippier and Young might not be the most defensively sound but they do whip in a fine cross and that is fine by me. If we can’t pass through someone it makes a good Plan B. For that alone Young should start against Panama.

5. The ref. Whilst the ref wasn’t the sole reason for the struggle, he certainly didn’t help. As someone who has watched every game, this was the worst refereeing performance. So far reffing has been of a good standard with the game allowed to flow, not standing for time wasting and other nonsense. The ones who have made dodgy calls have at least been consistent. This ref was crap and inconsistent. The only reason the Walker penalty was soft was because Kane didn’t get the next 2. Other refs would have given either 3 or 0 penalties. Presumably we will get the good refs in our next games which will be a huge plus.

6. Mental fortitude. How many times have we seen England heads drop when things go a bit wrong? The ball seems to bounce off them as if they are wearing football retardant boots and passes are continuously over and under hit. This happened for a bit last night, but, unlike previous teams, we kept going. Defence played out and didn’t go long, subs tried neat touches and crosses and we got the late goal. Previous England teams would fade the longer the game was going against them.

7. Subs. RLC and Rashford both made an impact. Nice to see players come on and not be noticeable downgrades/completely anonymous. In RLC’s case it would have been nice to see him earlier.

Negatives:

1. Why does the ball always bounce off our players? Every tournament the England team looks like the ball is impossible to control cleanly. In 2010 you could blame the over-inflated Jabulani ball but in every tournament since we can look very laboured. Whilst we did play great stuff in spells, for a large part of the second half it did resemble the laboured England of yesteryear. The only game of similar sloppiness (bar teams like Saudi Arabia) is Nigeria v Croatia, which was poor.

2. Movement. The team is pacey, why do so few of them run in behind or down the channels? Sterling and Rashford were guilty of coming too deep and then getting crowded out when on the ball. It would be nice to see them stretch teams to make space for Alli and Kane. I would like to see Vardy AND Kane start against Belgium for this reason. Vardy would run Kompany et. al ragged whereas Sterling would drop deep and run into him.

3. Timing of subs. Why did Alli play the second half? Clearly taken a knock and better to save him for other games. The second half might not have been so stodgy had subs been made sooner.

4. Defending crosses. No matter who the CB pairing/trio is, we always look weak when the ball is crossed in from the flank or a set play. Walker was a clear example of someone panicking and going for the man when he could have easily got the ball. Cahill, Jones, Stones and Maguire are all capable of similar brainfarts. Technically our defenders are better but we haven’t had a Terry/Ferdinand/Adams in some time.

5. Wasteful finishing. We were profligate and should have scored more. Dodgy penalty calls aside if we scored our other sitters it wouldn’t matter if the ref missed a rugby tackle as we would be 3 or 4-1 up. I thought Alan Russell had been brought in to improve movement and finishing but that is still a real weakness. Lingard and Sterling especially. Also it would be nice to see Alli, Kane or Young ping a few from range. The Tunisia sub-keeper looked like he would have fumbled any fizzers and we didn’t test him enough.

6. VAR. Still not sure on how it is consistently applied. I would much rather each side have limited number of challenges to use per game/half and then that way there will be a set number of confusing moments and we all know where we stand. If Harry Kane wants to call for a rugby tackle he can and we get the pen. No need for separate refs, the match ref has a screen he can review the calls and video analysts can go on the bench to help managers/players decide on whether to make the call.

7. Whilst Southgate isn’t too nice, he is ruthless. The team need a shithouse to stop the bullshit that Tunisia pulled. Ramos, Busquets and Costa for Spain. Casemiro, Miranda and Thiago Silva for Brazil, Pepe for Portugal and Mascherano for Argentina. All good teams have them for when the chips are down. That is what Germany were missing against Mexico. Whilst Alli – who will also get a silly booking – , Young and Sterling might simulate from time to time, none of them or the back three have that dirty edge to twist someone’s arm or stand on the knee.

Overall we were a much better and coherent outfit than England of old. Point 1 is all that matters. We won. Germany, Brazil and Argentina all failed to do that with France and Uruguay both huffing and puffing to victory. If the opening round has taught us anything it is that you need a two-goal lead, unlike the Euros, lesser teams will go for it more and can/will score if given the chance. Brazil especially just stopped playing after the first goal and to an extent so did all the other ‘big names’.
Joe, Midlands – Is RLC the first double-barrel to play for England seniors?

(You might have heard of some bloke called Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain – Ed)

 

…As is the requirement for anyone writing in post game to F365, here’s the eight things I took away from last nights game:

1. The influence of Guardiola, Klopp and Pochetino is evident on this England team – we’ve seen tremendous player development from the likes of Kane, Henderson, Sterling, Walker, Trippier, Alli and Stones at club level under those coaches tuition. Not sure we would have seen the opening 20 minutes or so without their day to day influence over the last few seasons.

2. Martin Keown should not be left in charge of a microphone at any stage for the remainder of the tournament. Good lord, talk about say what you see – at one point, I kid you not, he actually said, as a co-commentator and ex professional player (therefore selected by the BBC to use that experience and media savvy to impart upon us his more learned view) – “it would have been better if Young hadn’t fouled him”. Let’s forget that after 10 minutes he basically said England were the best team in the competition as we missed our fourth sitter, or that 10 minutes into the second half he said England wont go far in the competition if they take their foot off the gas against one of the big teams. Just focus on the individual snippets of Alan Partridge-esque football enlightenment he provides as the game progresses. How the hell is he a pundit/co-commentator?

3. Sterling’s Mind Set. Sterling had a great season, clearly has talent and could be a world-class player. But his performance last night struck of a player struggling for confidence and riddled with doubt. The blame for this can be laid squarely at the feet of the gutter press who have continually pulled this lad down simply for being young, talented and rich (oh and black – can’t believe it’s 2018 and I’m having to type that). There’s been lots of press given, rightly so, to mental health awareness recently – so why is no one taking a stand for this guy? We may well have seen over the last few weeks the live degradation of a young mans being, as the calls for him to be dropped after a poor finishing performance against Tunisia will now grow. He has everything to offer this side but the right media “look” and that should be devastating to every England fan.

4. Southgate leaping, screaming and fist pumping that opening goal and the winner will be as important to the tub-thumpers as the actual result. Maybe, just maybe this unassuming and professional coach will unite England fans as he seems to tick many boxes – English, Passionate, Tactically Aware, Man Manager etc. Just don’t pick up a brolly, spill your coffee, say anything non vanilla or gurn in the general direction of a photographer – really couldn’t cope with a back page “Gore-th Southgate” or “The Pratte with the Latte” type headline come the knockout stages.

5. Maguire looks less like a footballer than any other player I can recall. I mean his actual face – he’s a very fine footballer indeed and was impressive last night for most (but not all) of the game – but he simply doesn’t have the facial features of a footballer. Pretty sure he’s served me at B and Q, Wellingborough to be honest.

6. In Harry Kane there is a player that could take this team now and in the future on some very exciting journeys. He is genuinely world class and that alone gives England a shot.

7. I don’t think even that fantastic opening 20 minutes will have the Belgians worried one bit but it’s shaping up to be an epic game – it could well be one of those games that produce a World Cup memory, used in slow mo at every possible big tournament musical promo from now until 2030 – my monies on Vardy getting sent off for taking out Courtois with his witches chin.

8. Hasn’t Pickford got really long legs?

Loving the World Cup so far.

Cheers me dears
Eugene, Northampton

 

Down a rabbit hole
Living in the UAE and with a World Cup memory that only goes back to 1994, today I started googling whether the UAE had ever qualified for the tournament (slow work day). I rapidly fell down a Wiki rabbit hole, so thought I’d share some facts for you to enjoy about World Cup singletons.

21 nations have only made one World Cup appearance, including Iceland and Panama from this tournament. Unsurprisingly, over a third of those have come since 1998 with the expansion of the World Cup.

East Germany (1974) are the only one of those teams who no longer exist.

Of the teams to have played in just one World Cup, the furthest stage reached is the quarter finals (Cuba 1938, Wales 1958, East Germany 1974 and Ukraine 2006). Only one other team has gone beyond the first round, Slovakia in 2010. Jamaica and Bosnia & Herzegovina are the only other single World Cup teams with a World Cup win.

Cuba and Indonesia hold the record for the longest gap between first World Cup appearance and present day. Both qualified in 1938 and haven’t been heard from since. Even with expansion, we may have a while to wait. Cuba lost this year in a second round playoff to Curaçao while Indonesia were excluded from qualifying by FIFA due to government interference.

Indonesia’s first appearance was under their former name of the Dutch East Indies. The tournament in 1938 was a straight knockout of 16 teams, making Indonesia the only nation (although it’s true for Iceland and Panama until the end of the week) to have only ever played one World Cup match.

Canada, Trinidad & Tobago, DR Congo, Indonesia and Panama have yet to score a World Cup goal. Trinidad and Tobago did manage a point though in their only appearance.

If you’re wondering, the UAE did qualify in 1990.

If any of that is interesting I’ll find some more World Cup trivia in the coming weeks.
Mike, LFC, Dubai