Not sure I agree...especially regarding Gordon and Watkins.
Group C | Slovenia, Denmark, Serbia & England
- Thread starter SilentWitness
- Start date
Not sure I agree...especially regarding Gordon and Watkins.
The image of Gordon yawning from the bench will not sit well with GS I think. I saw it multiple times watching different replays. If he leave out Gordon again on Friday, we will know he is out.
As explained, there are a number of reasons for GS to prefer Toney over Watkins as back-up for Kane. Watkins also struggled versus Bosnia.
Really? Well if GS doesn't play Gordon again on Friday we can come back to this.Yeah, sorry, I can't take your post serious regarding the yawning.
The reason Gordon didn't play is because he's still recovering from injury. The only reason he will be left out of the squad will be injury.
No way he leaves Watkins at home. I suspect if Gordon is fit he'll get the nod ahead of Eze, who I think has come into the picture a little bit too late for this time around. Also, I think Maddison stays home at this point too.
If he goes to the EUROs his role is probably super-sub for 30 minutes at most. He came around 60 minute mark to substitute a forward, but we didn't play our usual system in second half. Also we had at that time a lot of fringe players "trialing" and can't really say which position is meant for him.
Maybe GS hasn't fully made up his mind about Toney vs Watkins topic. On the one hand, Toney's attributes make more sense to be Kane's back up, whereas Watkins has been prolific in goals this season that it would be difficult to be explained to the press if he is left out.
The one advantage that Gordon has over Eze is that he has been around the national team longer. However, imagine if England is behind in the 2nd half versus Germany, who would you bring on to make big impact, Eze or Gordon? I think Eze's trickery and pace is better and to be an impact sub that is what you need, not past national team experience. The 02 likely scenarios is Foden or Grealish to start on the left and the impact sub needs to be an unpredictable player. Gordon is a bit of an orthodox winger.
I take your point on both of these dilemmas, particularly Eze (I think Toney's end to the season has been so poor that it's more difficult to make a case for him). I just think that Southgate is cautious by nature so will take Gordon over Eze. Also, Gordon's pace and direct running will give us something v different as the squad is a little short on pace without rashford.
GS would not pick Eze and start him in the 1st call if he doesn't consider seriously. He also made comment about Eze's trickery and ability to wiggle pass fullbacks first thing in post match interview. Gordon is the type of winger that you would start the match first with over having as an unpredictable impact sub. However, GS has Foden there and no manager is crazy enough not start Foden somewhere, unless if he want Foden to replace Bell which is even more unlikely.
Take your point about Tọney. It made sense to favour Toney more in the previous friendlies but not now with his form.
Watching Denmark vs Sweden, and Denmark look bang average here. They look an older, slower and jaded version of the 2020 team that was so good to watch.
Because that's what we are when the manager refuse to swap out his old guard.
I doubt O`Riley will start. He is not selected for the squad.
Dont know why Serbia is taking part in these competitions, England alone will give them 6
Could our group be any easier?
Southgate really has lived a charmed life as England manager in tournament football.
Southgate really has lived a charmed life as England manager in tournament football.
Oh really?
Are you being sarcastic and I'm missing something? England couldn't beat Iceland in a friendly. Why should a group with Serbia, Slovenia and Denmark be "easy"? All 3 of those countries have better squads than Iceland.
No, O'Reilly
So what are you saying, this is a difficult group? Would you rather we had France or Portugal in our group, to make it easier?
I think that's the answer really. A friendly is just that. Also, i seem to recall the World cup winners losing their first game to the mighty Saudi Arabia so it it's not always best to judge on one game.
I think England will get through the group pretty comfortably but i'm wondering which teams will cause them the most problems and which side of the draw they'll be on. I'd fancy France and Portugal to be problematic.
I don't think England will have particular issues. Only chance they could mess it up is by losing against Serbia, but I don't think that's going to happen.
Even a draw would still have them as favourites.
Even a draw would still have them as favourites.
2 draws and a win
England will go through without any issues.
Serbia are the worst of the four teams on current form. This isn’t the Serbia of tournaments gone by.
3 draws, at best.
It’s not a hard nor an easy group. Don’t know why it has to be black and white. Belgium and Portugal’s groups are easier, France’s is harder (and group b obviously).
Weakest group in the tournament, England will walk through it
They will but Portugal and Belgiums groups are weaker than this one.
They’re all weak let’s be honest apart from the random thunderdomes groups B and D.
Don’t know about that. Form is short term factor with NT’s often, and Serbia’s have picked up lately, with two wins in the last three, all on the road, beating Sweden 3-0 in Stockholm in their most recent game.
Compare England with 1 win in 3, all home, losing to Iceland just now.
Serbia have some good and experienced players, and this is as good a time as any to get into a vein of form.
I’m not sure a win against Cyprus and a team that’s not in the Euro’s is something that needs to be given too much credit. I don’t really expect these warm up games to mean much, although I do think that there is a vast over rating of England’s squad going on - which is the norm.
I think there was quite a few weird selection choices with Serbia’s squad but will only be an issue if they get injuries. Two of their best players have been in Saudi, so we’ll see what kind of level they are playing at.
Ultimately, if I had to put money down I’d probably back them, for no other reason than because it’s Serbia. But if you asked me to give some less mainstream predictions, it would be Serbia going out in the groups. Also don’t forget that Slovenia play England last, so if England do win both games, they will heavily rest players.
It’s hard to predict which teams will get into a flow in a championship. Short term form is so big with such few games, and with so few games together compared to club teams, the difference between a team ‘clicking’ and one that doesn’t is often bigger than wether the players play for Barca and Juve regularily or if they come from the bench in Brügge or is a top scorer in Saudi Arabia. Slovenia is a team in a bit of form for a while, Denmark are not great on paper and rely on defensive organization, counters and set pieces to bet Norway recently (how the tables have turned!), but like Serbia, if either of them get into a groove early, they sure can bet an England team with good players but lacking in balance, at least if the gears grind a bit. Remember Denmark three years ago.
I don’t really have any doubts about that. It’s tournament football, so one bad result is quite difficult to recover from. There’s always a chance that Serbia can make it difficult for England. My point is more that a lot of English fans and pundits seem to be thinking that the main threat to England is Serbia and they will walk the rest. I’d rate the other three teams very equally, with Serbia having the worst season building up to the tournament and most question marks over the squad and manager.
Slovenia’s manager was rated as one of lowest in the tournament recently in the English media, which is honestly laughable and shows they just go off reputation and what they know.
Yea, good points all of that. Do you know muvh about Kek? Can’t say I know more than the pundits tbh. My knowledge of individuals in the Slovenian team are mostly limited to Oblak, Sesko and of course Ilicic, but I guess he’l not feature much with his age.
He certainly knows how to set up a team. Managed Slovenia in their only World Cup appearance, almost got a draw with England in the group stages. Did wonders at Rijeka. They were the only team not called Dinamo to win the HNL in the last 20 years. He’s really taken this Slovenia squad from nowhere to qualifying for this tournament.
Sesko and Oblak help (Ilicic didn’t play any qualifiers), but they perform way above their level for the most part. As someone who watches the Slovenian Prva Liga, it blows my mind that they’ve qualified using a few players from that league.
Interesting. Are you slovenian? I remember the team best from the Euro’s in 2000, when an unusually good Norway beat Spain 1-0 and wood go by to a historical qf either with a win vs Slovenia, are a draw providing Spain didn’t win. We played a cautious game ending 0-0, which seemed boring but sensible because Spain was 3-2 down to Rest-Yugoslavia three minutes into extra time. Unfortunately they got a pen and another goal after that and we were out, coach Semb on his knees crying as the radio message came through.
Zahovic was quite a nifty player back then, I remember.
Reading some of the posts in this thread you’d think England had a habit of not disappointing in tournaments…
Kek's last Slovenia team that got to 2010 were a very physical, dirty, well-organised team that were tough to look good against. Don't know if he's got them playing similarly nowadays, but they'll be a potentially very frustating opponent if he has.
Quite a hard group for England