England Squad Discussion (The Carsley Era)

MO_Football92 said:
He could play left. Nothing wrong with wingers floating during the game too; they're both intelligent players.

I'd probably drop Foden as I generally find he's overrated. Great talent, but lacks personality
Click to expand...

Honestly I’d much rather keep England’s most consistently good attacker in his position. Palmer or Foden in the 10 (the other drops to the bench). Bellingham in the 8. Rice and Mainoo in midfield, and a real LW (Gordon, Grealish whatever).

Something like that seems more balanced to me than shoehorning every big name into the team, or forcing top players out of position.
 
Last edited:
Didn't watch to be fair, but saw the team and just thought it didn't make much sense? I guess he's experimenting, but you could see it wouldn't be balanced.
 
saivet said:
I more meant the strikerless formation. The set up was different but clearly lacked balance. It was brave, silly but grave. In the grand scheme of things, tonight didn't matter. I would have been more interested to see how it would have gone with one of the attackers taken out and an actual midfielder in their place instead.
Click to expand...

It was fecking stupid, that's what it was.

There wasn't much balance to the England side in the euros, and you played with a half injured striker, less balance and no striker is obviously not going to be a good idea. At the end of the day, you're making it a lot more complicated for these players to perform.
 
WeePat said:
Honestly I’d much rather keep England’s most consistently good attacker in his position. Palmer or Foden in the 10 (the other drops to the bench. Bellingham in the 8. Rice and Mainoo in midfield, and a real LW (Gordon, Grealish whatever).

Something like that seems more balanced to me than shoehorning every big name into the team, or forcing top players out of position.
Click to expand...

Who is that? How can Bellingham play 8 with 2 of Rice and Mainoo alongside someone playing 10?

The aim is to create a balanced system that maximizes your best players. England could easily do this; but unfortunately the coaches lack the tactical nous of this level
 
WeePat said:
Honestly I’d much rather keep England’s most consistently good attacker in his position. Palmer or Foden in the 10 (the other drops to the bench. Bellingham in the 8. Rice and Mainoo in midfield, and a real LW (Gordon, Grealish whatever).

Something like that seems more balanced to me than shoehorning every big name into the team, or forcing top players out of position.
Click to expand...
You've got too many players in there. I think you either tell Bellingham to drop deeper and accept he's not that guy to be the most advanced midfielder and pair him with Rice. Or it's Rice, Mainoo (or Gomes) and one of Bellingham, Foden or Palmer as an advanced 8 or a no.10

Foden and Palmer should be considered as options for the RW, but they're behind Saka. They can also play on the left but I'd favour a natural LW over them too.

My feeling on Foden in particular is that he probably should be an ever present in the squad but if everyone's fit, he's likely a bench player for England.

I think ultimately we'll end up with really strong options to play in the advanced midfield slot / RW but the DM, no.8 and LW position spots and depth will be up for grabs.
 
MO_Football92 said:
Who is that? How can Bellingham play 8 with 2 of Rice and Mainoo alongside someone playing 10?

The aim is to create a balanced system that maximizes your best players. England could easily do this; but unfortunately the coaches lack the tactical nous of this level
Click to expand...

Saka. He has to play RW.

But you’re right, I had too many players in there. It might have to be a case of leaving two out of Bellingham, Foden and Palmer on the bench to create a balanced team.
 
My thinking is the team going into the World Cup should be something like this. I don't think the options at the back matter too much, though LB is an obvious concern with depth.

Pickford
TAA, Stones, Guehi, Shaw
Rice, Mainoo/Gomes
Saka, Bellingham/Palmer, LW
Kane
​
I don't think Mainoo and Gomes are bankers but they look to be the best two options to partner Rice in the midfield at the moment.

There are a lot of LW options and I think it's up for grabs depending on form. There may end up being a situation where Palmer is put at LW, simply to to fit him in and that you wouldn't play Bellingham there. I think it could work but it may be a similar situation to Foden.

I've thought it for a while but I think Foden should just be a bench option or start if England have injuries.
 
City players who have only ever known life under Pep just don't do it for England. They're system players who can't hack it under lesser managers.
 
Pfff that wasn’t good, they were more open than Manchester United. That team was too attacking, lacked a proper central midfielder next to Rice.
 
The England manager, who ever they’ll be, has to make some tough decisions and stick with them. For example, Saka or Palmer. Or Foden or Bellingham. Etc.
 
Rams said:
The England manager, who ever they’ll be, has to make some tough decisions and stick with them. For example, Saka or Palmer. Or Foden or Bellingham. Etc.
Click to expand...

I think Saka can be a bit of an unselfish all-round player, opposed to Palmer, Foden, Bellingham and Gordon where you really need to make decisions based on the overall form and opposition, then swap during the match if needed. It's mildly fascinating how it's still at a stage where balance is completely thrown out the window to accommodate brilliant individual players that don't function well together. All very well illustrated by Southgate happily admitting that he was hoping that an unfit and struggling Harry Kane would eventually start performing, rather than playing fully fit actual strikers and then just stick on Kane towards the end of the match against tiring opposition.
 
Might sound a bit strange but tonight it feels like Carsley did the right thing for England and the wrong thing for himself. In that sense, it showed that the next manager needs to be ruthless and drop 2 or 3 big players for the balance of the side.
 
WeePat said:
Saka. He has to play RW.

But you’re right, I had too many players in there. It might have to be a case of leaving two out of Bellingham, Foden and Palmer on the bench to create a balanced team.
Click to expand...

For me, 2 of Saka, Foden, Grealish or Palmer; should start wide. The other 2, benched.

Bellingham in midfield next to Rice, simple as that
 
NotChatGPT said:
I think Saka can be a bit of an unselfish all-round player, opposed to Palmer, Foden, Bellingham and Gordon where you really need to make decisions based on the overall form and opposition, then swap during the match if needed. It's mildly fascinating how it's still at a stage where balance is completely thrown out the window to accommodate brilliant individual players that don't function well together. All very well illustrated by Southgate happily admitting that he was hoping that an unfit and struggling Harry Kane would eventually start performing, rather than playing fully fit actual strikers and then just stick on Kane towards the end of the match against tiring opposition.
Click to expand...
Yeah absolutely agree with that. I know things were forced on the manager to a certain extent with players pulling out, but he should have picked 1 or 2 central midfielders extra in the squad and Watkins should have started. Playing Palmer in central midfield is definitely not going to work for example.
 
People don't realise what they've had till it's gone. It's always the same.

We're not suddenly going to win the World Cup and Euros because Southgate is gone. The players just aren't as good as people claim.
 
Methinks Carsley had the Brazil '70 tapes out before making his mind up on who to play last night.
 
groovyalbert said:
City players who have only ever known life under Pep just don't do it for England. They're system players who can't hack it under lesser managers.
Click to expand...
I keep saying the same thing. Foden is so underwhelming playing for England.
 
Did Bellingham play CF?

Palmer should play CF as a false 9.

Forden has been out of form for City & Watkins & Gordon are average players.
If Rashford can't be picked anymore -

Grealish - Palmer - Saka
Bellingham
Mainoo - Rice


​
 
MO_Football92 said:
Who is that? How can Bellingham play 8 with 2 of Rice and Mainoo alongside someone playing 10?

The aim is to create a balanced system that maximizes your best players. England could easily do this; but unfortunately the coaches lack the tactical nous of this level
Click to expand...
By dropping at least 2 of its 5 best players, yeah. And it still wouldn't solve the issue of central midfield, but there's probably enough talent to get away with it against most opponents(plus Mainoo might solve it by 2026 for example)
 
I can’t help but feel Jude Bellingham is to England what Bruno Fernandes is to United. His inclusion creates an inherent imbalance, because he’s hard to define as a midfielder and hasn’t shown the ability to control or run games. But he can be a real game changer. I reckon if a proper CM is played next to Rice, England would have more control.

If you put Bellingham in at 10, that also stifles creativity because he just isn’t that creative (hogs the ba a bit too much as well) but can get on the end of things, so that puts majority of the creative pressure on the wingers.

England are a much better team without him starting, but given his status and aura, can a manager afford to bench him?
 
giorno said:
By dropping at least 2 of its 5 best players, yeah. And it still wouldn't solve the issue of central midfield, but there's probably enough talent to get away with it against most opponents(plus Mainoo might solve it by 2026 for example)
Click to expand...

That doesn't make any sense as someone will need dropping, regardless. It's a squad game, they'll all get chances.

A Rice and Bellingham midfield could be amongst the best. Don't see any issues; especially if you had Palmer and Saka/Grealish wide.
 
MO_Football92 said:
That doesn't make any sense as someone will need dropping, regardless. It's a squad game, they'll all get chances.

A Rice and Bellingham midfield could be amongst the best. Don't see any issues; especially if you had Palmer and Saka/Grealish wide.
Click to expand...

How often does Bellingham play in a midfield two at cub level
 
NotChatGPT said:
How often does Bellingham play in a midfield two at cub level
Click to expand...

Plenty of players have played in different positions at club level and been successful.

Bellingham has all the attributes to be highly effective in a midfield 2, especially alongside someone like Rice
 
NotChatGPT said:
How often does Bellingham play in a midfield two at cub level
Click to expand...
At Dortmund for 3 seasons and he's currently playing deeper than his previous RM season as a B2B after Mbappe's arrival. His BVB performance as a CM was what drove Madrid to buy him for 100m.

Anyway Carsley's screwup v Greece is the best thing that could've happened to England, it's better he fecks up now so the FA hires a proven coach, than to hand Carsley a long-term contract and struggle to sack him later on.
 
Kweku Amonoo said:
I can’t help but feel Jude Bellingham is to England what Bruno Fernandes is to United. His inclusion creates an inherent imbalance, because he’s hard to define as a midfielder and hasn’t shown the ability to control or run games. But he can be a real game changer. I reckon if a proper CM is played next to Rice, England would have more control.

If you put Bellingham in at 10, that also stifles creativity because he just isn’t that creative (hogs the ba a bit too much as well) but can get on the end of things, so that puts majority of the creative pressure on the wingers.

England are a much better team without him starting, but given his status and aura, can a manager afford to bench him?
Click to expand...
While there is an element of imbalance that comes with Bellingham, it's actually possible to make it work with the right set-up as he's usually actually effective.

Foden is a much bigger issue.
 
Bellingham is capable of hero plays but lacks the basics for a midfielder. Mainoo and Gomes are much more adept at doing the simple stuff like positioning, showing for the ball, taking it under pressure, making short passes and moving to create angles to receive again, Bellingham doesn't think that way and his feet aren't quick enough in those areas. He's basically peak Dele Alli and with that comes the same problems, you really have to cater for him to fit into the side and I just don't think it's worth it. If he's to play then it should only be as a freed up forward to work off and run beyond Kane.

Foden for whatever reason just doesn't work either, he and Bellingham might be England's best players but they're not the best players for England. Neither should be starting when we have better suited options in those areas.
 
saivet said:
You've got too many players in there. I think you either tell Bellingham to drop deeper and accept he's not that guy to be the most advanced midfielder and pair him with Rice. Or it's Rice, Mainoo (or Gomes) and one of Bellingham, Foden or Palmer as an advanced 8 or a no.10

Foden and Palmer should be considered as options for the RW, but they're behind Saka. They can also play on the left but I'd favour a natural LW over them too.

My feeling on Foden in particular is that he probably should be an ever present in the squad but if everyone's fit, he's likely a bench player for England.

I think ultimately we'll end up with really strong options to play in the advanced midfield slot / RW but the DM, no.8 and LW position spots and depth will be up for grabs.
Click to expand...
Bellingham isn't half as good in a deeper role, probably better to bench him also.
 
lexisonfire said:
At Dortmund for 3 seasons and he's currently playing deeper than his previous RM season as a B2B after Mbappe's arrival. His BVB performance as a CM was what drove Madrid to buy him for 100m.

Anyway Carsley's screwup v Greece is the best thing that could've happened to England, it's better he fecks up now so the FA hires a proven coach, than to hand Carsley a long-term contract and struggle to sack him later on.
Click to expand...
And he's far worse at it. Also he has 2/3 midfielders behind him even now.
 
lexisonfire said:
At Dortmund for 3 seasons and he's currently playing deeper than his previous RM season as a B2B after Mbappe's arrival. His BVB performance as a CM was what drove Madrid to buy him for 100m.

Anyway Carsley's screwup v Greece is the best thing that could've happened to England, it's better he fecks up now so the FA hires a proven coach, than to hand Carsley a long-term contract and struggle to sack him later on.
Click to expand...
He made one mistake and to be honest in doing so showed more inventiveness and risk taking than Southgate ever did. He still has 3 games even the top managers of other top nations lose games. It would be harsh to write off Carsely because of one match.
 
Pickford should be one of the first names off the team sheet. The guys an absolute clown show.
 
They should really take a leaf out of Ireland's book. It's called Winning.
 
He was experimenting and I'm here for it. Glad he did - want someone to tweak and take risks during these shitty games. Weird reaction to the media to slate him but not by their standards I guess.
 
lexisonfire said:
At Dortmund for 3 seasons and he's currently playing deeper than his previous RM season as a B2B after Mbappe's arrival. His BVB performance as a CM was what drove Madrid to buy him for 100m.

Anyway Carsley's screwup v Greece is the best thing that could've happened to England, it's better he fecks up now so the FA hires a proven coach, than to hand Carsley a long-term contract and struggle to sack him later on.
Click to expand...

He played a lot of different positions at Dortmund, but it's not like he only played in midfield two's, his primary strength was his ability to drive forward with the ball, also it's Germany.

Imo, Englands problem is that their best individual players don't combine to make the best team. I don't see how you fit those players together in the starting lineup. By all means, if someone think it's better to utilize Bellingham in more a defensive role and limiting his role going forward then yeah, but you take away what has been his primary strength. If you want him to get forward, it's not ideal for Rice and it's not ideal for Foden either.
 
Cassidy said:
He made one mistake and to be honest in doing so showed more inventiveness and risk taking than Southgate ever did. He still has 3 games even the top managers of other top nations lose games. It would be harsh to write off Carsely because of one match.
Click to expand...
I only watched the 2nd half once I saw England was down :lol: but it's odd that he didn't rectify the issues in his starting lineup, and the defence was comically bad in a way it never was under Southgate. They were running into each other for Greece's winner. Surely a half decent coach would've managed at least a draw v Greece. Not like you were playing Croatia or Italy, when did Greece last qualify for a major tournament final?
Hammondo said:
And he's far worse at it. Also he has 2/3 midfielders behind him even now.
Click to expand...
So what do you reckon is his best position if not B2B? Madrid's issues this season aren't down to him playing as a B2B and he's been one of the best performers due to his defensive workrate, ballcarrying ability, creativity as an #8 since Mbappe/Vini don't track back much and Kroos' retirement left them bereft of linebreaking creativity. The issue for Madrid is too many wingers occupying the same spaces instead of a true CF which Mbappe isn't and too many uncreative #6s (Valverde, Camavinga Tchouameni), they still need a deep-lying playmaker to replace Kroos properly.
 
Last edited:
I was in favour of giving him the job but these 3 games so far have been fairly underwhelming. First half against Ireland was excellent but that's almost starting to look like Rangnick's 45 minutes against Palace. The 2nd half of that match was as dull as anything Southgate produced but you could argue the game had been won by that point so fair enough. Finland was a poor performance which allowed them a few very good chances before eventually getting a couple of goals thanks to terrible defending from an average League 1 full-back. And last night was just horrendous, Greece should have won that by 4 or 5. Felt like he was trying to be too clever and show that he could fit all those attacking players into the side, going for the popular choice rather than the best way to actually win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.