Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

World Cup 2022 - Team and Match Discussion

1128129131133134167

Comments

  • Posts: 14,734 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Yes you said something incredibly stupid that had nothing to do with the game or the discussion at hand.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,046 ✭✭✭DJIMI TRARORE


    lloris was the difference in the end



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,594 ✭✭✭✭gormdubhgorm


    Funny when you’d think of him as error prone. I can’t remember the match now. But it was one where he went flying out of his goal- fumbled the ball - dropped it and regathered it.

    Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    Wellity Wellity Wellity ;) Turns out I was still right with the round they were going out.

    Does that mean Santos got his team selection wrong?

    Anyway, people have really been sleeping on Morocco this tournament since the start, I don't know if they go any further because they seem to be getting worn down with injury now in the backline particularly and they are running themselves into the ground each game but jesus they can be proud of themselves.

    Super effort this world cup

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Posts: 14,734 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    There would be merit in the debate that Sa, cancelo and Leao should have started for me anywyas. What are your thoughts?

    But there might be a bit of after-timing in that opinion from me.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    I'm not sure what Leao needed to do to get a start tbh, he should have been starting in my eyes. Cancelo I probably would have started yeah even though he hasn't exactly been on top form.

    Its hard to know, I think he probably set his midfield up wrong, Bruno plays better with Ronaldo, Bruno plays better without Ronaldo aside, Bruno is kinda wasted from the right. I thought he was probably one of Portugals better players on the night in fairness to him, just feel like he would have been better if he had been central most of the game. He is far more creative through the middle.

    Sa I would have gone into the tournament starting, have no mass on the keeper they did play.

    I think he missed a trick in the second half by not bringing on Willy Carvalho to sit and use 2 up top with Ronaldo and Ramos, Bruno in behind them and Bernardo Silva and Neves in midfield. Plenty of creativity there and a partnership to play off each other, looking to use Ronaldo as the target man.

    They were more than likely going to be playing attach v defence so leaving Carvalho watching the back gate would have made more sense to me.

    The biggest changes I'd have made to the starting line up (assuming Sa would have been in goal, as he should have been from the start) is Leao over Felix, or maybe even Otavio and play Felix off the right, Leao from the left and have Bruno central behind Ramos.

    I would have been tempted then I guess to start with the added protection of Carvalho over Neves as Neves isn't starting over Bernardo.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭10000maniacs


    I have got to say England's strategy was a continuation of what they were doing in the Euros last year.

    A striker would go bombing hell for leather into the box, Sterling a year ago in the Euro's, Kane and Saka this time around, begging to get brought down. Like an elephant in a china shop.

    More often than not it worked. Penalties under dodgy pretences.

    France deserved it on the day because they scored two straight honest to goodness goals.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,406 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Fair amount of gaslighting here. So anyone who questions Southgate is just bitter or "playing to the gallery" for retweets and likes and actually jokingly compared to anti-vaxxers.

    Also France now have the best player in the world (he might be but wait till that narrative changes fast when Man City play). It seems to be the fault of the booers and naysayers that England lost.


    Articles like this should really not be written so soon after a loss when the journalist is clearly just being childish and sour.



  • Posts: 14,734 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I think I agree with that about 100%

    Deffo agree with Bruno, I think for me they got impatient even when they went behind it was too much long or direct balls bit if they were going to do that then why not leao.

    Silva, neves and Bruno, with some support from cancelo would deffo been able to play through the lines better.

    I will say though I thought after Spain grinding them for 120 mins they would have been ripe for the picking but they really didn't even look all that tired come the end of the game.

    Really hope they beat France I do actually think the games are getting easier for Morocco but I did really fancy Spain to win it all.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,139 ✭✭✭✭thebaz


    For 70% of the match I watched they bossed the midfield - Saka and Rice in particular



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,954 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    Never happier that England are out, but France were very lucky.

    Not sure what type of game they were playing. The best player in the world wasn't in the game. Their defence was incredibly rash. Could have cost them more than it did. Their manager is far too Conservative too. After the 1st, they stopped playing. Only starting up again when it went to 1 1.

    I think if England had got to 2 2 , I know where my money would have gone.

    They should probably be hot favs after the semi lineup was decided, but watching them yesterday I wouldn't be so sure.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,042 ✭✭✭✭ben.schlomo




  • Posts: 14,734 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    You are a high level straw man well done.

    Maybe go back and read the discussion you are dumping this nonsense on.

    You arent being clever or smart.

    Its hilarious that if you aren't being hyper negative about england it sends people's heads spinning.

    There is nothing wrong with being objective and even saying this the conversation you were strawmanning was about players adapting to referees, not even about there performance.

    So maybe if you reply again you might muster up something to add to the conversation



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,406 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    So FIFA just launched the official semi & final match ball 🤮



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,222 ✭✭✭✭SlickRic


    This narrative emerging that England are in wonderful shape, Saturday proved that Southgate is doing a good job, that it maybe should be up to him if he leaves, and that the loss was heroic is mind boggling.

    They lost to a team they should have beaten.  Let’s get this absolutely straight.

    France were missing a host of players.

    Mbappe being quiet is apparently a victory to some over there.  England basically sat 2, and sometimes 3 people on him at any one time, sacrificing space to Griezmann, who is essentially the main reason France won.  It was naive management.  He rolled the dice that a world class player (Griezmann) wasn’t as much of a threat as Mbappe, and he got killed.

    England created little of actual note.  France has the 3 best chances, scored one of them, and Tchouameni had the class to finish his half chance.

    I’ve read that Lloris was one of France’s men of the match.  I honestly don’t remember him doing much at all.  He caught balls coming into the box.  He saved a volley he should have from Bellingham. 

    Southgate essentially ignored Rashford, who had been England’s best attacker bar Saka during this World Cup.  He ignored Maddison completely, despite him being arguably the Premier League’s form player.  He didn’t play Grealish for even 90 minutes over the tournament.

    The management of the team was, as ever with Southgate, extremely questionable.  

    Maguire looked good because he’s a perfect CB for a conservative coach.  If you protect him with midfielders and tuck in your full backs, he looks great.  Ask him to do a thing on his own - balls fly over his head, and he can’t keep pace with attackers, or track runs.

    Every question that was there about Southgate and the team before that tournament was magnified in the one game they had against an elite nation, as usual.  Sure, they were crap against the US.  The benefit of the doubt he gets because he’s a nice lad is one of the great mysteries of the football era we’re living in.

    But sure, it’ll be funny to see him take them to the Euros, and they fail in their first big test again.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,479 ✭✭✭Esse85




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,222 ✭✭✭✭SlickRic


    They played fine, but this notion that the match represented an heroic loss, or that Southgate proved his doubters wrong, irritates me.



  • Posts: 14,734 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I don't watch too much English tv but it is kind of hilarious how the england managers job (especially when managed by an Englishman) is a position that seems so revered that it can't be criticised.

    Even when the analysts do disagree with him they always preface it by saying I think he is a great manager, a good guy or something as such.

    I don't know it feels like it has a much higher prestige then it should and I find it fascinatingly odd



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,405 ✭✭✭jacool


    Just for those who thing that England were unlucky. They were. I don't think you can criticise Southgate for Kane missing a penalty.

    I heard a 25 minute debate on 505 about who else should have taken the spotter. Someone shut them up quickly enough when he said

    "Imagine this scenario. Someone else takes the penalty, and misses." Guess what the narrative is for the next 10 years.

    Statistically, England lorded it, and were about 9 feet away from extra time.

    image.png




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 61,272 ✭✭✭✭Agent Coulson


    Kane is the England captain and had just equalled the England goal scoring record with his previous penalty in that game there was no way in hell he was going to let anyone else take that penalty as he would have become Englands greatest ever goalscorer if he scored it.

    Southgate got his tactics spot on for that game and anyone blaming Southgate for Kane taking that penalty and missing and costing England the game really is just wrong.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,406 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    If it was once I would say ya it's down to luck.

    But this is 3 times now they couldn't put away a side that they had on the ropes. Its not luck when there is such a clear pattern.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,590 ✭✭✭✭Cartman78


    Southgate seems like a decent bloke but England will never really progress with him imho.

    Beating Wales, Iran and Senegal and drawing with USA is hardly anything to get excited about.

    France didn't play anywhere remotely near their best, barely broke sweat, yet I never thought the result was in doubt.

    Sure an equaliser might have made it interesting but England would have found a way to sh1t the bed before the night was out



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,954 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    I have seen a list of the teams he has beat in major tournaments, and to be fair its not that impressive.

    Often as soon as they meet a half decent side, they lose.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,222 ✭✭✭✭SlickRic


    The whole problem with Southgate is how conservative he is.

    so yes, England played fine. but the French were there for the taking and England, in reality, were ponderous. Lloris made one save of note. England didn't score an open play goal. France kept England at largely arms length, with England generally pot-shotting it from distance.

    these are the games where elite managers actually make their money. Southgate has to beat a team that's pretty evenly matched with his own - can he do it, or will he lose? And he lost. Again. Because of tactical inadequacies. Again. He never adjusted to the Griezmann problem, which is an obvious problem from the middle of the first half, but he was allowed to continue to roam while 2 or 3 sat on Mbappe.

    France simply contained England from distance, created the clear cut chances, and won.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,406 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    For all their great players at the minute England are missing a real bstard in defense or midfield. It all seems a little too soft and friendly. The no yellow cards (before France) thing is just weird



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,434 ✭✭✭cute geoge


    They were far the better team against France and like you say they badly need Keane/zidane/scholes type player to drag them over the line .You can not imagine them losing that game the last night if Roy Keane was on the pitch .Maguire really is only a fair weather player should really be showing better leadership from the back but he is still one of the few of them to dig in



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,980 ✭✭✭happyoutscan


    How many players were France missing? England still couldn't do the job.

    Mentally soft, but I think that for this squad that is more down to management rather than the players.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,422 ✭✭✭omega man


    England haven’t beaten anyone of note in a WC in quite some time and Qatar was no exception. Their media writing a narrative of a good tournament is laughable. Yes they played well against France but they really relied on set pieces, let’s be honest. France deserved to win and on another day it could have gone England’s way but it didn’t as France scored more goals, end of.

    As for Southgate I see similarities with Belgium’s Martinez. A golden generation wasted while waiting for the nice guy to finally get it right. England have time to fix that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,038 ✭✭✭Did you smash it


    England’s yips over penalties make winning a tournament a tall order.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,713 ✭✭✭theoneeyedman


    Those defenders are not good enough on the ball either. On Saturday they were shocking, Maguire slowly to Henderson slowly to Shaw who either gave it away, or else hit another slow pass to Maguire to start again, and on the other side Stones offered nothing while Walker was the best of a bad lot. Add in an ultra defensive anchor man in midfield in Rice and they have half the team out of the picture when they have the ball that offers them nothing.



Advertisement
Advertisement