We all see it different. I thought considering 3 of our 4 most dangerous players didn’t start we did well and created enough chances to beat a team set up to defend. You’re never going to carve apart a team as deep as that and we scored twice and had two other good chances. The interplay down the flanks and clever pressing was particularly promising.I was bored stiff with it. Very little penetration, pedestrian and barring the moment of magic from Rashford, sterile. Costa Rica very limited and I remain sceptical we will do any better than last time. I would be happy to eat humble pie and look forward to eating my words. Roll on Russia, I think
i can't work out the irony. are you saying navas is decent. or agreeing with dixon?Dixon doesn’t think much of Navas. Real have done well to win 3 Champions Leagues in a row with him in goal.
i agree, and in terms of penetration it was light years away from our last effort against costa rica. interesting that the commentators started using jetlag as an excuse for the fact that they hardly got a kick.We all see it different. I thought considering 3 of our 4 most dangerous players didn’t start we did well and created enough chances to beat a team set up to defend. You’re never going to carve apart a team as deep as that and we scored twice and had two other good chances. The interplay down the flanks and clever pressing was particularly promising.
i agree, and in terms of penetration it was light years away from our last effort against costa rica. interesting that the commentators started using jetlag as an excuse for the fact that they hardly got a kick.
i can't work out the irony. are you saying navas is decent. or agreeing with dixon?
Think Dixon has it right. Don’t rate him and a better keeper could have got something on Rashfords effort. He hardly jumped.
We've now played a better African team than Tunisia and a better North American team than Panama, and beaten them both reasonably comfortably....
The fifa rankings are meaningless. Check these out https://www.eloratings.net/... in friendlies !!!
We beat Germany away (the world champions) before Euro 2016 and put on a very good showing by all accounts. I think we all remember what happened when the results and performances really started counting out in France.
Absolutely nothing can be read into the effect of friendly results and performances on likely progress in tournaments... as the England team have shown time and time again in their long and less than illustrious history.
That said, I did say to a mate last night that this is the first time in many, many years that we look like a team rather than a collection of individuals playing in a system that doesn't suit them. Just desperately hope that continues in 10 days' time against Tunisia (currently more than 20 places above Nigeria, and 2 places above Costa Rica, in the FIFA rankings).
What do you mean pairing? We’ll play 3 centre backs. Also Cahill and Maguire are both more likely to play LCB. Walker Stones Cahill in the first two for me.OK - resisted the urge to have my usual rant about Stones, but afraid I can't resist it. Will someone please tell him he's not a midfield player! I counted twice that he was way out of position when we lost posession and left a gaping hole in the middle of defence. Could have cost us against better opposition. What do others think about a CB pairing of Cahill & Maguire? Might be a more solid back pairing defensively but I haven't seen enough of them to judge.
Always 3cbs for a while nowShows my lack of knowledge of the England team at present then - I thought there were only two recognised CBs (Stones & Maguire) - I thought others were FBs or wing-backs? Ah - assume you mean for the WC. Confusion as I was basing it on yesterday's team.