Have to agree, they didn't really have one or at least not one that could even remotely dictate the tempo of a game for half an hour.

It looked like they could against Sweden but hindsight suggests that was simply down to Sweden being god awful with a ball at their feet.

As bad as Sweden were they still created 3-4 good chances which they should have scored from.

I have been saying no to this every time it comes up, but maybe, if he stays fit, Wilshere should be given another crack until someone else comes through?

Will we stick with the same system?

I've listened to a couple of podcasts and they've both said that none of Southgate's substitutions were tactical changes, they were all like for like. At this stage of a competition, you need a plan B. Although saying that I'm sure we went to a back four when Walker came off?

This is something we knew before the WC started. It was why some suggested taking Jonjo Shelvey.

comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 48 seconds ago
This is something we knew before the WC started. It was why some suggested taking Jonjo Shelvey.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But is he good enough? Most people were saying take him for those long diagonal balls he plays. That's not what we need. Also he could quite easily have lost his head today or against Colombia.

I would not take him myself. And Jack isn't the answer, either. At the moment there isn't an option. So, either wait for one to come through or play with a system that doesn't rely on one. The latter is what I think Southgate has tried to do. But that does limit the way you can play.

We really should have played with a second midfielder today. Everyone was saying how well we played in the first half but I still felt we gave the ball away far too cheaply in the middle. We needed either Delph or RLC in there. There was far too much space between Henderson and Lingard/Alli.

An extra midfielder beside Henderson could have helped. Neither Alli nor Lingard are CMs. They play closer to the strikers. One of them or Sterling would have had to sacrificed.

I would have dropped Alli for one of Delph or RLC. Sterling and Lingard can create space with their movement and Alli has played some of the previous games with injury. He, along with Rashford, could have worked as impact subs when England were chasing the game. Though in that scenario, you'd have swap one in for a defender.

That's just what I think. Still, I don't think Croatia are that much better. Their best players are close to and past 30. They will have a bug rebuilding job soon.

England have their own issues, but the future is brighter than before. Southgate needs to build on this as well as introduce more ideas. Especially in open play.

comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 9 minutes ago
An extra midfielder beside Henderson could have helped. Neither Alli nor Lingard are CMs. They play closer to the strikers. One of them or Sterling would have had to sacrificed.

I would have dropped Alli for one of Delph or RLC. Sterling and Lingard can create space with their movement and Alli has played some of the previous games with injury. He, along with Rashford, could have worked as impact subs when England were chasing the game. Though in that scenario, you'd have swap one in for a defender.

That's just what I think. Still, I don't think Croatia are that much better. Their best players are close to and past 30. They will have a bug rebuilding job soon.

England have their own issues, but the future is brighter than before. Southgate needs to build on this as well as introduce more ideas. Especially in open play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Totally agree with all of this.

Mistake from Southgate to leave Lallana out of a squad so starved of any real creative midfield players.

Lallana was just coming back from injury and in worse form than other players, right?

If I see more posts about how we should’ve taken Shelvey or Wilshere I’ll lose my rag, reminds me of in Euro 16 where people said we *should’ve* taken Danny Drinkwater because apparently he’d have made all the difference. That one actually made more sense as he’d just come off a title winning season, Shelvey and Wilshere both decidedly average (Shelvey in people’s minds because he had good highlights on MOTD for the last 4-6 weeks of the season). Neither could do Henderson’s role in midfield in our system sitting next to Lingard/Alli. Chamberlain was a bigger miss. Lallana fit and in form should defo have come though.

Lallana was just coming back from injury and in worse form than other players, right?
=========================
Well obviously he had little form that could be measured, as he's had very little game time, but that was 8 or 9 weeks ago, so wouldn't have been the biggest gamble to take him along.
England needed a player in that second half who could retain posession in the opposition's half, but simply had nobody on the bench capable of fulfilling that role, so form or no form, Lallana should have been in that squad.

England definitely needed more midfield options, Lallana could have been risked at the expense of a defender.

With hindsight it looked like we took a defender too many.

comment by Komakino (U7809)
posted 1 minute ago
England definitely needed more midfield options, Lallana could have been risked at the expense of a defender.

With hindsight it looked like we took a defender too many.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly.
Three goalkeepers, a host of defensive players, and no real creative options.

comment by jlou1978 (U15376)
posted 15 hours, 14 minutes ago
Mistake from Southgate to leave Lallana out of a squad so starved of any real creative midfield players.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Feck off, stop trying to plug your own players. Lallana has been out for far to long, I would taken Jack or Cook over him.

Best bets for the next couple of years are probably going to be Winks or Wilshere. Winks you would assume is the best placed since he's playing at a top club in the CL under a top coach who likes him. With Dembele's decline there could be an opening for him to play regularly at Spurs in big games.

Phil Foden is too young and will be lucky to breakthrough at City for a regular starting place.

I don't know why we're touting injured or recently returned from injured players.

Rooney gets a lot of stick for his record at the WC but he's played at least one while injured and I think another after he returned from injury. And that guy took some time to get back to his best when he was a good player.

Out of he three, Lallana should be in the side when fit and in form. Wilshere, unless he has a remarkable turn around (think RVP in his last season at Arsenal and first at United), should never grace the England shirt again. That ship has sailed. Jonjo Shelvey might be good for teams like Newcastle, Scotland, Wales and the Irish teams, but he falls short of being good enough for England, even with the shortage of quality available.

I could be mistaking the WC for the EC but seriously, if a player is injured, he should not be taken. Even if he were to return mid tournament.

It's not like England are Egypt.