OK. WE were unlucky last night. On the whole we deserved to win. But reading some articles here and in the press, it's as if we had played out of this world. WE DIDN'T.
Our first half was good and in reality, the game should have been won before half time, but it wasn't. Lallana - great closing down, terrible in everything else. Kane, anonymous. Delli Alli ... what did he do apart from spurn our best chances? ... all of them!!! Sterling - he's so fast that he has to stop and not beat his man ... why? He hardly managed a cross into the box!
Yet this morning I read how fabulous they were. NONE of those players were above a five out of ten last night. The problem is we are kidding ourselves. Read Sky Sports and see the player ratings - all sevens, eights and nines! This is our problem. We won't solve anything because the truth is that we didn't kill off the game in the first half when we had chances and in the second half, we were the sloppy, casual and disjointed England of old.
Our manager, instead of taking off the dire Sterling, took off Rooney - who was actually having a fair game, hard to believe! Instead of replacing Kane, or Alli and Lallana, who by then was not even closing down, took off the only player who seemed to know what pass and move means.
In attack Alli, Lallana and Sterling were static. On the counter, they were wasteful.
Dier and Walker deserve praise for their performances, Rooney and Rose were acceptable. The rest were just pants. The problem is that we never seem to accept the reality of our performances and Hodgson will change very little. I just hope we get through!
THIS is the problem
posted on 12/6/16
2 strikers is the way forward IMO
posted on 12/6/16
comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 16 seconds ago
2 strikers is the way forward IMO
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A real number 10.
posted on 12/6/16
Rooney was the best player in the pitch, hence why he got motm.
posted on 12/6/16
4-3-1-2 might work
----3 other blokes
----AlliOrRooney
Kane-VardyorStudge
posted on 12/6/16
"Problem with Sterling is that he kept cutting back - what's the point of having pace to burn if you don't take your man on?"
In the second half I agree, but a lot of that was down to no one else keeping up with the run as Kane was too deep, which is why it needed more pace up front rather than less (bringing on Milner).
Balance wise, it could have worked better with Sterling on the right and Lallana on the left, only one of them would cut in then rather than both.
posted on 12/6/16
Melton one of the few on here talking any sense.
posted on 12/6/16
Rooney didn't really create anything, and had an easy going game, up against a poor makeshift Russian midfield.
Hell be over run by the Welsh, mark my words.
posted on 12/6/16
comment by jlou1978 (U15376)
posted 2 hours, 55 minutes ago
Rooney didn't really create anything, and had an easy going game, up against a poor makeshift Russian midfield.
Hell be over run by the Welsh, mark my words.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He might well be but it doesn't change the fact that with the space afforded to him he played quite well.
Kane was the issue for me. With the players we have on the bench couldn't understand why Hodgson kept him on the pitch after we scored. He was so pedestrian. After the praise he has had this season he still has a lot to prove that he can step up and perform at this level.
posted on 12/6/16
Too many Spurs. players on the field.
posted on 12/6/16
Russia were generally poor and to some extent made us look maybe a bit better than we really were. Saying that the only ones to disappoint for us were Kane, Sterling and possibly Lallana. The other thing that drove me mad was how they said Rooney was motm. It was one of his better games but I didn't think he was the best player on the pitch.